agenda council ordinary meeting · document number a1873888 far north district council ordinary...

Document number A1873887

COUNCIL CHAMBER MEMORIAL AVENUE

KAIKOHE

THURSDAY 10 AUGUST 2017

COMMENCING AT 10:00 AM Council Membership His Worship the Mayor John Carter Deputy Mayor Tania McInnes

Councillors

Ann Court Dave Hookway Colin Kitchen Sally Macauley Felicity Foy Willow-Jean Prime Mate Radich John Vujcich

AGENDA

COUNCIL

ORDINARY MEETING


FAR NORTH DISTRICT COUNCIL ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING

THURSDAY 10 AUGUST 2017 COMMENCING AT 10:00 AM IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBER, MEMORIAL AVENUE, KAIKOHE

A G E N D A Item

1.0 PRAYER

2.0 APOLOGIES AND DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST Members need to stand aside from decision-making when a conflict arises between their role as a Member of the Council and any private or other external interest they might have. This note is provided as a reminder to Members to review the matters on the agenda and assess and identify where they may have a pecuniary or other conflict of interest, or where there may be a perception of a conflict of interest.

If a Member feels they do have a conflict of interest, they should publicly declare that at the start of the meeting or of the relevant item of business and refrain from participating in the discussion or voting on that item. If a Member thinks they may have a conflict of interest, they can seek advice from the Chief Executive Officer or the Team Leader Governance Support (preferably before the meeting).

It is noted that while Members can seek advice the final decision as to whether a conflict exists rests with the Member.

3.0 MAYORAL ANNOUNCEMENTS

4.0 CONFIRMATION OF PREVIOUS MINUTES Document number A1873889

5.0 BAY OF ISLANDS-WHANGAROA COMMUNITY BOARD 5.1 Kerikeri Croquet Club Lease

Document number A1875187 5.2 Reserve Revocation for Hundertwasser Project


6.0 KAIKOHE-HOKIANGA COMMUNITY BOARD

6.1 Kaikohe And District Historical And Mechanical Trust (Pioneer Village) Lease Document number A1877987

7.0 TE HIKU COMMUNITY BOARD

7.1 Perehipe Reserve, Whatuwhiwhi - Lease Proposal Document number A1887492


8.0 STRATEGY COMMITTEE 8.1 Final Consideration Of Proposed Far North District Plan

Change 15 - Rural Provisions Document number A1887555

9.0 OPERATIONS COMMITTEE

9.1 Kaka Street, Ahipara - Drainage Evaluation Document number A1887581

9.2 Omanaia Rawene Water Scheme Document number A1887588

10.0 STRATEGIC PLANNING AND POLICY GROUP 10.1 Use of the Hundertwasser Fund


11.0 CORPORATE SERVICES GROUP 11.1 Amendement To Standing Orders For Attendance At Meetings

By Audio Or Audio-Visual Link Document number A1874832

11.2 Appointment of Community Board Chairpersons to Strategy Committee Document number A1887871

11.3 Capital Carry Forwards June 2017 Document number A1891313

11.4 Tangonge Domain Recreation Reserve - Lease To Aupouri Ngatikahu Te Rarawa Trust- Document number A1889204

12.0 INFRASTRUCTURE AND ASSET MANAGEMENT GROUP

12.1 Ministerial Review - Better Responses to Natural Disasters and Other Emergencies in New Zealand Document number A1889350

13.0 CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

13.1 Chief Executive Officer’s Report - Period: June/July 2017 Document number A1888650

14.0 PUBLIC EXCLUSION 14.1 Resolution to exclude the public:

THAT the public be excluded from the meeting pursuant to section 48(1)(a) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 on the grounds that the public conduct of the proceedings would be likely to result in the disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding exists, while the matters listed below are being dealt with for the reason as set out below; 1.0 Confirmation of Previous Minutes Reason: To enable any local authority holding the information to carry out, without prejudice or disadvantage, commercial activities.


2.1 Property File Digitisation - Supplier recommendation Reason: To enable any local authority holding the information to carry out, without prejudice or disadvantage, commercial activities. 3.1 Asset Disposal Of The Takahue Rugby Club Building Reason: To enable the local authority holding the information to carry on without prejudice or disadvantage, negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiation). 4.1 Supplier recommendation for the Forestry Resilience Package 1 Reason: To enable the local authority holding the information to carry on without prejudice or disadvantage, negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiation). 5.1 Transportation Procurement Strategy 2017-21 Reason: To enable the local authority holding the information to carry on without prejudice or disadvantage, negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiation). AND THAT Mike Edmonds - Chairperson Kaikohe-Hokianga Community Board; Melanie Dalziel - Chairperson Te Hiku Community Board (Acting); and Terry Greening - Chairperson Bay of Islands-Whangaroa Community Board be permitted to remain at this meeting for items 1.0 to 5.1 inclusive after the public has been excluded, because of their knowledge of local wards. This knowledge, which will be of assistance in relation to the matter to be discussed, is relevant to that matter because they advocate for and represent local community views. 6.1 CEO Quarterly Performance Review Against Objectives for the period ending 30 June 2017 Reason: To protect the privacy of natural persons, including that of deceased natural person.

15.0 CONFIRMATION OF DECISIONS AND INFORMATION IN OPEN MEETING Recommendation THAT Council confirms that the following information and decisions contained in the part of the meeting held with the public excluded are / are not to be restated in public meeting.

16.0 CLOSE OF MEETING

Document number A1873889 Page 1 of 2

Item: 4.0 MEETING: COUNCIL - 10 AUGUST 2017 Name of item: CONFIRMATION OF PREVIOUS MINUTES Author: Melissa Wood - Meetings Administrator

Date of report: 03 July 2017

Document number: A1873889

Executive Summary The minutes are attached to allow Council to confirm that the minutes are a true and correct record of the previous meeting.

Recommendation THAT Council confirm the minutes of the Council meeting held 22 June 2017 as a true and correct record.

1) Background Local Government Act 2002 Schedule 7 Section 28A states that a local authority must keep minutes of its proceedings. The minutes of these proceedings duly entered and authenticated as prescribed by a local authority are prima facie evidence of those meetings.

2) Discussion and options The minutes of the meetings are attached.

Far North District Council Standing Orders Section 27.3 states that no discussion shall arise on the substance of the minutes in any succeeding meeting, except as to their correctness.

3) Financial implications and budgetary provision There are no financial implications or the need for budgetary provision as a result of this report.

4) Reason for the recommendation The reason for the recommendation is to confirm the minutes are a true and correct record of the previous meetings.

Manager: Kate Barnes - Team Leader Governance Support

Attachment 1: Council Minutes - 22 June 2017 - Document number A1874116


Compliance schedule:

Full consideration has been given to the provisions of the Local Government Act 2002 S77 in relation to decision making, in particular:

1. A Local authority must, in the course of the decision-making process, a) Seek to identify all reasonably practicable options for the achievement of the

objective of a decision; and b) Assess the options in terms of their advantages and disadvantages; and c) If any of the options identified under paragraph (a) involves a significant

decision in relation to land or a body of water, take into account the relationship of Māori and their culture and traditions with their ancestral land, water sites, waahi tapu, valued flora and fauna and other taonga.

2. This section is subject to Section 79 - Compliance with procedures in relation to decisions.

Relationship with existing policies and Community outcomes.

Not applicable.

Possible implications for the relationship of Māori and their culture and traditions with their ancestral land, water, site, waahi tapu, valued flora and fauna, and other taonga.

None

Views or preferences of persons likely to be affected by, or to have an interest in the matter, including persons with disabilities, children and older persons.

Yes

Does the issue, proposal, decision or other matter have a high degree of significance or engagement as determined under the Council's Policy #2124?

No

If the matter has a Community rather than a District wide relevance has the Community Board's views been sought?

Not applicable.

Financial Implications and Budgetary Provision.

Chief Financial Officer review.

There are no financial implications or the need for budgetary provision arising from this report.

The Chief Financial Officer has not reviewed this report.

UNCONFIRMED


MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE FAR NORTH DISTRICT COUNCIL HELD IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBER, MEMORIAL AVENUE, KAIKOHE ON 22 JUNE 2017 COMMENCING AT 10:02 AM

PRESENT

His Worship the Mayor John Carter Deputy Mayor Tania McInnes Councillors Ann Court Felicity Foy (via video conference) Colin Kitchen Sally Macauley Willow-Jean Prime Mate Radich (via video conference) John Vujcich

APOLOGIES

Dave Hookway

IN ATTENDANCE

Terry Greening Chairperson Bay of Islands-Whangaroa Board Mike Edmonds Chairperson Kaikohe-Hokianga Community Board Adele Gardner Chairperson Te Hiku Community Board Shaun Reilly Member Kaikohe-Hokianga Community Board

STAFF PRESENT

Shaun Clarke Chief Executive Officer Jacqui Robson General Manager- Infrastructure and Asset Management Group Kathryn Ross General Manager - Strategic Planning and Policy Group Dr Dean Myburgh General Manager - District Services Group Samantha Edmonds General Manager - Corporate Services Group Richard Edmondson Manager - Communications Caroline Wilson Manager - District Administration Matt Bell Manager - Risk and Improvement Kate Barnes Team Leader - Governance Support Sheryl Gavin Team Leader - Corporate Business and Planning (from 10:43) Neil Miller Team Leader - Policy and Research Andrew Bonica Business Improvement Advisor Leslie Trussler Policy Advisor (from 10:10am) Tanya Reid Business Improvement Advisor Fergus Broom Department of Internal Affairs ( on secondment ) Janice Smith Chief Financial Officer Aisha Huriwai Meetings Administrator

1.0 PRAYER His Worship the Mayor commenced the meeting with a prayer.

2.0 APOLOGIES AND DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

Reason for the resolution

Council may grant leave of absence to a Member from a meeting upon application by the Member. If a Member has not obtained a leave of absence an apology may be tendered on behalf of the Member and the apology may be accepted or declined by Council. Acceptance of the apology shall be deemed to be granting of a leave of absence for that meeting.

UNCONFIRMED Council Meeting 22 June 2017


Resolved His Worship the Mayor/Deputy Mayor McInnes

THAT the apology from Councillor Hookway be accepted. Carried

3.0 MAYORAL ANNOUNCEMENTS His Worship the Mayor may wish to bring the attention of various matters to Council and then provided a mayoral statement.

• Far North District Council awarded runner up for ALGIM GIS Project of the Year,

• Commendation to the Chief Executive and staff,

• Reminded elected members to work as a team,

• Reminded elected member use of swipe cards is a privilege,

• Working with the Chief Executive to improve the reports coming to meetings to seek a decision, and

• Working with the Chief Executive to improve the reporting of finances.

4.0 CONFIRMATION OF PREVIOUS MINUTES Agenda item 4.0, document number A1867506, pages 1-19 refers.


To confirm the minutes of the previous Council meeting as a true and correct record.

Resolved His Worship the Mayor/Court

THAT Council confirm the minutes of the Council meeting held 11 May and 18 May 2017 as a true and correct record. Carried

5.0 DEPUTATION At the time the agenda was printed, no requests for deputations had been received.

6.0 STRATEGY COMMITTTEE 6.1. Policy Review Programme 2017-18 Agenda item 6.1, document number A1867497, pages 21-27 refers.


To proceed with the policy review programme in order to have reviewed all of Council’s existing policies by July 2018 and to then undertake the process of identifying and filling gaps in the overall policy framework.

Resolved Prime/His Worship the Mayor

THAT the 2017/18 policy review programme be adopted 2017-18 Quarter

Number Policy

July – Sep 2115 Elected Members Allowance and Reimbursements 2117 Appointment and Remuneration of Directors for

CCO’s 2123 Appointment of Elected Members as Directors of

CO’s 3212 Community Sport and Recreation Loan Scheme 5106 Use of the Hundertwasser Fund Scoping for Stormwater



Oct-Dec 2112 Election Hoardings 3116 Alfresco Dining 3119 Dangerous, Insanitary and Earthquake Prone

Buildings 4110 Street Lighting Jan-Mar 2125 Equity and Access for People With Disabilities 4103 Limits of Council Responsibility for Formation and

Maintenance of Roads 4105 Private Roads and Rights of Way 4106 Road Maintenance 4112 Community Initiated Infrastructure - Roading

Contribution Policy 4113 Road Speed Limits 5004 Footpaths Carried

6.2. Bylaw Review Programme 2017-18 Agenda item 6.2, document number A1867498, pages 29-38 refers.


The recommendation ensures that Council has an up-to-date set of bylaws that have been reviewed within the statutory timeframe set by the LGA 2002 sections 158-160

Resolved Court/Vujcich

THAT the 2017/18 Bylaw Review Programme include the Dog Control, Wastewater Drainage, Trade Waste, Maritime Facilities and Mooring Charges Bylaws. Carried

6.3. Review of Maritime Facilities Bylaw Agenda item 6.3, document number A1867499, pages 39-62 refers.


A Maritime Facilities Bylaw is the most appropriate way of managing the problem.

Resolved Court/Macauley

THAT the Maritime Facilities Bylaw is the most appropriate form of bylaw; AND THAT Community Boards be consulted upon the statement of proposal for a Maritime Facilities Bylaw. Carried

6.4. Proposed Control of Public Places Bylaw Fireworks Amendment Agenda item 6.4, document number A1867500, pages 63-70 refers.

Councillor Kitchen declared a conflict as a volunteer fire fighter and abstained from voting.


Further investigation and new legislation has clarified that FENZ has the power to specifically restrict fireworks alongside any fire prohibition or restriction. That approach can be adopted by FENZ in the first instance.



A control of the use of Public Places Bylaw Fireworks Amendment is not necessarily the most appropriate way of managing and preventing the problems that can be caused by fireworks in the Far North District.

Resolved Deputy Mayor McInnes/Vujcich

THAT the control of public places bylaw is not the most appropriate form of bylaw to manage the problems caused by fireworks. AND THAT council request Fire and Emergency New Zealand consider specifying fireworks when introducing any prohibition or restriction on fires in the open air in the District. Carried

Councillor Court recorded her vote against the motion.

6.5. Hearings Commissioner’s Recommendations on Submissions to Proposed Plan Change 20 - Traffic, Parking and Access

Agenda item 6.5, document number A1869288, pages 71-142 refers.


It is to recommend that Council adopt the Commissioner’s recommendations as to do otherwise would delay implementation of the changes and at the worst necessitate a repeat of the hearing.

Resolved Court/Kitchen

THAT pursuant to Clause 10 of Schedule 1 of the Resource Management Act 1991, the recommendations of the Commissioner to allow, allow in part or not allow submissions and further submissions on Proposed Plan Change 20 - Traffic, Parking and Access be adopted, such that the Proposed Plan Change is approved subject to consequential amendments arising from the decisions on submissions and further submissions; AND THAT Council proceeds to notify the decision on Plan Change 20 - Traffic, Parking and Access. Carried

6.6. Kerikeri Domain Reserve Management Plan Agenda item 6.6, document number A1867501, pages 143-146 refers.


The development of a Management Plan will guide the future use of the Domain and fulfils statutory requirements.

Resolved Court/Deputy Mayor McInnes

THAT Council notify the Kerikeri Domain Reserve Management Plan for community consultation. Carried



7.0 OPERATIONS COMMITTEE 7.1. Road Stopping Koutu Loop Road Agenda item 7.1, document number A1869315, pages 147-155 refers.


The recommendation is a necessary part of the process of stopping a portion of legal road under the Local Government Act 1974, in exchange for land already acquired from the previous owner and vested as road.

Approval of the recommendation by the Community Board, and subsequently the Operations Committee and the Council, is a legal formality required for compliance with an order of the Maori Land Court.


THAT the portion of Koutu Loop Road shown as Section 1 SO 485870 be stopped and vested in the owner of CFR 478825, subject to an easement in gross being granted to Chorus Ltd; AND THAT an application be filed for the land to be set aside by the Maori Land Court as a Maori reservation, as directed by the court AND THAT the CEO ensures the conditions stipulated by the Maori Land Court be met. Carried

7.2. Ground Lease Red Cross Society Inc Agenda item 7.2, document number A1869320, pages 157-160 refers.


NZ Red Cross Inc already has a serviceable storage building established on the land and there is an ongoing requirement for this in the Kaitaia area.

FNDC has no other use for the land other than for the sewer pump station which occupies only a small portion of the land.

Charging a market rent is in accordance with the requirement of the 2015-25 LTP, ensures transparency in the way non-profit and charitable organisations are financially supported by Council and creates a level playing field for those non-profit and charitable organisations that rent from Council and those that don’t.

Resolved Court/Kitchen

THAT Council enter into a new ground lease with the NZ Red Cross Society Inc on the land at 3 Grigg Street in Kaitaia, Lot 2 DP 100593 for a term of 15 years commencing 1 October 2017; AND THAT the General Manager Infrastructure and Asset Management is authorised to negotiate the terms and conditions of the ground lease at market rent. Carried



7.3. Kaitaia Wastewater; Reducing Raw Sewage Overflows Agenda item 7.3, document number A1869326, pages 161-166 refers.


The recommendations are to enable consultation to be undertaken so Council can consider whether or not to realise significant savings through providing a lower level of service.

Resolved Court/Macauley

THAT Council supports a staged approach with the first stage to achieve a once in 3 month overflow frequency and the second stage of once in 1 year overflow frequency being deferred until after further consultation is undertaken and a resource consent has been granted. AND THAT consultation is undertaken with the Kaitaia community to determine the acceptability of a once in 3 month overflow standard for the Kaitaia wastewater network subject to a report being prepared on the financial implications relating to depreciation and in water and sewerage finances and to include possible funding sources; AND THAT it is also understood that a report will be prepared by the CEO regarding historical issues to provide further guidance to Elected Members. Carried

8.0 STRATEGIC POLICY AND PLANNING GROUP 8.1. Kaitaia Business Improvement District Updated Memorandum of

Understanding Agenda item 8.1, document number A1871649, pages 167-191 refers.


An updated, more understandable, MOU clarifies the roles of both parties involved and removes redundancies. In addition, a 1 December reporting deadline will allow the Business Association sufficient time to compile all required information for future annual reports.

Resolved Vujcich/Deputy Mayor McInnes

THAT the Council endorse the updated Memorandum of Understanding between the Kaitaia Business Association and the Te Hiku Community Board; AND THAT the Council delegate to the Te Hiku Community Board the authority to enter into an MOU with the Kaitaia Business Association on its behalf regarding the Kaitaia BID. Carried

8.2. Far North Holdings Limited - Draft Statement of Intent 2017 to 2020 Agenda item 9.2, document number A1872844, pages 235-252 refers.


The receipt of the draft Statement of Intent from the Council CCO, Far North Holdings Limited, is part of the compliance requirements of a statutory process. Council has an opportunity through this process to make comment on the draft Statement of Intent by 30 April 2017.

Confirm the draft SOI and additional letter covering economic development opportunity.



Resolved Vujcich/His Worship the Mayor

THAT Council confirm the Far North Holdings Limited Draft Statement of Intent 2017 to 2020. AND THAT Council confirm the addition of a letter from Far North District Council to Far North District development consideration raised on 02 May 2017. Carried

8.3. Procurement Board Quorum Agenda item 9.3, document number A1859181, pages 253-255 refers.


To address the current issue of elected member quorum at Procurement Board meetings. It ensures procurement decisions can continue to be made in a timely manner.

Resolved Deputy Mayor McInnes/Vujcich

THAT the report entitled “Procurement Board Quorum: dated 28 April 2017 be noted. Carried

8.4. Voting System for The 2019 Local Body Elections Agenda item 9.4, document number A1875297, pages 257-270 refers.


The Local Electoral Act 2001 (LEA) requires Council to either retain the previously adopted FPP voting system, or amend the electoral system to be used in the 2019 local body elections. Council must make its decision by 12 September 2017 and a public notice of the decision must be advertised by 19 September 2017.


THAT the Far North District Council retains the First Past the Post electoral system for the 2019 local body elections. Carried

Deputy Mayor McInnes and Prime recorded their votes against the motion.

8.5. Elected Member Training and Conference Attendance Report Agenda item 9.5, document number A1875094, pages 271-279 refers.


To provide information to the Council on the consequential travel expenses, feedback on what elected members have learned and the value to the organisation from attendance at the conference that is the subject of this report. The aim is to provide transparency and confidence to the public that ratepayer funds are being used effectively.

Resolved His Worship the Mayor/Macauley

THAT the report attached entitled “Report to Council from Sally Macauley -Sister Cities New Zealand Conference 3-7 May 2017” dated 8 May 2017; AND THAT the report attached entitled “Report to Council from Adele Gardner -Community Board Conference 11-13 May 2017” dated 29 May 2017; be noted. Carried



8.6. Audit of Procurement Practises Agenda item 9.6, document number A1850834, circulated under separate cover.


To assess the effectiveness of Councils’ procurement practices.

Resolved His Worship the Mayor/Vujcich

THAT the Chief Executive employ an independent person to review a selection of procurements over the past 2 years with the objective of identifying any shortfall in the procurement and to identify what the problems are (if any) and what steps can be taken to improve the process. Carried

8.7. Adoption of Annual Plan 2017/18 Agenda item 8.2, document number A1873636, pages 193-223 refers.


The reason for the resolution is to comply with the statutory provisions for adopting the 2017/18 Annual Plan.


THAT the Council agrees to replace item 8.2 Attachment 1 with this report “Amendments to the Annual Plan - Adoption of Annual Plan 2017/18” and the 2017/2018 Annual Plan tabled at the 22 June 2017 Council meeting. Carried

Moved Court/Deputy Mayor McInnes

THAT the tabled 2017/2018 Annual Plan be adopted.

Amended Radich/Foy

Subject to the removal of the Te Kao water supply of $200,000

Lost


THAT the tabled 2017/2018 Annual Plan be adopted. Carried

Councillors Vujcich and Radich recorded their votes against the motion.

Resolved Macauley/Vujcich

AND THAT the Chief Executive Officer is delegated the authority to approve any minor accuracy, grammatical or formatting amendments prior to the Annual Plan 2017/18 being published or uploaded onto the Far North District Council website. Carried



9.0 CORPORATE SERVICES GROUP 9.1 Setting of Rates 2017-18

Agenda item 9.1, document number A1874488, pages 225-233 refers.


It is by setting the rate that Council obtains the funding for the forthcoming year this resolution provides for funding as set out in the Long Term Plan for the 2017-2018 rating year.


THAT pursuant to section 23 of the Local Government (rating) Act 2002 (the Act), Council sets the rates as described below for the year commencing 01 July 2017 and concluding 30 June 2018:

SCHEDULE OF RATES Note: All rates are shown inclusive of GST GENERAL RATE Uniform Annual General Charge (UAGC): A UAGC of

$473.20 per Separately Used or Inhabited Part (SUIP) of a rateable Rating Unit

Differential General Rate Note: differentiated on the basis of land use set on all rateable land

Differential Basis Rate General Differential Per $ of Land Value $0.0047772 Commercial Differential Per $ of Land Value $0.0131373

TARGETED RATES Targeted Ward Services Rate Note: differentiated on the basis of location set on all rateable land in the identified wards

Differential Basis Rate BOI - Whangaroa Ward Per SUIP $364.80 Te Hiku Ward Per SUIP $300.20 Kaikohe - Hokianga Ward Per SUIP $385.00

TARGETED ROADING RATES Uniform Roading Rate A Uniform Targeted Rate of $100 per Separately Used or Inhabited Part (SUIP) of a rateable Rating Unit

Differential Roading Rate Note: differentiated on the basis of land use set on all rateable land

Differential Basis Rate Residential Per $ of Land Value $0.0001348 Lifestyle Per $ of Land Value $0.0001285 Farming General Per $ of Land Value $0.0001320 Horticulture Per $ of Land Value $0.0001297 Dairy Per $ of Land Value $0.0001975 Forestry Per $ of Land Value $0.0017958 Commercial Per $ of Land Value $0.0003307 Industrial Per $ of Land Value $0.0004440



Mining/Quarry Per $ of Land Value $0.0101256 Other Per $ of Land Value $0.0002071

DIFFERENTIATED STORMWATER TARGETED RATE Note: differentiated on the basis of land use set on all rateable land in the identified area

Differential Basis Rate General Differential Per Rating Unit $35.78 Commercial Differential Per Rating Unit $71.56

TARGETED DEVELOPMENT RATES Differential Kerikeri Mainstreet Rate Note: differentiated on the basis of land use set on all rateable land in the identified area

Differential Basis Rate General Differential Per SUIP $9.20 Commercial Differential Per SUIP $27.60

Differential Paihia CBD Development Rate Note: differentiated on the basis of land use set on all rateable land in the identified area

Differential Basis Rate General Differential Per SUIP $18.00 Commercial Differential Per SUIP $56.00

Kaitaia BID Rate Commercial rating units in the defined rating area

Basis Rate Per $ of Land Value $0.0015294

BOI Recreation Centre Rate Rating Units in the defined rating area

Basis Rate Per SUIP $5.00

TANEKAHA LANE ROAD SEALING RATES Rating Units in the defined rating area

Basis Rate Per SUIP $310.78 Per Ha of Land Area $89.65

TARGETED SEWERAGE RATES Notes: Separate sewerage rates are set for each sewerage scheme differentiated on the basis the supply or availability of supply to each scheme. The additional pan rate is set on the basis of the third and subsequent water closet or urinal within the rating unit. A rating unit used primarily as a residence for a single household will be treated as having a single pan. Ahipara Sewerage Capital Rate Differential Basis Rate Connected Per SUIP $288.31 Available Per Rating Unit $288.31

Additional Pan Rate Per additional pan $172.99

East Coast Sewerage Capital Rate Differential Basis Rate Connected Per SUIP $243.68 Available Per Rating Unit $243.68




Hihi Sewerage Capital Rate Differential Basis Rate Connected Per SUIP $614.34 Available Per Rating Unit $614.34


Kaeo Sewerage Capital Rate Differential Basis Rate Connected Per SUIP $736.13 Available Per Rating Unit $736.13


Kaikohe Sewerage Capital Rate Differential Basis Rate Connected Per SUIP $200.00 Available Per Rating Unit $200.00


Kaitaia and Awanui Sewerage Capital Rate Differential Basis Rate Connected Per SUIP $274.02 Available Per Rating Unit $274.02


Kawakawa Sewerage Capital Rate Differential Basis Rate Connected Per SUIP $549.02 Available Per Rating Unit $549.02


Kerikeri Sewerage Capital Rate Differential Basis Rate Connected Per SUIP $484.70 Available Per Rating Unit $484.70


Kohukohu Sewerage Capital Rate Differential Basis Rate Connected Per SUIP $809.32 Available Per Rating Unit $809.32




Opononi Sewerage Capital Rate Differential Basis Rate Connected Per SUIP $311.86 Available Per Rating Unit $311.86


Paihia Sewerage Capital Rate Differential Basis Rate Connected Per SUIP $371.99 Available Per Rating Unit $371.99


Rangiputa Sewerage Capital Rate Differential Basis Rate Connected Per SUIP $352.80 Available Per Rating Unit $352.80


Rawene Sewerage Capital Rate Differential Basis Rate Connected Per SUIP $569.94 Available Per Rating Unit $569.94


Russell Sewerage Capital Rate Differential Basis Rate Connected Per SUIP $481.80 Available Per Rating Unit $481.80


Whangaroa Sewerage Capital Rate Differential Basis Rate Connected Per SUIP $743.99 Available Per Rating Unit $743.99


Whatuwhiwhi Sewerage Capital Rate Differential Basis Rate Connected Per SUIP $359.45 Available Per Rating Unit $359.45


District Wide Sewerage Operating Rate Operating Rate Basis Rate Connected (All schemes)

Per SUIP $523.49




TARGETED WATER RATES Notes: Separate water rates are set for each water supply scheme differentiated on the basis the supply or availability of supply to each scheme.

Kaikohe Water Capital Rate Differential Basis Rate Connected Per SUIP $287.88 Available Per Rating Unit $287.88

Kaitaia Water Capital Rate Differential Basis Rate Connected Per SUIP $279.62 Available Per Rating Unit $279.62

Kawakawa Water Capital Rate Differential Basis Rate Connected Per SUIP $358.76 Available Per Rating Unit $358.76

Kerikeri Water Capital Rate Differential Basis Rate Connected Per SUIP $171.73 Available Per Rating Unit $171.73

Okaihau Water Capital Rate Differential Basis Rate Connected Per SUIP $374.73 Available Per Rating Unit $374.73

Omapere/Opononi Water Capital Rate Differential Basis Rate Connected Per SUIP $664.08 Available Per Rating Unit $664.08

Paihia Water Capital Rate Differential Basis Rate Connected Per SUIP $219.17 Available Per Rating Unit $219.17

Rawene Water Capital Rate Differential Basis Rate Connected Per SUIP $459.84 Available Per Rating Unit $459.84



District Wide Water Operating Rate The District wide operating rate is assessed on the basis of the quantity of water supplied as recorded by meter

Metered Supply rate (all schemes) Operating Rate Basis Rate Potable Water Per M3 Supplied $3.06 Non-potable Water Per M3 Supplied $1.99 Non Metered Water Supply Rate (Includes 250 M3 Supply) Operating Rate Basis Rate Potable Water Per SUIP $1039.65 Non-potable Water Per SUIP $771.90

DRAINAGE RATES Kaitaia Drainage

Area Basis Rate

Area of land within the defined rating area

Per hectare $8.57

Kaikino Drainage Area (as defined in the FIS) Differential Basis Rate Differential A Per hectare $11.53 Differential B Per hectare $5.77 Differential C Per hectare $1.96

Motutangi Drainage Area (as defined in the FIS) Differential Basis Rate Differential A Per hectare $42.46 Differential B Per hectare $21.23 Differential C Per hectare $7.22

Waiharara Drainage Area (as defined in the FIS) Differential Basis Rate Differential A Per hectare $26.01 Differential B Per hectare $13.00 Differential C Per hectare $4.42

AND THAT, pursuant to Section 24 of the Act and with the exception of the targeted rates set for the supply of water pursuant to Section 19 of the Act, Council charges the rates for the 2017-2018 rating year by way of four instalments. Each instalment to be paid on or before the due dates set out below. Any amount of rates remaining unpaid after the due date become liable for the penalties as set out below:

Rate Instalment Due Date Penalty Date First Instalment 20 August 2017 27 August 2017

Second Instalment 20 November 2017 27 November 2017

Third Instalment 20 February 2018 27 February 2018

Fourth Instalment 20 May 2018 27 May 2018 NOTE: Where any due date or penalty date falls on a weekend or public holiday, the due date or penalty date will be the first working day following the due date.



AND THAT, pursuant to Sections 57 and 58 of the Act and with the exception of the targeted rates set for the supply of water pursuant to Section 19 of the Act, Council imposes the following penalties: A ten percent (10%) penalty on any portion of any instalment of rates assessed in the 2017-2018 financial year that is not paid on or by the due date for payment as detailed above. This penalty will be added on the penalty dates detailed above; AND THAT, pursuant to Section 19 of the Act, Council sets a targeted rate for the supply of water based on the quantity of water supplied as recorded by meter; AND THAT the water meters be read and invoiced on a six-month cycle, or more often if required, and the subsequent invoices become due for payment on the 20th day of the month following the month of issue; AND THAT, pursuant to Sections 57 and 58 of the Act, Council imposes the following penalties in respect of targeted rates set for the supply of water pursuant to Section 19 of the Act: A ten percent (10%) penalty on any portion of the rate for the supply of water charged pursuant to Section 19 of the Act, as separately invoiced, that is not paid on or by the due date for payment as set out on the invoice. This penalty will be added on the 27th day of the month in which the invoice fell due. AND THAT, pursuant to Section 88 of the Act, Council set Postponement Fees as provided for in the relevant Rates Postponement Policies; FEES IN RESPECT OF POSTPONED RATES Pursuant to Section 88 of the Local Government (Rating) Act 2002, Council will charge a postponement fee on all rates that are postponed under any of its postponement policies.

The Postponement fees are as follows: • Application Fee: $50 • Administration Fee: $50 pa

Financing Fee on all Postponements: Currently set at 4.75% pa but may vary to match Council’s average cost of funds. At Council’s discretion all these fees may be added to the total postponement balance Carried

The meeting adjourned for lunch at 12:01 pm and reconvened at 12:31 pm.

10.0 CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER 10.1. Chief Executive Officers Report- Period: April/May 2017 Agenda item 10.1, document number A1874300, pages 281-306 refers.


This report is for information only.

Resolved His Worship the Mayor/Macauley

THAT the report entitled “Chief Executive Officer’s Report - Period: April / May 2017” dated 31 May 2017 be noted. Carried



11.0 PUBLIC EXCLUSION 11.1. Resolution to Exclude the Public Agenda item 11.0, order paper refers.

Resolved His Worship the Mayor/Court

THAT the public be excluded from the meeting pursuant to section 48(1)(a) of the Local Government Official Information and Information and Meetings Act 1987 on the grounds that the public conduct of the proceedings would be likely to result in the disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding exists, while the matters listed below are being dealt with for the reason as set below; 1.0 Confirmation of Previous Minutes Reason: to enable any local authority holding the information to carry out, without prejudice or disadvantage, commercial activities. 2.1 Water Wastewater Service Delivery Review Reason: to enable the local authority holding the information to carry on without prejudice or disadvantage, negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiation). 2.2 Maromaku Netball Courts Reason: to enable the local authority holding the information to carry on without prejudice or disadvantage, negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiation). 3.1 Twin Coast Cycle Trail Governance Reason: to enable the local authority holding the information to carry on without prejudice or disadvantage, negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiation). 3.2 Directors for Far North Holdings Limited Reason: to enable the local authority holding the information to carry on without prejudice or disadvantage, negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiation). 3.3 Appointment of Independent Corporate Committee Member Reason: to enable the local authority holding the information to carry on without prejudice or disadvantage, negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiation). AND THAT Adele Gardner - Chairperson Te Hiku Community Board; Mike Edmonds - Chairperson Kaikohe-Hokianga Community Board; and Terry Greening - Chairperson Bay of Islands-Whangaroa Community Board be permitted to remain at this meeting after the public has been excluded, because of their knowledge of local wards. This knowledge, which will be of assistance in relation to the matter because they advocate for and represent local community views. Carried



12.0 CONFIRMATION OF DECISIONS AND INFORMATION IN OPEN MEETING Agenda item 12.0, order paper refers.


Having considered the information and made decisions with the public excluded on the matters specified, Council confirms its decision as to which information and decisions should now be disclosed to the public.

Resolved His Worship the Mayor/Radich

THAT Council confirms that the following information contained in the part of the meeting held with the public excluded is not to be restated in public meeting. AND THAT Council confirms that the following decisions contained in the part of the meeting held with the public excluded are/are not to be restated in public meeting Resolved His Worship the Mayor/Radich

THAT Council confirms that the following decision contained in the part of the meeting held with the public excluded are to be restated in public meeting: Maromaku Netball Courts Resolved His Worship the Mayor/Kitchen

THAT Council rescind the following part of the resolution passed at the Council meeting held 11 May 2017 with the public excluded: ‘AND THAT the report (Maromaku Netball Courts) be referred to the Bay of Islands-Whangaroa Community Board for consideration.’ Carried

Councillors Prime and Court recorded their votes against the motion.

Resolved His Worship the Mayor/Kitchen

THAT in accordance with Policy 2105 Council enter into an agreement for undertaking a community project with the Maromaku community to provide for the upgrade of Maromaku Netball Courts Carried

Deputy Mayor McInnes and Councillor Prime recorded their votes against the motion.

Resolved His Worship the Mayor/Kitchen

THAT Council instruct the CEO that this is a priority and that the agreement is to be drafted and signed within four weeks of passing the above resolution Carried

Deputy Mayor McInnes and Councillor Foy recorded their vote against the motion.

Twin Coast Cycle Trail Governance Resolved Deputy Mayor McInnes/Radich

THAT Council approves the appointment of John Law and Anton Haagh as Council appointed trustees with to the Twin Coast Cycle Trail Trust, with full voting rights. Carried



Directors for Far North Holdings Limited Resolved His Worship the Mayor/Vujcich

THAT Council reappoints Bill Birnie for a further term of 2 years so that he retires on 30 October 2019, reappoints Ian Walker for a further term of 15 months so that he retires on 30 June 2018, reappoints Kevin Baxter for a further term of 17 months so that he retires on 30th June 2020 AND THAT Council accept Ross Blackman will attend Board meetings via Skype from 1 July 2017 in an unpaid capacity to retain continuity, and then reappoint him to a further 12 months from 1 July 2018 so that he retires on 30 June 2019 AND THAT Council commence a recruitment process for a replacement director for Ross Blackman for 12 months from 1 July 2017, who will then continue as replacement for the vacant director role when Ian Walker retires 30 June 2018 Carried

Deputy Mayor McInnes and Councillor Court recorded their votes against the motion.

Carried

13.0 CLOSE OF MEETING The meeting closed at 3:21 pm

Chairperson

____/____/____


Item: 5.1 MEETING: COUNCIL - 10 AUGUST 2017 Name of item: KERIKERI CROQUET CLUB LEASE Author: Kaye Lethbridge - Property Legalisation Officer

Date of report: 08 March 2017


Executive Summary The purpose of the report is to inform the Council that the Kerikeri Croquet Club’s lease of land at Waipapa Landing expired in September 2016 and the club has requested a new lease. It is proposed that a new lease be granted on the same terms as the expired lease.

This report was submitted to the 22 May 2017 Bay of Islands-Whangaroa Community Board meeting. The Board makes the following recommendation to Council:

Recommendation THAT the Far North District Council, pursuant to its powers under section 12(2) of the Local Government Act 2002, consents to the lease of the land legally described as Lot 1 DP 37646 CFR NA997/218 to the Kerikeri Croquet Club (Incorporated) for the purpose of and associated with the sport of croquet. AND THAT the terms of the lease shall be; Term 5 years Commencement date 01 October 2016 Initial termination date 30 September 2021 Renewal term 5 years Annual rent $100 plus GST per annum Rent review On renewal AND THAT in making this decision the Council notes that it has taken into account the requirements of section 138 of the Local Government Act 2002 (regarding restrictions on disposal of parks), and section 82 of the Local Government Act 2002 (regarding principles of consultation), and has concluded that no consultation is necessary beyond that which was involved in seeking a recommendation from the Bay of Islands-Whangaroa Community Board which itself represents and has knowledge of local community views.

1) Background The Kerikeri Croquet Club has been leasing an area of 3645 square metres of Council-owned land at 158 Landing Road, adjacent to Cherry Park House, Waipapa Landing. The lease was for two ten-year terms. The lease commenced in October 1996, and was renewed as from October 2006, and expired on 30 September 2016. The club has requested a new lease. It is proposed that a new lease be granted on the same terms as the expired lease, i.e. for a term of ten years with right of renewal for a second ten-year term. A location plan is attached.


2) Discussion and options The land is fee simple land owned by Council. It is not a reserve under the Reserves Act 1977 and is not subject to Reserves Act requirements such as those involving public notification. The statutory authority enabling the Council to lease this land to the club is section 12(2) of the Local Government Act 2002 (“the LGA02”).

Other legal considerations It is also necessary to consider section 138 of the LGA02. Section 138 states that a local authority proposing to sell or otherwise dispose of a park or part of a park must consult on the proposal before disposing of the park. “Park” is defined as including land used principally for community, recreational, environmental, cultural, or spiritual purposes (other than reserves under the Reserves Act). “Dispose of” in relation to a park is defined as including the granting of a lease for more than six months that has the effect of substantially interfering with the public’s access to the park. The proposed lease to the Croquet Club therefore involves “disposing of” a “park.”

In relation to the above use of the word “consult” a legal commentary notes that the term “consult” is not defined but that it can be presumed that section 82 of the LGA02 (principles of consultation) applies.

A synopsis of section 82(1) states: “If a local authority undertakes consultation, it must do so in accordance with six principles of consultation. These include: providing people with reasonable access to relevant information; encouraging people to present their views; giving clear information on the purpose and scope of the consultation; providing reasonable opportunities for people to present their views to the local authority; receiving those views with an open mind; and providing submitters with access to a clear record of relevant decisions and explanatory material.”

However section 82 also states that the local authority has a discretion as to how it observes these principles in any particular instance having regard to matters including: the extent to which the current views and preferences of persons who will or may be affected by the proposed decision are known to the local authority; the nature and significance of the decision; and the costs and benefits of any consultation process or procedure.

Aside from the above legislation, the Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy established under section 76AA of the LGA02 has also been considered. The land involved in this lease application is not a “strategic asset” under the policy and the proposed decision to grant the lease is not considered to be “significant.” Consequently the policy’s compulsory consultation requirements are not triggered.

Option 1 (the recommended option) Option 1 takes into account the fact that the Croquet Club has already leased the land for 20 years, and that there is tacit support for the ongoing use of the land for the playing of croquet (no groundswell of opposition). This option envisages that the Community Board is likely to conclude that its own knowledge of current community views and preferences is sufficient to obviate any need for further consultation, and that the costs of any further consultation would outweigh the benefits. On that basis the Board could recommend that the Council grants a new lease to the Kerikeri Croquet Club, and that the Council exercises its discretion to conclude that no community consultation is needed beyond that which was involved in seeking a recommendation from the Community Board on this matter.

Option 2 In the event that the Community Board considers that a formal community consultation process of some sort should occur, the Board could recommend that the


Council undertake a consultation process seeking community views in respect of the use of the land currently used by the Croquet Club. A decision on the Club’s application would then need to be deferred pending the outcome of the consultation process. Given that the existing lease has expired, the Croquet Club could be permitted to continue using the land on an informal basis until the results of community consultation have been assessed.

3) Financial implications and budgetary provision There are no financial implications as the Kerikeri Croquet Club maintains all of the leased area. The nominal income would continue to be received.

4) Reason for the recommendation The area is not required for some other purpose and it is being sufficiently used by the club as croquet lawns.

The Kerikeri Croquet Club secretary has advised that the Club accepts the terms and conditions of the draft lease and the Manager Facilities Operations, Infrastructure and Asset Management has no concerns with the granting of the lease.

Manager: Jacqui Robson - General Manager Infrastructure and Asset Management Group

Attachment 1: Aerial map - Document number A1875188




1. A Local authority must, in the course of the decision-making process,

a) Seek to identify all reasonably practicable options for the achievement of the objective of a decision; and

b) Assess the options in terms of their advantages and disadvantages; and c) If any of the options identified under paragraph (a) involves a significant




The recommendation is in accordance with the community outcomes and activity performance indicators for recreation contained in the 2015-25 LTP.


None identified.


The Community Board is to consider the application.


No.


This report seeks a recommendation from the Community Board.



There are no financial implications.


Property Map

This map has been reproduced from the Far North District Council (FNDC) databases. Copyright and the information contained in itbelongs to FNDC. No person may reproduce this map without the express written permission from FNDC. This is updated from time totime but may not be accurate. No reliance on the information contained on this map by any person is permitted. For the avoidance ofdoubt, this maps does not constitute a LIM report. FNDC will not be liable for any omissions or errors of information contained on this map.FNDC recommends that persons seek specific advice on individual properties from FNDC and other specialist organisations which mayhold more up to date or accurate information. Contractors are to verify the exact location of all Council services on site, before workcommences. Contractors are liable for any damage they may cause to Council services, including any services not identified on this plan.If you find information on this map that may not be accurate, please advise FNDC.NZGD_2000_New_Zealand_Transverse_Mercator

Date Printed:

SCALE 1: 1,657

Projection:

13-May-2016

83

Meters

0


klethbridge

Polygon

klethbridge

Typewriter

Kerikeri Croquet Club lease(lawns)approximate area

klethbridge

Typewriter

Pt Lot 1 DP 37646 NA997/21 3645 sq m 1

klethbridge

Typewriter

klethbridge

Typewriter

Appendix 1


Item: 5.2 MEETING: COUNCIL - 10 AUGUST 2017 Name of item: RESERVE REVOCATION FOR HUNDERTWASSER

PROJECT Author: Ruben Wylie - Manager - Infrastructure Planning

Date of report: 09 June 2017


Executive Summary Kawakawa Hundertwasser Park Visitor Centre-Te Hononga is to be developed on Council owned land at the rear of the Hundertwasser public toilets. The reserve in question is Lot 1 DP 320865. Far North Holdings Ltd is delivering the project and will own the assets associated with the development. Far North Holdings Ltd has advised that it needs to own the land on which the development is to be completed in order to secure a bank loan. The reserve status of the land will need to be revoked before it can be sold. The purpose of this report is to seek a resolution to initiate the revocation process.

This report was submitted to the Bay of Islands-Whangaroa Community Board meeting held 03 July 2017. The Board makes the following recommendations to Council:

Recommendation: THAT the public consultation process for the revocation of the reserve status from the local purpose (parking) reserve contained in CFR 98943 is commenced; AND THAT the Bay of Islands-Whangaroa Community Board is appointed to hear any submissions and or objections received in response to the public process, and then to make a recommendation to Council in respect of the proposal.

1) Background Far North Holdings Limited (FNHL) has developed a commercial model to build the visitor centre at Kawakawa: the Kawakawa Hundertwasser Park Visitor Centre-Te Hononga (KHPCT). The initiative has received widespread community support. In 2012, Council, in conjunction with the Kawakawa Hundertwasser Park Charitable Trust, prepared a Reserve Management Plan (RMP) for those land parcels envisaged to accommodate the future Hundertwasser Park. This RMP was reviewed and amended in 2014. At the same time, FNDC signalled its commitment to the project through the Long Term Plan by agreeing in principle to relocate its library and service centre into the proposed Visitor Centre. In 2016, Northland Regional Council (NRC) commissioned a business case and committed further funds to the project. Far North Holdings Ltd (FNHL) was appointed as the project director. FNHL completed concept plans for the development. The plans have been developed in accordance with the RMP and propose the development of a Council owned parcel of land at the rear of the Hundertwasser toilets. It is relevant to note that FNHL has also lodged an application with the Ministry of Business Innovation and Employment


for investment from its Tourism Infrastructure Fund. FNHL has advised that delays that could affect the delivery of that project could place that funding at risk. The site subject to the development is a 2357m2 parcel of Council owned reserve land, designated local purpose (parking) reserve. A map of the land is provided in Attachment 1. The RMP states that the land is to be leased to FNHL. However, FNHL has recently advised it cannot secure a loan agreement with its bank where the land for the proposed development has reserve status, or is leasehold. A statement issued by the BNZ reinforces this by setting out that securing a loan arrangement would be more difficult where the land is leasehold rather than freehold. To overcome the difficulty in securing funds, FNHL has requested that Council revoke the current reserve status of the car park and that ownership is transferred to FNHL.

2) Discussion and options 2.1) Reserve description The land in question is a 2357m2 local purpose (parking) reserve, and is vested in the Far North District Council. It is described as Lot 1 DP 320865, contained in CFR 98943. The site is depicted in the plan provided as Attachment 1. In 2001 Council approved expenditure to acquire a portion of land for additional car parking in the area for visitors to the Hundertwasser toilets and in 2003 this land was purchased by Council and vested as a local purpose (parking) reserve. The carpark is located behind the Kawakawa Hundertwasser toilets in the centre of Kawakawa township and is used for visitor and general public car parking. 2.2) Legal setting and process Reserves Act 1977 The Kawakawa Hundertwasser Park NZ Management Plan (Adopted January 2012 and amended December 2014) provides for the possibility of the local purpose (parking) reserve to be changed to a local purpose (community facilities) reserve if the main building is located on this portion of land. The RMP does not discuss revocation and sale of the carpark land. It does make provision for the lease of the land. Under the Reserves Act, Council is able to offer a long term lease of 33 years with a right of renewal for another 33 years, and another right of renewal for 33 years (a 99 year lease in total). Section 41 Reserves Act 1977 (Management Plans) places no requirement on a local purpose reserve to be covered by a reserve management plan. Consequently, changing the “lease” of the carpark allotment to a “revocation and sale” would not be considered a “comprehensive review” that would trigger the notification process typically required when reviewing reserve management plans. Such a change could be considered as a ‘minor amendment’ to the reserve management plan and could be undertaken by Council resolution. Although there is no need to notify the public under section 41 Reserves Act 1977, notification of a proposed revocation and sale of the land is required under section 24 of the Act. Process A Council resolution is required to commence the public consultation process and every person affected may object to the proposal. All submissions are to be made in


writing within one month after the date of the first publication of the notice of the proposal. For those submitters who indicate they wish to be heard, Council will need to provide a forum to hear the submissions. The Reserves Act stipulates that Council can delegate the hearing process to a separate committee, or even an individual. Unless Council wishes to hear and consider submissions itself, a delegation from Council is required. The recommendation is to delegate this task to the Bay of Island-Whangaroa Community Board. In accordance with the Reserves Act, a decision on the submissions must be made by the full Council as the administering body of the reserve. The Council’s resolution together with a summary of all objections and comments received, and a statement as to the extent to which they have been allowed or disallowed, must be sent to the Minister of Conservation for approval. 2.3) Options Option 1: Lease the local purpose (parking) reserve The current RMP envisages the reserve land to be leased as part of the Hundertwasser Park development. As outlined above, the Reserves Act 1977 allows, in this instance, for a long term lease of up to 99 years. External legal advice has been received confirming that Council can enter into a lease agreement without the need for any further public notification under the Reserves Act given the status of the reserve. Furthermore, it is also considered that the consultation undertaken thus far with the local community is sufficient to meet the general decision-making requirements of the Local Government Act 2002. The advantage of the lease option is that it can be put in place as and when required without any further delays of public notification. The disadvantage, as outlined earlier in this report, is that FNHL may experience difficulty in securing a loan arrangement to fund the project because leasehold land would inhibit the bank from obtaining appropriate security over land or assets. Option 2 (recommended option): Revoke the reserve status from the local purpose (parking) reserve, Lot 1 DP 320865 and sell the land to FNHL. As outlined earlier in this report, any Council decision to sell the reserve will require the revocation of the reserve status, and will trigger the public notification process under the Reserves Act. An estimated timeframe to complete the statutory process would be in the vicinity of 6 months. FNHL has indicated that it has applied for funding to the Ministry for Business Innovation and Employment (MBIE). FNHL advised that, once the funding has been approved, the physical works need to be able to start very soon thereafter. However, the application on the latest round of funding was unsuccessful. Whilst there will be another round of funding, it is unlikely an application will be decided upon until the end of 2017. That timeframe lines up with the estimated timeframe for the revocation process.

3) Financial implications and budgetary provision The report does not consider the project as a whole but only those matters relevant to the land on which the project is to be developed. The financial implications in that regard only relate to the value of the sale of the land. Should the reserve status be


revoked, a separate report will be brought before Council to enable the sale of the land. The value of the sale will be considered at that time.

4) Reason for the recommendation The preferred option will enable FNHL to secure loan funding though its bank to deliver the project. The sale of the land will not bring about any material changes to what is set out in the current reserve management plan, nor the project itself. In that regard, the subject land will be used for the same purpose whether it is leased or sold. The preferred option provides more certainty for the project to be funded.


Attachment 1: Site Plan - Document number A1894996










There are no policies directly relevant to this proposal. The Hundertwasser project is aligned with the vision of the local community, and is generally in accordance with the Reserve Management Plan.


Local tangata whenua have been involved with the Hundertwasser Project for a number of years and are in support of the intended outcome.


The project has considerable community support and will provide for all members of the community.


No.


This is a report to the Community Board.


No material impact on current budgets because the decision relates only to commencing a statutory process which is a standard operational matter.


Report had been provided for review.

Gillies Street

Mac

Ker

eth

Lane

Wynyard S

treet

1:5000 3015 M³ Reserve Subject to Proposed Revocation

LegendLot 1 DP 320865



Item: 6.1 MEETING: COUNCIL MEETING - 10 AUGUST 2017 Name of item: KAIKOHE AND DISTRICT HISTORICAL AND MECHANICAL

TRUST (PIONEER VILLAGE) LEASE Author: Kaye Lethbridge - Property Legalisation Officer

Date of report: 29 March 2017


Executive Summary The purpose of this report is to seek a resolution to update the lease for Kaikohe and District Historical and Mechanical Trust (also known as the Pioneer Village) on a section of land owned by Council at 1 Recreation Road, Kaikohe.

This report was submitted to the 03 May 2017 Kaikohe-Hokianga Community Board meeting. The Board makes the following recommendation to Council:

Recommendation THAT the Far North District Council pursuant to s61 Reserves Act 1977 consents to a lease of the local purpose reserve land being (a) lot 4 DP 89178 (0.4991 ha) museum, (b) part lot 1 DP 185981 (1.4448 ha) a site for Pioneer Village and (c) part lot 1 DP 134473 (0.0205 ha), to the Kaikohe and District Historical and Mechanical Trust (Pioneer Village). AND THAT the terms of the lease shall be:

Term: 10 years Commencement date: 1 July 2016 Initial termination date: 30 June 2026 Annual rental: $100 plus GST per annum Renewal term: 10 years Rent review: On renewal

1) Background

The 1996 lease to the Kaikohe and District Historical and Mechanical Trust terminated in June 2016. The lease has a five (5) year renewal option but the Trust considered that this did not give sufficient security of tenure and elected to seek to enter into a new lease for 10 years with a renewal term of 10 years. Attached is a copy of the proposed lease.

2) Discussion and options The land is local purpose reserve vested in the Far North District Council and classified specifically for a museum and a site for a Pioneer Village. Public notification of the lease proposal is not required under the Reserves Act 1977 and Council as the administering body of the reserve has the power to consent to the lease.

The Pioneer Village is also referred to as Heritage Kaikohe.


3) Financial implications and budgetary provision The Far North District Council Long Term Plan 2015–25 recognises Council support of Heritage Kaikohe and provides for a community assistance grant.

4) Reason for the recommendation The proposed lease provides security of tenure for the Pioneer Village (Heritage Kaikohe) and it aligns with Council policy recognising the contribution that museums make to their communities.

Manager: Jacqui Robson, General Manager - Infrastructure and Asset Management Group

Attachment 1: Copy of draft Lease for Kaikohe and District Historical and Mechanical Trust (Pioneer Village) - Document number A1877988










Policy - Museum Services


None have been identified


The Community Board is to consider this item


No


This report is to the relevant Community Board



The Far North District 2015 - 2025 Long Term Plan provides for funding assistance

Between

THE FAR NORTH DISTRICT COUNCIL

And

THE KAIKOHE AND DISTRICT HISTORICAL AND MECHANICAL TRUST (Pioneer Village)

DEED OF LEASE Lot 4 DP 89178 Local Purpose (Museum) Reserve 0.4991 ha,

Part Lot 1 DP 185981 Local Purpose (Pioneer Village) Reserve 1.4448 ha and Part Lot 1 DP 134473 - 0.0205 ha.

Far North District Council Kaikohe


THIS DEED dated the day of 2017

BETWEEN FAR NORTH DISTRICT COUNCIL a body corporate pursuant to the Local Government Act 2002 (hereinafter together with its successors and assigns called (“the Lessor”)

AND THE KAIKOHE AND DISTRICT HISTORICAL AND MECHANICAL TRUST (2202599) incorporated under the Charibable Trust Act 1957 on the 13th day of January 2009 called (“the Lessee”)

BACKGROUND

WHEREAS the Lessor is the owner of the land situated at Recreation Road, Kaikohe know as the Pioneer Village and more particularly described in the Schedule hereto called “the land”.

AND WHEREAS the Lessor at the request of the Lessee is agreeable to lease the said land “the leased area” to the Lessee.

THE PARTIES AGREE: 1. INTERPRETATION

In this agreement unless the context indicates otherwise:

1.1 Definitions:“Annual Rent” means the annual rent specified in the schedule subject to changes consequent on the Lessor’s exercise of any right to review the annual rent or on the Lessee’s exercise of any right to renew this lease;

“Authority” means and includes every governmental, local, territorial and statutory authority having jurisdiction or authority over the Premises or their use;

“Commencement Date” means the date of commencement of the Lease specified in the reference schedule;

“GST” means tax charged under the Goods and Services Tax Act 1985 and includes any tax charged in substitution for that tax;

“Insured Risks” means loss, damage or destruction resulting from fire, earthquake, storm, tempest and aircraft impact and any other risks which the Lessor reasonably requires to be insured against;


“Lessee” means the person specified as the Lessee in the Schedule and the Lessee’s permitted assigns and the Lessee’s agents, employees, contractors and invitees;

“Lessee’s Improvements” means the Lessee’s property situated in, or on the Premises and includes all buildings, structures and improvements and all equipment and plant owned or placed on the Premises by the Lessee;

“Lessor” means person specified as the Lessor in the schedule and includes the Lessor’s assigns and Lessor’s employees, contractors and agents;

“Outgoings” means all rates, taxes, charges, assessments, duties, impositions and fees from time to time payable to any Authority relating to the Premises;

“Premises” means the land described in the schedule and shown outlined on the plan attached to this lease but excludes the Lessee’s Improvements;

“Term” means the term of this lease;

“Utilities” means all utility and other services connected and/or supplied to the Premises, including water, sewage, drainage, electricity, gas, telephone and rubbish collections;

1.2 Building Act Terms: the terms “Building Work” and “Code Compliance Certificate” have the meanings given to those terms in the Building Act 2004;

1.3 Defined Expressions: expressions defined in the main body of this lease have the defined meaning in the whole of this lease, including the background and the schedules;

1.4 Headings: section, clause and other headings are for ease of reference only and do not form any part of the context or affect this lease’s interpretation;

1.5 Joint and Several Obligations: where two or more persons are bound by a provision in this lease, that provision will bind those persons jointly and each of them severally.

1.6 Negative Obligations: any obligation not to do anything includes an obligation not to suffer, permit or cause that thing to be done;

1.7 Parties: references to parties are references to parties to this agreement and include each party’s executors, administrators and successors;

1.8 Persons: references to parties are references to individuals, companies, partnerships, associations, trusts, government departments and local authorities in each case whether or not having separate legal personality;

1.9 Plural and Singular: singular words include the plural and vice versa;


1.10 Schedules: the schedule and its contents have the same effect as if set out in the body of this lease;

1.11 Schedule Terms: the terms “Commencement Date”, “Default Interest Rate”, “Final Expiry Date”, “Term”, “Permitted Use”, “Rent Payment Date(s)”, and “Termination Date” together with the other terms specified in the schedule, will be interpreted by reference to the schedule;

1.12 Sections, Clauses and Schedules: references to sections, clauses and schedules are references to sections and clauses of and schedules to this agreement;

1.13 Statutes and Regulations: references to a statute include references to regulations, orders, rules or notices made under that statute and references to a statute or regulation include references to all amendments to that statute or regulation whether by subsequent statute or otherwise; and

2. GRANT OF LEASE Pursuant to the provisions of Section 61 of the Reserves Act 1977, the

Lessor leases to the Lessee and the Lessee takes the Premises on lease for the Term beginning on the Commencement Date and ending on the Termination Date at the Annual Rent.

3. RENEWAL 3.1 Renewal: One further period of ten (10) years if the lessor is

satisfied that the terms and conditions of the lease have been complied with, and there is sufficient need for the recreational activity specified in the lease, and that in the public interest some other recreational activity should not have priority.

3.2 Holding Over: If, other than the grant of a further lease, the Lessor permits the Lessee to remain in occupation of the Premises after the expiry or earlier termination of the Term, the Lessee will be a monthly tenant only.

4. RENT The Lessee must pay:

4.1 Annual Rent: the Annual Rent by annual payments in advance on the Rent Payment Dates;

4.2 No Deductions or Set-Off: all rent and other money payable by the Lessee under this lease to the Lessor without any deduction or set-off; and

4.3 Method: all rent payments by direct bank payment or as the Lessor may direct.

5. GST 5.1 Payment: The Lessee must pay to the Lessor all GST payable

on the Annual Rent and other money payable by the Lessee under this lease. The Lessee must pay GST;


5.1.1 on the Annual Rent on each occasion when any rent falls due for payment; and

5.1.2 on any other money payable by the Lessee on demand.

5.2 Default: If the Lessee fails to pay the Annual Rent or other money payable under this lease (including GST); and the Lessor becomes liable to pay additional GST or penalty tax,

then the Lessee must pay the additional tax or penalty tax to the Lessor on demand

6. DEFAULT INTEREST If the Lessee fails to pay any instalment of the Annual Rent or any other

money payable under this lease for 14 days after;

6.1 Date Due: the due date for payment; or

6.2 Demand: the date of the Lessor’s demand, if there is no due date;

then the Lessee must on demand pay interest at the Default Interest Rate on the money unpaid from the due date or the date of the Lessor’s demand (as the case may be) down to the date of payment.

7. OUTGOINGS 7.1 Lessee to Pay Outgoings: The Lessee must on demand by the

Lessor pay the Outgoings without deduction or set-off. If any Outgoing is not separately assessed or charged to the Premises, the Lessee must pay a fair and reasonable proportion of that Outgoing.

7.2 Apportionment: Any Outgoing which is not assessed or charged for a period falling wholly within the Term will be apportioned between the Lessor and the Lessee.

7.3 Penalties: If any Outgoing is payable by a date after which a penalty applies, the Lessee will comply with clause 7.1 if the Lessee pays that Outgoing at least five days before the penalty date.

7.4 Lessor’s Obligation: The Lessor must pay all costs, expenses and charges relating to the Premises which are not the Lessee’s responsibility under this lease.

8. UTILITY CHARGES 8.1 Lessee to Pay Utility Charges: The Lessee must promptly pay

to the relevant Authority or supplier all charges for Utilities which are separately metered or charged to the Premises and/or Lessee’s Improvements.

8.2 Apportionment: The Lessee must pay to the Lessor on demand a fair and reasonable proportion of the charge for any Utility which is not separately metered or charged to the Premises.


8.3 Meters: If the Lessor or any Authority requires the Lessee to do so, the Lessee must at the Lessee’s own expense install any meter or other measuring devices necessary for the proper measurement of the charges for any Utility or other services supplied to the Premises and/or Lessee’s Improvements.

9. COSTS The Lessee must pay to the Lessor on demand:

9.1 Legal Costs: the legal costs for the negotiation, preparation and execution of this lease and of any renewal, extension or variation of this lease (including any variation recording a rent review); and

9.2 Default Costs: all costs, charges and expenses for which the Lessor becomes liable as a result of the Lessee’s breach of any of this lease’s terms.

10. INSURANCE 10.1 Lessee to Insure: The Lessee must at all times during the Term:

10.1.1 Lessee’s Improvements: insure and keep the Lessee’s Improvements insured to their full insurable value against the Insured Risks and within 30 days of the execution of this Deed produce to the Lessor a copy of the said policy; and

10.1.2 Pay Premiums: pay the premium for the insurance taken out under clause 10.1.1 when due.

10.2 Destruction of buildings: 10.2.1 Partial Damage: In the event of the building or any part

thereof at any time during the Term being partially destroyed or damaged as a result of an Insured Risk then as often as that happens all moneys received in respect of insurance shall be expended by the Lessee with all reasonable speed in repairing the damage sustained; or

10.2.2 Total Destruction: In the event of the building being totally destroyed or damaged by any cause, the Lessee may elect not to rebuild or reinstate the buildings and if the Lessee shall elect not to rebuild or reinstate the Term shall immediately cease and determine and the Lessee will demolish and clear the debris and have the site clear to the satisfaction of the Lessor.

10.3 Public Risk Insurance: The Lessee must throughout the Term keep current a public risk insurance policy applicable to the Premises and Lessee’s Improvements and the business and activities carried on, in, or from the Premises and Lessee’s Improvements for:

10.3.1 Specified Amount: the amount specified in the Schedule (being the amount which may be paid out arising from any single accident or event); or


10.3.2 Increased Amount: any increased amount that the Lessor reasonably requires and in particular any increased amount required by the Lessor as a result of a change in government provision for Accident Compensation claims;

and shall within 30 days of the execution of this Deed produce to the Lessor a copy of the said Public Risk Insurance Policy.

11. MAINTENANCE 11.1 Maintenance: The Lessee must throughout the Term:

11.1.1 Repair: maintain the Premises and the Lessee’s Improvements in good repair and make good any damage which may be done to the Premises or Lessee’s Improvements or any improvements thereon during the Term of this lease but at all times shall comply with clause 14 herein;

11.1.2 Keep Premises Clean: keep the Premises and Lessee’s Improvements clean and tidy;

11.1.3 Removal of Rubbish: regularly remove all rubbish and waste from the Premises and the Lessee’s Improvements;

11.1.4 Broken Glass: replace all broken glass on the Premises and the Lessee’s Improvements; and

11.1.5 Pests: prevent and exterminate any pest infestation on the Premises and the Lessee’s Improvements; and

11.1.6 Notice from Lessor: upon receipt of notice in writing from the Lessor of any defect or want of repair of the Premises or any building or other improvement on the Premises requiring the Lessee within a reasonable time, to be specified therein, to repair the same, the Lessee shall with all reasonable speed cause the defect to be remedied and/or the repair to be made to the satisfaction of the Lessor.

12. USE OF PREMISES AND TERMINATION 12.1 Permitted Use: The Lessee must only use the Premises for the

Permitted Use and if at any time the Lessor is of the opinion that the Premises are not being used or are not sufficiently used for the Permitted Use, the Lessor after making such enquiries as it thinks fit and giving the Lessee the opportunity of explaining the useage of the Premises, and if satisfied that the Premises are not being used or are not being sufficiently used for the Permitted Use, may terminate the lease whereupon the Premises together with all the improvements (including Lessee’s Improvements) thereon shall revert to the Lessor and no compensation shall be payable to the Lessee by the Lessor whatsoever.


12.2 Change of Permitted Use: The Lessee may use the Premises for a use or activity other than the Permitted Use but only with the Lessor’s prior written consent.

12.3 Restrictions on use: The Lessee must: 12.3.1 Noxious Activities and Nuisances: not carry on any

noxious, noisy or offensive business or activity in or about the Premises or do anything which is or may become a nuisance or annoyance to any person, but the carrying on of the Permitted Use by the Lessee in a reasonable manner will not of itself be a breach of this clause;

12.3.2 Resource Management Act: not do anything which is or may become a breach of any duty imposed on any person by the Resource Management Act 1991;

12.3.3 Health and Safety at Work Act: not do anything which is or may become a breach of any duty imposed on any person by the Health and Safety at Work Act 2015;

12.3.4 Acts, Bylaws, etc: comply in all respects and at the Lessee’s expense with all acts, bylaws, regulations, rules and requisitions relating to the Premises and Lessee’s Improvements and the Lessee’s use of the Premises and Lessee’s Improvements; and

12.3.5 Accommodation: under no circumstances use the Premises or Lessee’s Improvements for accommodation, other than a caretaker’s cottage, without first obtaining approval from the Lessor pursuant to section 44 of the Reserves Act 1977.

12.4 Reserves Act 1977: The Land and this lease are subject to the Reserves Act 1977 and the provisions of said act are applicable to this lease and shall be binding in all respects upon the Parties in the same manner as if such provisions had been fully set out herein and as such the Lessee accepts this lease of the Land to be held by it as tenant subject to the conditions, restrictions and covenants set forth in this lease.

13. SALE AND SUPPLY OF ALCOHOL ACT 13.1 The Lessee shall be responsible for compliance with the

provisions of the Sale and Supply of Alcohol Act 2012 and shall ensure that all necessary licences are obtained and conditions met in relation to any liquor contained on the Premises and Lessee’s Improvements.

14. BUILDING WORK 14.1 Approvals: Subject to the provisions of this section, the Lessee

must not carry out any Building Work or alterations or erect any signage on the Premises without first giving plans and specifications of the proposed work to the Lessor and:


14.1.1 Lessor’s Consent: obtaining the Lessor’s prior written consent; and

14.1.2 Building Consent: obtaining and giving the Lessor a copy of all Building Consents required to enable the relevant Building Work to be carried out lawfully; and

14.2 Building Act: The Lessee must:

14.2.1 Building Consent: carry out all Building Work in conformity with the Building Consent produced to the Lessor under clause 14.1.2; and

14.2.2 Compliance Certificate: obtain a Code Compliance Certificate

15. REVERSION ON TERMINATION On termination of this lease pursuant to the terms herein by effluxion of

time, surrender, breach of conditions or otherwise, the Premises together with all improvements thereon shall revert to the Lessor without compensation being payable by the Lessor whatsoever.

16. REMOVAL OF IMPROVEMENTS 16.1 Conditions of Removal: Notwithstanding anything to the

contrary in clauses 12.1 and 15, if the Lessee has: 16.1.1 Paid the rent due; and 16.1.2 Is not in breach of any of the terms of this lease; and 16.1.3 Has given notice sent by Courier Post/signature required

to the Lessor three months prior to the expiration or termination of the Term of its intention to remove the Lessee’s Improvements;

then the Lessee:

16.2 Remove Lessee’s Improvements: may remove the Lessee’s Improvements from the Premises; and

16.3 Repair Damage: must repair any damage caused to the Premises by that removal; and

16.4 Leave Premises Tidy: must leave the Premises in a clean and tidy condition to the Lessor’s reasonable satisfaction.

16.5 Reversion to Lessor: In the event that the Lessee’s Improvements are not removed within three calendar months of the date of expiry or termination of the Term, then the Lessee’s Improvements will revert to the Lessor, who shall have the right to enter upon the Premises and remove all the Lessee’s Improvements and charge to the Lessee all costs of removal and storage of the Lessee’s Improvements or deal with the Lessee’s Improvements as it deems appropriate.

16.6 Lessees Right to Transfer: Notwithstanding anything contained in clauses 16.2 and 16.5 and provided clause 16.1 has been


complied with the Lessee may alternatively transfer the Lessee’s Improvements which shall remain on the Premises to anybody or organisation approved by the Lessor which has similar objects to the objects of the Lessee and which shall prohibit the distribution of its assets among its members and which body or organisation shall enter into a lease agreement with the Lessor for the use and enjoyment of the Premises and the Lessee shall yield and deliver up the Premises and the Lessee’s Improvements to remain thereon in good clean and substantial order condition and repair.

16.7 Payment: Nothing in this clause 16 shall render the Lessor liable to pay to the Lessee compensation for the Lessee’s Improvements and if the Lessee does not exercise its right to remove or transfer the Lessee’s Improvements in accordance with clauses 16.1 - 16.6, then the Lessee’s Improvements shall revert to the Lessor without compensation being payable to the Lessee by the Lessor whatsoever.

17. ASSIGNMENT AND SUBLEASING 17.1 Lessor’s Consent: The Lessee may with the Lessor’s prior

written consent:

17.1.1 Assign: assign the Lessee’s entire interest in this lease; or

17.1.2 Sublease: sublease the whole or any part of the Premises.

17.2 Conditions: Without limiting the grounds on which the Lessor may withhold consent under clause 17.1, the Lessor may, as a condition of any consent, require prior compliance with the following conditions:

17.2.1 Standing of Assignee: the Lessee must prove to the Lessor’s reasonable satisfaction that the proposed assignee or sub lessee is responsible and, in the case of an assignment, of sound financial standing;

17.2.2 Performance by Lessee: the Lessee must have performed all of the Lessee’s obligations under this lease up to the date of the proposed assignment or grant of the sublease;

17.2.3 Deed of Covenant: in the case of an assignment, the assignee must sign a deed of covenant with the Lessor agreeing to perform the Lessee’s obligations under this lease but without releasing the assignor or any other person from liability under this lease; and

17.3 Costs: The Lessee must pay the Lessor’s reasonable costs for any consent or application for consent under this section (including the Lessor’s legal costs) and the costs of investigating the suitability of the proposed assignee or sub lessee.

18. LESSOR’S RIGHTS OF ENTRY


18.1 Entry to Premises by Lessor: The Lessor may, with all necessary materials and equipment at all reasonable times and on reasonable notice (but at any time without notice in the case of an emergency), enter the Premises or the Lessee’s Improvements to:

18.1.1 Inspect Premises: inspect the condition and state of repair of the Premises or the Lessee’s Improvements; or

18.1.2 Compliance with Statutes, etc: carry out any works to comply with any statutes, regulations, by-laws, ordinances, orders, proclamations, requirements of or notices by any Authority and if such works are the responsibility of the Lessee under this lease such works shall be at the Lessee’s cost and all moneys expended by the Lessor in completing the works shall be payable by the Lessee to the Lessor and shall be recoverable together with interest thereon at the default rate until payment thereon as rent in arrears.

18.2 Minimise Disturbance to Lessee: The Lessor will take reasonable steps to minimise any disturbance to the Lessee when exercising the entry rights granted under clause 18.1.

19. QUIET ENJOYMENT If the Lessee pays the Annual Rent and performs the Lessee’s obligations in this lease subject to the provisions of this lease, the Lessee will be entitled to quiet enjoyment of the Premises and the Lessee’s Improvements without interruption by the Lessor or any person claiming under the Lessor.

20. DEFAULT 20.1 Re-Entry: The Lessor may re-enter the Premises and the

Lessee’s Improvements and terminate this lease if the Lessee:

20.1.1 Failure to Pay Rent: fails for a period of 30 days after the due date to pay any instalment of the Annual Rent or any other money payable under this lease;

20.1.2 Failure to Perform: fails for a period of 14 days to observe or perform any other obligation under this lease;

20.1.3 Winding up: is wound up or dissolved.

20.2 Lessor May Remedy Lessee’s Default: The Lessor may, without being under any obligation to do so, remedy any default or breach by the Lessee under this lease at the Lessee’s cost and all monies expended by the Lessor by reason of the default shall be payable by the Lessee to the Lessor together with interest thereon at the default rate until payment thereon and shall be recoverable as rent in arrears.

21. ESSENTIAL TERMS 21.1 Essential Terms: The Lessee’s breach of the following terms is

a breach of an essential term of this lease:


21.1.1 Payment of Rent: the covenant to pay rent or other money payable by the Lessee under this lease;

21.1.2 Assignment and Subleasing: the terms dealing with assignment and subleasing; or

21.1.3 Use of Premises: the terms restricting the use of the Premises.

21.2 Waiver: The Lessor’s acceptance of any arrears of rent or other money payable under this lease is not a waiver of the essential obligation to pay any other rent or money payable under this lease.

21.3 Compensation: The Lessee must compensate the Lessor for any breach of an essential term of this lease. The Lessor may recover damages from the Lessee for those breaches. The Lessor’s entitlement to compensation under this clause is in addition to any other remedy or entitlement of the Lessor (including the right to terminate this lease).

22. COMPENSATION 22.1 Lessee’s Acts or Omissions: If any act or omission of the

Lessee:

22.1.1 Repudiation: is a repudiation of this lease or of the Lessee’s obligations under this lease; or

22.1.2 Breach of Lease: is a breach of any of the Lessee’s obligations under this lease;

the Lessee must compensate the Lessor for the loss or damage suffered by reason of the repudiation or breach during the whole of the Term.

22.2 Entitlement: The Lessor’s entitlement to recover damages will not be affected or limited by:

22.2.1 Abandonment: the Lessee abandoning or vacating the Premises;

22.2.2 Re-entry or Termination: the Lessor electing to re-enter or to terminate this lease;

22.2.3 Acceptance of Repudiation: the Lessor accepting the Lessee’s repudiation; or

22.2.4 Surrender: the parties’ conduct constituting a surrender by operation of law.

22.3 Legal Proceedings: The Lessor may bring legal proceedings against the Lessee claiming damages for the entire Term including the periods before and after:

22.3.1 Premises Vacated: the Lessee has vacated the Premises; and


22.3.2 Abandonment, etc: the abandonment, termination, repudiation, acceptance of repudiation or surrender by operation of law referred to in clause 22.2;

whether the proceedings are instituted before or after that conduct.

22.4 Mitigation of Damages: If the Lessee vacates the Premises, whether with or without the Lessor’s consent, the Lessor must take reasonable steps to:

22.4.1 Mitigate Damages: mitigate the Lessor’s damages; and

22.4.2 Lease Premises: endeavour to lease the Premises at a reasonable rent and on reasonable terms.

The Lessor’s entitlement to damages will be assessed on the basis that the Lessor should have observed the obligation to mitigate damages contained in this clause. The Lessor’s conduct in pursuance of the duty to mitigate damages will not by itself constitute acceptance of the Lessee’s breach or repudiation, or a surrender by operation of law.

23. NO WAIVER The Lessor’s waiver or failure to act in response to the Lessee’s breach of any of the Lessee’s obligations in this lease will not operate as a waiver of:

23.1 Waiver of Breach: the same breach on any later occasion; or

23.2 Waiver of Obligations: any other obligations in this lease.

24. INDEMNITY 24.1 Lessor Indemnified: The Lessee indemnifies the Lessor against

all actions, proceedings, calls, claims, demands, losses, damages, costs, expenses or liabilities of any kind suffered or incurred by the Lessor resulting from the Lessee’s acts or omission.

24.2 Repair Costs: The Lessee must pay to the Lessor on demand the amount of all costs and expenses incurred by the Lessor in making good any damage to the Premises and the Lessee’s Improvements resulting from the Lessee’s acts or omission.

24.3 Extent of Indemnity: The Lessee is liable to indemnify the Lessor only to the extent that the Lessor is not fully indemnified under any insurance policy.

25. RESOLUTION OF DISPUTES 25.1 Disputes: Any dispute, difference or question arising between

the parties about:

25.1.1 Interpretation: the interpretation of this lease;

25.1.2 Matters Arising: anything contained in or arising out of this lease;


25.1.3 Rights, Liabilities or Duties: the rights, liabilities or duties of the Lessor or Lessee; or

25.1.4 Other Matters: any other matter touching on the relationship of the Lessor and the Lessee under this lease (including claims in tort as well as in contract);

will be referred to the arbitration of a single arbitrator under the Arbitration Act 1996.

25.2 Arbitrator: The parties must try to agree on the arbitrator. If they cannot agree, the president for the time being of the Auckland District Law Society for the place where the Premises are situated (or his or her nominee) will, on either party’s application, nominate the arbitrator.

25.3 Action at Law: The parties must go to arbitration under this section before they can begin any action at law (other than an application for injunctive relief).

26. NOTICES 26.1 Service of Notices: Any notice or document required or

authorised to be delivered or served under this lease may be delivered or served:

26.1.1 Property Law Act: in any manner mentioned in the Property Law Act 2007 Sections 353-361 (Part 7); or

26.1.2 Facsimile: by facsimile.

26.2 Signature of Notices: Any notice or document to be delivered or served under this lease must be in writing and may be signed by:

26.2.1 Attorney, etc: any attorney, officer, employee or solicitor for the party serving or giving the notice; or

26.2.2 Authorised Person: the party serving the notice or any other person authorised by that party.

27. PROPERTY LAW ACT The covenants and powers contained in Section 218 and Schedule 3 of

the Property Law Act 2007 apply to this lease unless they are inconsistent with this lease’s express terms.

27. LEASE NOT REGISTRABLE The Lessor does not warrant that this lease is in registrable form. The Lessee must not require registration of this lease against the title to the Premises.

28. LESSOR’S CONSENT The Lessor’s consent under this lease is required for each occasion even if the Lessor has given consent for the same or a similar purpose on an earlier occasion.

29. CONTINUED OPERATION OF CLAUSES:


The provisions of clauses 20, 25 and 26 shall operate and have effect notwithstanding that this lease may have expired or been terminated.

EXECUTED AS A DEED Executed for and on behalf of the FAR NORTH DISTRICT COUNCIL

by two elected representatives Elected member signature Please print name Elected member signature Please print name SIGNED on behalf of ) THE KAIKOHE AND DISTRICT ) HISTORICAL AND MECHANICAL TRUST ) by ) __________________________________ _________________________ Signature of authorised signatory for The Kaikohe & District Historical & Mechanical Trust

Signature of authorised signatory for The Kaikohe & District Historical & Mechanical Trust

_________________________________ ________________________________ Full name of authorised signatory for The Kaikohe & District Historical & Mechanical Trust

Full name of authorised signatory for Te The Kaikohe & District Historical & Mechanical Trust


SCHEDULE

Lessor: FAR NORTH DISTRICT COUNCIL

Lessor’s Address: Private Bag 752, Kaikohe

Lessee: THE KAIKOHE AND DISTRICT HISTORICAL AND MECHANICAL TRUST (2202599)

Lessee’s Registered Office: Pioneer Village, Recreation Road, Kaikohe

Lessee’s Postal Address: PO Box 55, Kaikohe

Lessee’s Physical Address: 1A Recreation Road, Kaikohe

Premises: All those pieces of land more particularly shown on the plan annexed hereto shown (A) Lot 4 DP 89178 Local Purpose (Museum) Reserve 0.4991 ha, (B) Part Lot 1 DP 185981 Local Purpose (Pioneer Village) Reserve 1.4448 ha and (C) Part Lot 1 DP 134473 0.0205 ha.

Commencement Date: 1 July 2016

Termination Date: 30 June 2026

Initial Term: Ten (10 years)

Annual Rent: $100 per annum plus GST

Rent Payment Dates: 1st payment due on execution by both parties to the lease and thereafter on or before the anniversary date each year until termination date.

Renewal Term: Ten (10) years

Rent Review: On renewal

Final Expiry Date: 30 June 2036

Permitted Use of Premises: The said land shall be used solely for the purpose of and incidental to an historical and mechanical museum.

Public Liability Insurance: $1,000,000.00

Default Rate: 14% per annum


Docum

ent number A

1877988P

age 17 of 17


Item: 7.1 MEETING: COUNCIL - 10 AUGUST 2017 Name of item: PEREHIPE RESERVE, WHATUWHIWHI - LEASE

PROPOSAL Author: Kaye Lethbridge - Property Legalisation Officer



Executive Summary The Te Hiku Community Board has been given delegated authority to consider all submissions and objections received in response to the public notification of a proposal to lease a part of the Perehipe Reserve to the Whatuwhiwhi Top 10 Holiday Park, and to make a recommendation to Council on whether the proposed lease should be granted. The land involved is shown shaded yellow on the attached plan of the reserve (attachment 6 of this report) and adjoining properties entitled “Plan no. 2 dated 23 May 2017.”

This report was submitted to the 06 July 2017 Te Hiku Community Board meeting. The Board makes the following recommendation to Council:

Recommendation THAT the Far North District Council, pursuant to its powers under sections 53(1)(h) and 54 of the Reserves Act 1977, grants a lease of a part of the Perehipe Recreation Reserve, being apart of Lot 4 DP 44395 CFR NA26D/1387, shown shaded yellow on the indicative plan of the reserve and adjoining properties entitled “Plan no. 2dated 23 May 2017”, to the owners of the Whatuwhiwhi Top 10 Holiday Park and that the terms of the lease shall be: Term: 5 years Rent: Commercial rate to be determined by valuation Maintenance: Responsibility of the lessee AND THAT Council prioritise the development of a reserve management plan for the Perehipe Recreation Reserve as part of the 2018-28 Long Term Plan. Council is also required to make a decision from the standpoint of the Council as the Minister of Conservation’s delegate.

Recommendation THAT the Far North District Council, in its role as administering body of the reserve and in its role as the delegate of the Minister of Conservation and subject to the provisions of the Reserves Act 1977, grants and consents to a lease to the owners of the Whatuwhiwhi Top 10 Holiday Park.

1) Background The Council at its February 2017 meeting resolved as follows:

THAT the Far North District Council publicly notifies the proposal to lease a part of the recreation reserve Lot 4 DP 44395 to the owners of the Whatuwhiwhi Top 10 Holiday Park with the terms of the lease to be:


Term: 5 years Rent: Commercial rate to be determined by valuation Maintenance: Responsibility of the lessee Right of Renewal: A further 5 years if no alternative need identified.

AND THAT the Te Hiku Community Board is appointed to hear any submissions and/or objections received in response to the public process and then to make a recommendation to Council in respect of the proposal.

The Board had previously received a staff report indicating that the Holiday Park has been using part of the reserve on an informal basis for some time, and that playground equipment and structures located on the reserve are the property of the Holiday Park, and that the Holiday Park has been providing a water supply to the public toilets located just south of the reserve on an area of unformed legal road, and that the Holiday Park owners wish to formalise their use of part of the reserve.

The Reserves Act requires the Council to consult with and have regard to the views of the public before undertaking certain actions in respect of reserves, such as when considering granting leases. The proposal was publicly notified and of the 240 submissions received 33 were in favour of the lease and 207 were opposed.

On 15 June 2017 the Board, as the Council’s delegate, heard from a small number of submitters/objectors who wished to speak in support of their submission or objection to the lease proposal. Prior to the hearing, the applicant modified the application by reducing the size of the area for which a lease is sought. The reduced area is shown shaded yellow on an indicative plan of the reserve and adjoining properties entitled “Plan no. 2 dated 23 May 2017.” The plan is attached.

The Board is now required to deliberate on the modified application, and the submissions and objections, and to make a recommendation to Council.

2) Discussion and options Legislation – the Reserves Act 1977 The Reserves Act provides a statutory framework for the management and preservation of areas of public land for the benefit of the public. .

Some extracts from the Reserves Act are contained in a summary attached to this report. The extracts are taken from the following sections of the legislation:

Section 17 Recreation Reserves

Section 40 Functions of Administering Body

Section 53 Powers (other than leasing) in Respect of Recreation Reserves

Section 54 Leasing Powers in Respect of Recreation Reserves

The Board is required to take into account the above legislation, including the functions and purpose of recreation reserves, when deciding on a recommendation.

Legislation – the Local Government Act 2002 The decision-making requirements of section 76 of the Local Government Act overlay decision-making requirements under other Acts such as the Reserves Act, although there is a proviso in that section 76 will only apply so far as it is not inconsistent with the specific requirements of any other enactment.


The Local Government Act’s general decision-making requirements cover the need to take into account community views. This is being achieved by compliance with the Reserves Act’s public consultation requirements as well as iwi consultation.

Council policy Council’s Reserves Policy generally favours the preservation of reserves and where there is an encroachment Council’s policy offers the following resolution options:

Council will seek long term resolution of illegal encroachments or private use of public land. Council’s preferred resolution is removal or cessation and reinstatement of the encroached or utilised land as that is the best outcome for the public at large and meets the objectives of the policy.

Each encroachment will be put before Council on a case by case basis for a decision with recommendations of:

• Removal of the encroachment; or

• Licence to occupy for an encroachment onto legal road for a fee; or

• Licence to occupy or lease with market rent or rates being charged for the period of the encroachment; or

• Land exchange at no cost to the Council; or

• Land disposal at market rates.

In this case the owners of the Holiday Park have chosen to apply for a lease with the aim of formalising their use of the relevant portion of the reserve.

Iwi consultation Section 4 of the Conservation Act 1987 requires that various Acts including the Reserves Act are to be administered so as to give effect to the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi. This requires decision-makers to seek comments from tangata whenua on proposals such as this proposed lease. The Council (and in this case the Board as the Council’s delegate) is required to have consulted with and considered the views of tangata whenua or to have been able to make an informed decision in some other way.

This obligation has been met via the public consultation process which led to submitters from the local marae and individual submitters being heard by the Board.

Options The available options include recommending that the Council either: 1) Grants the Whatuwhiwhi Top 10 Holiday Park’s application for a lease, or 2) Declines the application for a lease. In the event that the Board recommends that a lease be granted, it has been suggested that the terms could be:

Term: 5 years

Rent: Commercial rate to be determined by valuation

Maintenance: Responsibility of the lessee

Right of Renewal: A further 5 years if no alternative need identified. However the Board is not precluded from recommending that some other terms of lease be negotiated with the applicant.


The role of the Board The Te Hiku Community Board covers the interests of the entire community they were elected to represent, and has delegated authority to make a recommendation to Council in respect of this matter.

Following public notification of this proposal, numerous submissions and objections were received, and a hearing was held, as stated above. The Act requires that every submission or objection must be given full consideration before a decision is made to recommend that the Council grants or declines the application for a lease.

A list of all submissions/objections was provided to the Board at the hearing and is attached again for ready reference. A summary of those submissions and objections, the staff report for the February 2017 Community Board meeting, and further information provided by speakers at the hearing, are also attached.

The Board is now asked to consider the modified application, and the submissions and objections, and to make a recommendation to Council.

The role of Council The Council at its next meeting will be required to consider the Board’s recommendation and make the final decision regarding the proposal. This will involve two decisions: one from the standpoint of the Council as the administering body for the reserve, and the other from the standpoint of the Council as the Minister of Conservation’s delegate.

3) Financial implications and budgetary provision A lease would provide Council with free water to the public toilets, maintenance of the reserve and additional funds for reserve use. If there was no lease Council and the ratepayers would have to meet an approximate cost of $9,250 per annum for mowing the reserve and supplying water to the toilets.

4) Reason for the recommendations Alternative recommendations have been provided to assist the Board. They provide for the possible granting or declining of the Whatuwhiwhi Top 10 Holiday Park’s application for a lease. However it is noted that Council staff have deliberately not identified a preferred recommendation. This is because at this stage in the process the Board, having recently conducted the hearing, is required to deliberate on its decision without further extraneous influence.

Manager: Jacqui Robson - General Manager Infrastructure and Asset Management

Attachment 1: Summary of submissions and objections - Document number A1887493

Attachment 2: Complete list of submissions and objections - Document number A1887494

Attachment 3: February 2017 staff report - Document number A1887495

Attachment 4: Map showing reserve boundary - surveyed - Document number A1887496

Attachment 5: Map showing original area of proposed lease (shaded in blue) - Document number A1887497


Attachment 6: Map showing modified area of proposed lease (shaded in yellow) entitled “Plan no. 2 dated 23 May 2017” - Document number A1887498

Attachment 7: Extracts from Reserves Act 1977 - Document number A1887500

Attachment 8: Notes from Reserve Act Hearing by Te Hiku Community Board - Document number A1887499

Attachment 9: Complete Set of Supplementary Submissions - Document number A1887501










Council’s Reserves Policy refers to encroachments on Council-owned land.


Submitters from the local marae and individual submitters were heard by the Te Hiku Community Board.


The proposal has been publicly notified and submissions/objections are being considered through the statutory process under the Reserves Act.


No, the degree of significance has been assessed as moderate.


Yes, the Community Board is to consider all submissions/objections and to make a recommendation to Council.


The $9,250 estimate for mowing and water supply is an unbudgeted amount

Chief Financial Officer review. The chief financial officer has reviewed this report


June 2017 – Te Hiku Community Board

Summary of Submissions Perehipe Recreation Reserve – Proposal to lease a part of the reserve

Opposition can be summarised as follows:

• A private company should not profit from the use of private land. • The site should be used for parking boat trailers, as proposed by a report tabled with

Council in 1993. • That it may set a precedent to allow commercial interests to override the public right to

use public reserves and/or lead to the sale of public reserves to private entities. • That the reserve is waahi tapu (sacred) and part of an old urupa (burial ground) of the

local hapu. Furthermore the land was taken and should be returned to the local marae. • Historic grievances alleging the community have been prohibited from using the reserve,

even though it is public land. • Concern about the environmental effects, including erosion of the bank, pollution through

rubbish dumping and declining seafood stocks as a result of increased numbers of visitors.

• That there is already insufficient parking in this area. Increasing numbers of visitors will encourage parking on the road, making it more dangerous.

• The holiday park is already large enough. A previous application to increase cabin numbers was declined (presumably under the RMA). Perspective is that the campground is big enough.

• Neighbouring landowners are concerned about potentially detrimental effects to their property values.

• Concern the effect of increased traffic over areas that contain service utilities may cause more erosion.

Submissions in favour of the lease put forward the perspective that:

• Maintenance of the reserve would be more regular and of a higher standard if the proposal goes ahead.

• Increasing the size of the campground would encourage more visitors to the area.

• The area in question is a favourite of freedom campers and illegal rubbish dumpers. If the land was under control of the campground this would cease.

• The proposal relates only to part of the reserve. Most of the reserve would still be available for public use.

Many submitters who supported the lease recommended that if the lease was granted it should be conditional on:

• Ensuring the property was properly maintained. • That the reserve not be fenced off. • That any income be used to provide more facilities for public use at Whatuwhiwhi. • If it is at all possible, the lease should be managed by local Maori trustees. • That the lease exclude the strip of land beside 29 Whatuwhiwhi Road, where privately

owned fruit trees are foraged by visitors and campers. • That no further structures be constructed on the lease area.

TE HIKU COMMUNITY BOARD PEREHIPE RESERVE HEARINGS AGENDA

TE AHU CNR MATTHEWS AVE AND SOUTH ROAD

KAITAIA

THURSDAY 15 JUNE 2017 COMMENCING AT 3:00 PM

Membership Adele Gardner (Chairperson) Awhina Murupaenga Lawrie Atkinson Nuu Ward Melanie Dalziel Councillor Felicity Foy Bronwyn Hunt

COPY


The Local Government Act 2002 states the role of a Community Board is to:- (a) Represent, and act as an advocate for, the interests of its community; (b) Consider and report on all matters referred to it by the territorial authority, or any matter

of interest or concern to the community board; (c) Maintain an overview of services provided by the territorial authority within the

community; (d) Prepare an annual submission to the territorial authority for expenditure within the

community; (e) Communicate with community organisations and special interest groups within the

community; (f) Undertake any other responsibilities that are delegated to it by the territorial authority

Council Delegations to Community Boards The "civic amenities" referred to in these delegations include the following Council activities:

• Amenity lighting

• Cemeteries

• Drainage (does not include reticulated stormwater systems)

• Footpaths/cycle ways and walkways.

• Public toilets

• Reserves

• Halls

• Swimming pools

• Town litter

• Town beautification and maintenance

• Street furniture including public information signage.

• Street/public Art.

• Trees on Council land

• Off road public car parks.

• Lindvart Park – a Kaikohe-Hokianga Community Board civic amenity.Exclusions: From time to time Council may consider some activities and assets as having district wide significance and these will remain the responsibility of Council. These currently include: The roading network, Hundertwasser toilets, District Library Network, Baysport, the Kerikeri, Kaikohe & Kaitaia Airports, Hokianga Vehicle Ferry, i-Site network, Far North Community Centre, Kerikeri Domain, Kawakawa Heated Swimming Pool, Kaikohe Cemetery, Kerikeri Sports Complex, The Centre at Kerikeri, the Bay of Islands/Hokianga Cycle Trail. 1. Set local priorities for minor capital works in accordance with existing strategies, Recommend local

service levels and asset development priorities for civic amenities as part of the Annual Plan andLong Term Plan processes.

2. Reallocate capital budgets within the Annual Plan of up to 5% for any specific civic amenity,provided that the overall activity budgetary targets are met.

3. Make grants from the allocated Community Funds in accordance with policy 3209, and theSPARC/Sport Northland Rural Travel fund in accordance with the criteria set by the respectivebody, and, for the Bay of Islands-Whangaroa Community Board, the power to allocate theHundertwasser Donations Account.

4. Provide comment to council staff on resource consent applications having significance within theCommunity, including the provision of land for reserves or other public purposes.

5. To hold, or participate in hearings, as the Council considers appropriate, in relation to submissionspertinent to their community made to plans and strategies including the Long Term Plan and AnnualPlan, and if appropriate recommend decisions to the Council.

6. To hold hearings of submissions received as a result of Special Consultative Procedures carried outin respect of any matter other than an Annual or Long Term Plan, and make recommendations tothe Council.

7. Where recommended by staff to appoint management committees for local reserves, cemeteries,halls, and community centres.

8. To allocate names for previously unnamed local roads, reserves and other community facilities, andrecommend to Council name changes of previously named roads, reserves, and communityfacilities subject to consultation with the community.

9. To consider the provisions of new and reviewed reserve management plans for recommendation tothe Council in accordance with the Reserves Act 1977, and hear or participate in the hearing ofsubmissions thereto, as considered appropriate by the Council,

10. To provide recommendations to the Council in respect of applications for the use and/or lease ofreserves not contemplated by an existing reserve management plan.

11. Prohibit the use of skateboards in specified locations within their communities, in accordance withCouncil’s Skating Bylaw 1998.

12. Recommend new bylaws or amendments to existing bylaws.

COPY

Document number A1887494 Page 2 of 27Document number A1887494 Page 2 of 27

13. Prepare and review management plans for local cemeteries within budget parameters and in amanner consistent with Council Policy.

14. Exercise the following powers in respect of the Council bylaws within their community:

i) Control of Use of Public Spaces – Dispensations on signs

ii) Mobile Shops and Hawkers – Recommend places where mobile shops and/or hawkersshould not be permitted.

iii) Parking and Traffic Control – Recommend parking restrictions, and areas where complyingcamping vehicles may park, and consider and grant dispensations in accordance withclause 2007.2

iv) Public Places Liquor Control – Recommend times and places where the possession ordrinking of alcohol should be prohibited.

v) Speed Limits – Recommend places and speed limits which should be imposed.

15. To appoint Community Board members to speak on behalf of their community in respect ofsubmissions or petitions.

16. Specific to the Bay of Islands-Whangaroa Community Board – consider any recommendations ofthe Paihia Heritage Working Group and make appropriate recommendations to Council on thedevelopment of a draft Plan Change and a Section 32 analysis on heritage provisions for Paihia

17. To set schedule of meeting dates, times and venues, subject to the meetings not conflicting withmeetings of the Council and satisfying the provisions of the Local Government Official informationand Meetings Act 1987.

18. To review all proposed public art projects on a project-by project basis to ensure they comply withpolicy #5105 Art in Public Places, including approval of the aesthetic appearance, maintenanceprogramme, insurance and appropriate location, and to agree to their installation.

19. In respect of applications from food establishments for permission to establish tables and chairs ona public place, i.e. Alfresco dining in accordance with Policy 3116, to consider and decide on anyapplication which does not meet all criteria of the policy, and any application which staff recommendto be declined.

20. Subject to a report from the appropriate managers and the appropriate budgetary provision, tomake decisions in respect of civic amenities including the levels of service, and the provision orremoval of an amenity not provided for elsewhere in these delegations.

Terms of Reference In fulfilling its role and giving effect to its delegations, Community Boards are expected to:

1. Comment on adverse performance to the Chief Executive in respect of service delivery.

2. Assist their communities in the development of structure plans, emergency managementcommunity response plans, and community development plans

3. Assist their communities to set priorities for Pride of Place programmes

4. Have special regard for the views of Maori

5. Have special regard for the views of special interest groups, e.g. disabled, youth, aged, etc.

6. Actively participate in community consultation and advocacy and keep Council informed on localissues.

7. Seek and report to Council community feedback on current issues by:

• Holding a Community forum prior to Board meetings

• Varying the venues of Board meetings to enable access by members of the community

8. Monitor and make recommendations to Council to improve effectiveness of policy

9. Appoint a member to receive Annual Plan\Long Term Council Community Plan submissionspertinent to the Board area, attend hearings within the Board area, and attend Councildeliberations prior to the Plan adoption.

Protocols In supporting Community Boards to fulfil their role, the Council will:

1. Provide appropriate management support for the Boards

2. Organise and host regular workshops with the Community Boards l to assess the 'State of theWards & District' to establish spending priorities

3. Prior to decision-making, seek and include 'Community Board views' in Council reports in relationto:

a. the disposal and purchase of land

b. proposals to acquire or dispose of reserves

c. representation reviews

d. development of new maritime facilities

e. community development plans and structure plans

f. removal and protection of trees

g. local economic development initiatives

COPY


h. Changes to the Resource Management Plan

4. Organise and host quarterly meetings between Boards, the CEO and senior management staff

5. Prepare an induction/familiarisation process targeting new members in particular early in the term

6. Support Board members to arrange meetings with local agencies and service clubs to place moreemphasis on partnerships and raising profile of the Boards as community leaders.

7. Permit Board chairperson (or nominated member) speaking rights at Council meetings.

8. Help Boards to implement local community projects

9. Arrange for Infrastructure and Asset Management Staff to meet with the Community Boards inSeptember each year to agree the capital works for the forthcoming year for input into the Annual orLong Term Plan.

10. Provide information

COPY


of 1

FAR NORTH DISTRICT COUNCIL

TE HIKU COMMUNITY BOARD MEETING

THURSDAY 15 JUNE 2017 COMMENCING AT 3:00 PM TE AHU

CNR MATTHEWS AVE AND SOUTH ROAD KAITAIA

A G E N D A

Item Page No

1.0 APOLOGIES AND DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

Members need to stand aside from decision-making when a conflict arises between their role as a Member of the Community Board and any private or other external interest they might have. This note is provided as a reminder to Members to review the matters on the agenda and assess and identify where they may have a pecuniary or other conflict of interest, or where there may be a perception of a conflict of interest.

If a Member feels they do have a conflict of interest, they should publicly declare that at the start of the meeting or of the relevant item of business and refrain from participating in the discussion or voting on that item. If a Member thinks they may have a conflict of interest, they can seek advice from the Chief Executive Officer or the Team Leader Governance Support. (preferably before the meeting).

It is noted that while Members can seek advice the final decision as to whether a conflict exists rests with the Member.

2.0 RESOLUTION TO SUSPEND STANDING ORDERS

Recommendation

THAT Standing Orders ‘3.8 Rules of Debate’ be suspended for the duration of the Hearing to enable Elected Members to speak more than once and to enable free participation by members of the public.

3.0 PROPOSED PEREHIPE RESERVE LEASE – HEARING OF SUBMISSIONS

4.0 RESOLUTION TO RESUME STANDING ORDERS

Recommendation THAT Standing Orders be resumed.

5.0 CLOSE OF MEETING

COPY


TABLE OF CONTENTS

i

ID Number Name Page

PRLC17/247 Abbott, Mrs Marie ............................................................................ 16

PRLC17/36 Abrahall, Mrs Berit ............................................................................ 2

PRLC17/187 Albert, Ms Myra ................................................................................ 12

PRLC17/60 Allison, Mr ......................................................................................... 4

PRLC17/197 Anderson, Mrs Janet ......................................................................... 12

PRLC17/159 Anderson, Mrs Lisa ............................................................................ 9

PRLC17/46 Ange, Dr ............................................................................................ 3

PRLC17/115 Anita, Ms ........................................................................................... 6

PRLC17/248 Anson, Mr Charles ............................................................................. 16

PRLC17/207 Armstrong, Mrs Hazel ....................................................................... 14

PRLC17/212 Atchison, Mr Chris ............................................................................. 14

PRLC17/211 Atchison, Mr Trevor .......................................................................... 14

PRLC17/230 Atchison, Mrs Karen .......................................................................... 15

PRLC17/213 Atchison, Ms Kylie ............................................................................. 14

PRLC17/31 Baker, Mrs Lisa .................................................................................. 2

PRLC17/166 Billington, Mr Robin .......................................................................... 10

PRLC17/17 Billington, Mrs ................................................................................... 2

PRLC17/103 Billington, Mrs Judy ........................................................................... 6

PRLC17/45 Black, Mrs Gael.................................................................................. 3

PRLC17/229 Blundell, Mr Alfred ............................................................................ 15

PRLC17/23 Boyd, Mr ............................................................................................ 2

PRLC17/179 Bradley, Dr John ................................................................................ 11

PRLC17/233 Britton, Mr Craig ............................................................................... 15

PRLC17/234 Britton, Mrs Kyleigh .......................................................................... 15

PRLC17/243 Burke, Mr Ian .................................................................................... 16

PRLC17/18 Burrows, Mrs Rhonda ....................................................................... 2

PRLC17/121 Callaghan, Mrs Sharon ...................................................................... 7

PRLC17/28 Campbell, Mr Grant .......................................................................... 2

PRLC17/113 Cann, Mrs Debbie .............................................................................. 6

PRLC17/14 Cant, Mrs Pauline .............................................................................. 2

PRLC17/111 Carol, Mrs .......................................................................................... 6

PRLC17/1 Chapman, Ms Gina ............................................................................ 1

PRLC17/70 Chris, Mr ............................................................................................ 4

PRLC17/4 Cockle, Ms Victoria ............................................................................ 1

PRLC17/86 Cole, Ms Deb ..................................................................................... 5

PRLC17/246 Conlon, Mr Ivan ................................................................................. 16

PRLC17/245 Conlon, Mrs Katrina .......................................................................... 16

PRLC17/134 Conrad, Mrs Tania ............................................................................. 7

PRLC17/39 Corcoran, Mrs Barbara ...................................................................... 3

PRLC17/72 Cornwall, Mr Steve ............................................................................ 4

PRLC17/53 Corrigan, Mr Mike ............................................................................. 3

PRLC17/104 Coxhead, Mr John ............................................................................. 6

PRLC17/37 Cramond, Mrs ................................................................................... 3

COPY


TABLE OF CONTENTS

ii

ID Number Name Page

PRLC17/50 Darin, Mr Steve ................................................................................. 3

PRLC17/49 Darrin, Mrs Debbie ............................................................................ 3

PRLC17/214 Davidson, Mr Neil .............................................................................. 14

PRLC17/100 Davidson, Ms ..................................................................................... 6

PRLC17/161 Davis, Mr Kelvin (MP) ........................................................................ 10

PRLC17/228 Day, Mr Richard ................................................................................ 15

PRLC17/227 Day, Mrs Leanne ............................................................................... 15

PRLC17/177 de Waal, Mrs Sheryl .......................................................................... 11

PRLC17/202 Dean, Mrs Noeline ............................................................................ 13

PRLC17/67 Dixon, Ms Anna ................................................................................. 4

PRLC17/226 Donovan, Mr Peter ............................................................................ 15

PRLC17/16 Doolan, Mr Karl ................................................................................. 2

PRLC17/3 Dowman, Ms Debbie ......................................................................... 1

PRLC17/73 Dunn, Mrs Diane ............................................................................... 4

PRLC17/82 Edwards, Ms Sonja ............................................................................ 5

PRLC17/175 Evans, Mr John .................................................................................. 11

PRLC17/176 Evans, Mrs Dianne ............................................................................. 11

PRLC17/203 Evered, Ms Irene ............................................................................... 14

PRLC17/136 Foley, Mary ....................................................................................... 8

PRLC17/148 Fox, Mr Michael ................................................................................ 9

PRLC17/11 Fox, Mrs Delice .................................................................................. 1

PRLC17/182 Gavin, Mr ........................................................................................... 11

PRLC17/75 Golf, Ms Theresa ............................................................................... 4

PRLC17/56 Grace, Mrs Korina ............................................................................. 4

PRLC17/209 Greenfield, Ms Pam .......................................................................... 14

PRLC17/25 Greig, Mr Cameron ........................................................................... 2

PRLC17/188 Griffioen, Dr Anne ............................................................................. 12

PRLC17/238 Hack, Mr Edward ............................................................................... 15

PRLC17/217 Hack, Mr Hakeagaiki ......................................................................... 14

PRLC17/221 Hack, Mr Paki .................................................................................... 14

PRLC17/218 Hack, Mr Sunteli ................................................................................ 14

PRLC17/220 Hack, Mrs Lisa ................................................................................... 14

PRLC17/95 Haititaimarangai Marae - Chair - Lawrence, Mr Hori

Speaker - Windleborn, Mr Hazely ..................................................... 5

PRLC17/204 Haititaimarangai Marae - Chair - Lawrence, Mr Hori

Speaker - Windleborn, Mr Hazely ..................................................... 14

PRLC17/237 Hakeua-Hack, Ms Marilyn ................................................................. 15

PRLC17/141 Haretuku, Ms Ellen ............................................................................ 8

PRLC17/48 Harrison, Mrs .................................................................................... 3

PRLC17/240 Haufler, Ms Ursula ............................................................................ 15

PRLC17/139 Henderson, Ms Jodi ........................................................................... 8

PRLC17/172 Henwood, Mr Andrew ...................................................................... 11

PRLC17/174 Henwood, Mrs Jodene ...................................................................... 11

COPY


TABLE OF CONTENTS

iii

ID Number Name Page

PRLC17/22 Herbert, Mr George .......................................................................... 2

PRLC17/85 Herbert-Graves, Ms Anahera ............................................................ 5

PRLC17/123 Hetaraka, Mr ................................................................................... 7

PRLC17/81 Hetaraka, Mr Wiremu ....................................................................... 5

PRLC17/135 Hetaraka, Ms Sharlene ...................................................................... 7

PRLC17/132 Hetaraka, Ms Toni-Leeann ................................................................ 7

PRLC17/97 Hita, Mrs Karena ............................................................................... 5

PRLC17/106 Hodgson, Ms Petrina ......................................................................... 6

PRLC17/59 Hokai, Mrs Keri .................................................................................. 4

PRLC17/146 Holloway, Mr Victor (and Family) ..................................................... 9

PRLC17/38 Hudson, Mr Wallis ............................................................................. 3

PRLC17/210 Hunt, Mr Shane ................................................................................. 14

PRLC17/147 Jayne ................................................................................................. 9

PRLC17/61 Joe, Mrs ............................................................................................. 4

PRLC17/112 Johnston, Ms Sharon ......................................................................... 6

PRLC17/142 Jorey, Mr Mark .................................................................................. 8

PRLC17/71 Judy, Ms ............................................................................................ 4

PRLC17/79 Kelly, Mrs........................................................................................... 5

PRLC17/154 Kidd, Ms Sarah-Jane .......................................................................... 9

PRLC17/76 Laird, Mr ............................................................................................ 4

PRLC17/200 Larkins, Ms Moa Harris ..................................................................... 13

PRLC17/57 Lawrence, Mr Boyce .......................................................................... 4

PRLC17/155 Lawrence, Mr Paki ............................................................................. 9

PRLC17/7 Lawrence, Mrs Christie ..................................................................... 1

PRLC17/65 Lawrence, Mrs Daphne ..................................................................... 4

PRLC17/143 Lawrence, Mrs Michelle .................................................................... 8

PRLC17/165 Lawrence, Ms Deborah ..................................................................... 10

PRLC17/108 Lawrence, Ms Nelleigh ...................................................................... 6

PRLC17/180 Lunjevich, Mrs Wendy....................................................................... 11

PRLC17/87 MacLean, Jessica ............................................................................... 5

PRLC17/157 Mann, Mrs Christine ......................................................................... 9

PRLC17/126 Marriott, Mr Rangi ............................................................................ 7

PRLC17/99 Mary, Mrs .......................................................................................... 6

PRLC17/194 Masters, Mrs Myra ............................................................................ 11

PRLC17/178 Masters, Ms Andrew ......................................................................... 11

PRLC17/80 Matthews, Mrs Margaret .................................................................. 5

PRLC17/122 McCloy, Avril ..................................................................................... 7

PRLC17/6 McDermott, J .................................................................................... 1

PRLC17/27 McDonald, Mr Gary ........................................................................... 2

PRLC17/184 McDonald, Mrs Ashleigh ................................................................... 11

PRLC17/15 McIver, Ms Jean ................................................................................ 2

PRLC17/35 McKibbin, Mrs Natalie....................................................................... 2

PRLC17/24 McLeod, Mrs Debera ......................................................................... 2

COPY


TABLE OF CONTENTS

iv

ID Number Name Page

PRLC17/242 McMahon, Mr John ........................................................................... 16

PRLC17/196 McMahon, Mrs Larraine ................................................................... 12

PRLC17/224 McNally, Mr Bruce ............................................................................ 14

PRLC17/225 McNally, Mrs Roma ........................................................................... 15

PRLC17/62 Miranda, Mr ...................................................................................... 4

PRLC17/215 Mitcalfe, Mr Mike ............................................................................. 14

PRLC17/216 Mitcalfe, Mrs Pam ............................................................................. 14

PRLC17/145 Mitchell, Mr Glen .............................................................................. 9

PRLC17/223 Mitchell, Mr Jax ................................................................................. 14

PRLC17/105 Moore, Ms Clare ............................................................................... 6

PRLC17/8 Morgan, Mr Alec ............................................................................... 1

PRLC17/110 Morris, Mr ......................................................................................... 6

PRLC17/52 Mortlock, Mr Bill ............................................................................... 3

PRLC17/51 Mortlock, Mrs Joanne ....................................................................... 3

PRLC17/164 Motu, Mrs Makareta ......................................................................... 10

PRLC17/133 Murray, Mr Bart ................................................................................ 7

PRLC17/94 Murray, Sera ..................................................................................... 5

PRLC17/138 Nacho, Mr ......................................................................................... 8

PRLC17/40 Narbey, Mr Harris ............................................................................. 3

PRLC17/84 Neho, Ms Shirley ............................................................................... 5

PRLC17/118 Nicholson, Mrs Mel ........................................................................... 6

PRLC17/185 O'Donoghue, Mrs A ........................................................................... 12

PRLC17/170 Oneroa, Ms Mori Anne ..................................................................... 11

PRLC17/150 Oturu School - Principal Mr Fraser Smith ......................................... 9

PRLC17/54 Page, Mr Brian ................................................................................... 3

PRLC17/26 Page, Mr Matthew ............................................................................ 2

PRLC17/140 Page, Mrs Ere .................................................................................... 8

PRLC17/137 Perkinson, Ms Jeanine ...................................................................... 8

PRLC17/102 Perry, Mr Nick ................................................................................... 6

PRLC17/129 Phillip, Mr .......................................................................................... 7

PRLC17/151 Phillips, Mrs Carolyn.......................................................................... 9

PRLC17/128 Pio, Mrs Rererangi ............................................................................. 7

PRLC17/119 Pirrie, Mr Phelan ............................................................................... 7

PRLC17/190 Pitchford, Ms Nadia .......................................................................... 12

PRLC17/183 Prior, Mr Phil ..................................................................................... 11

PRLC17/29 Rachael, Ms ....................................................................................... 2

PRLC17/198 Rahanuhi, Mrs Rhonda ...................................................................... 12

PRLC17/5 Raharuhi, Ms Nina ............................................................................. 1

PRLC17/2 Raharuhi-Toby, Mrs Polly .................................................................. 1

PRLC17/186 Reeve, Mr Brian ................................................................................ 12

PRLC17/144 Rehu, Mrs Rayleen ............................................................................ 8

PRLC17/44 Reihana ............................................................................................. 3

PRLC17/58 Reihana, Ms Olivia ............................................................................. 4

COPY


TABLE OF CONTENTS

v

ID Number Name Page

PRLC17/124 Renee, Ms ......................................................................................... 7

PRLC17/93 Reti, Mr Henry ................................................................................... 5

PRLC17/90 Reti, Mr Jason .................................................................................... 5

PRLC17/91 Reti, Mrs Carol .................................................................................. 5

PRLC17/89 Reti, Mrs Siobhan .............................................................................. 5

PRLC17/219 Rhind, Mrs Kataraina......................................................................... 14

PRLC17/47 Rhonda, Mrs ...................................................................................... 3

PRLC17/109 Richard, Mr K ..................................................................................... 6

PRLC17/192 RJ & SM Urlich Descendents

Speaker - Urlich, Mr Randolph .......................................................... 12

PRLC17/232 Rodewyk, Mr Peter ........................................................................... 15

PRLC17/231 Rodewyk, Mrs Jill............................................................................... 15

PRLC17/199 Rodewyk, Ms Anna............................................................................ 13

PRLC17/191 Rogers, Mrs Sara ............................................................................... 12

PRLC17/249 Rutene, Mr Cedric ............................................................................. 16

PRLC17/236 Ruth, Mr Martyn ............................................................................... 15

PRLC17/235 Ruth, Mrs Donna ............................................................................... 15

PRLC17/19 Ryan, Ms Sana ................................................................................... 2

PRLC17/163 Saggers, Mr T..................................................................................... 10

PRLC17/43 Sanders, Mr Vaughan ........................................................................ 3

PRLC17/74 Scahill, Mr Roy ................................................................................... 4

PRLC17/117 Scully, Ms Simone ............................................................................. 6

PRLC17/83 Sheral, Ms ......................................................................................... 5

PRLC17/33 Shirkie, Mr Stewart ........................................................................... 2

PRLC17/13 Shirkie, Mrs Sally ............................................................................... 1

PRLC17/55 Sleep, Mr ........................................................................................... 4

PRLC17/168 Smith, Ms Donna ............................................................................... 10

PRLC17/42 Snowden, Mrs Caroline ..................................................................... 3

PRLC17/156 Stather-Dunn, Dr Loise ...................................................................... 9

PRLC17/244 Steel, Ms Leona ................................................................................. 16

PRLC17/96 Stephen, Mr ...................................................................................... 5

PRLC17/64 Tania, Mrs ......................................................................................... 4

PRLC17/171 Taylor, Mr Steve ................................................................................ 11

PRLC17/12 Taylor, Mrs Leena .............................................................................. 1

PRLC17/173 Taylor, Mrs Robyn ............................................................................. 11

PRLC17/68 Thompson, Mr Daniel ....................................................................... 4

PRLC17/208 Thompson, Mr Kevin ......................................................................... 14

PRLC17/149 Thomson, Ms Josie ............................................................................ 9

PRLC17/92 Thrupp, Mrs Sara ............................................................................... 5

PRLC17/66 Tipene, Mr ......................................................................................... 4

PRLC17/69 Tom, Mr ............................................................................................. 4

PRLC17/20 Tothill, Ms Annie ............................................................................... 2

PRLC17/63 Trista, Mrs ......................................................................................... 4

COPY


TABLE OF CONTENTS

vi

ID Number Name Page

PRLC17/222 Turua, Mrs Hayley ............................................................................. 14

PRLC17/239 Turua, Mrs Lucy ................................................................................. 15

PRLC17/153 Unkovich, Mr Colin ............................................................................ 9

PRLC17/152 Urlich, Mr Randolph .......................................................................... 9

PRLC17/206 Urlich, Mr Simon ............................................................................... 14

PRLC17/21 Urlich, Mrs Freya ............................................................................... 2

PRLC17/201 Urlich, Mrs Glenys ............................................................................. 13

PRLC17/9 Urlich, Mrs Karen .............................................................................. 1

PRLC17/193 Van Rens, Dr Joost............................................................................. 12

PRLC17/116 Victoria, Ms ....................................................................................... 6

PRLC17/107 Vinac, Mrs Stephanie ........................................................................ 6

PRLC17/131 Walker, Ms Stephanie ....................................................................... 7

PRLC17/41 Wallace, Mrs Lesley........................................................................... 3

PRLC17/167 Walsh, Mr Nicholas ........................................................................... 10

PRLC17/195 Warena, Ms Rosina ........................................................................... 12

PRLC17/77 Whalen, Ms Georgina ....................................................................... 4

PRLC17/32 Whatuwhiwhi Top 10

Speaker -Shirkie, Mrs Sally ................................................................ 2

PRLC17/98 White, Mrs Joy .................................................................................. 6

PRLC17/189 Wild, Mr Ryan ................................................................................... 12

PRLC17/158 Wilkinson, Mr Des ............................................................................. 9

PRLC17/10 Williams, Mrs Trish ............................................................................ 1

PRLC17/181 Windelborn, Mr Hazely ..................................................................... 11

PRLC17/241 Winks, Mr Barry ................................................................................ 16

PRLC17/30 Woodward, Mrs Gayle ...................................................................... 2

PRLC17/120 Wylie, Mr ........................................................................................... 7

PRLC17/169 Yelash, Mr Peter ................................................................................ 10

PRLC17/162 Young, Mr R ....................................................................................... 10

PRLC17/130 Yvonne .............................................................................................. 7

COPY


Submission to the Proposed Perehipe Reserve Lease Consultation

PAGE 1

ID Number

Reason Name

PRLC17/1 The Reserve should be available to all members of the District and ratepayers for their enjoyment not just customers of the Holiday Park. If the lease is granted, the area is considerably diminished when the area itself is growing and their is a greater need for public recreational space. If the lease does go ahead, there should be a clause to void the lease should there be a change in use by the owners, such as the park no longer offers accommodation exclusively to the general public and it is used primarily for accommodation for contractors & employees of the Holiday park owner.

Chapman, Ms Gina

PRLC17/2 The reserve should be left for public use all year round. During the busy holiday season the space would’ve great for families especially as there is no other space for families to go along there as the beach area is small.why should a multi million dollar foreign company be allowed to make more money off it when it should rightfully be open space for the general public to use freely. Sometimes people need to stop thinking about making extra money and think about the amount of people that would be able to use this reserve and enjoy it with friends and family all year round

Raharuhi-Toby, Mrs Polly

PRLC17/3 I presume it is only the blue area on the map? In which case it doesnt really have much other use and there is still a large reserve area avaliable to the public. I think the area needs to remain un fenced as it is now. The playground will remain accesible to the public too I presume? Maybe council could use some of the lease income to provide more facilities there. I own a property at Whatuwhiwhi and I feel so long as the land is onlyleased snd nnever sold then it should be supported. It is not the current owners fault that council allowed this situation to happen that was between previous owners and council. Really that land wouldnt be much use as a reserve. Up by the road is a different matter and this area should be enhanced.

Dowman, Ms Debbie

PRLC17/4 Why would we? I can’t see that residents and ratepayers get anything out of this deal. We just lose use of a public reserve. The Top 10 Holiday Park on the other hand, get to make a profit from camper over-flow in peak season. Seems like a crazy deal to me.

Cockle, Ms Victoria

PRLC17/5 This section of land was always a protected public reserve before the previous owners of the Top 10 decided to just took over the land and developed it and charged to camp on it. No profit going back to the community only to themselves. Perehipe reserve has always been a public reserve until the previous owners of Top 10 decided amongst himself and a couple of his business mates that he would just take over that reserve and make it part of the Top 10 and hiring the land out to campers and profiting all for himself but nothing for the community.

Raharuhi, Ms Nina

PRLC17/6 If a lease is in place with the holiday park then that is fine, they have shown that they keep the land tidy and well kept. Money from the lease could be used to help with the upkeep of other reserve land in the district, If not leased out to the camping ground it will be up to the council to maintain this area and that will be an added cost and who knows what this area will look like in a few years, there is enough reserve land that is not utalized to its full potential in this area already, this area of land is being used to its full potential and the council will be making money off it instead of costing money with the upkeep. Thank you!

McDermott, J

PRLC17/7 My name is Christie Lawrence I’m 31 years of age I’m white and make over 170k a year. the fact that the council can’t see why this is an issue and needs it to be explained baffles me. 1) you (the council) do not own it, it is owned by the people,all people& upkeep is paid by rate payers. 2) this land should be ngati kahu land white greed is disgusting 3) the fact you think it’s ok to lease out our land to the highest bidder is a joke 4) the fact it’s to the Chinese makes this even worse, if it was for school trips maybe this would be ok but once again this land is for everyone not just the Chinese 5) <expletive deleted> you for making me spend time writing this, time I could be using for good instead of telling you how wrong you are.

Lawrence, Mrs Christie

PRLC17/8 . Carrington Jade has had a lot of taxpayer and ratepayer support over the years with little discernible return even per employment and training for local people, this is more indulgence . If it is decided in the end to lease the substantial portion of any income should go into FNDC funds, contestable, for recreation use

Morgan, Mr Alec

PRLC17/9 This is public land NOT councils land son it should not be leased Urlich, Mrs KarenPRLC17/10 Because its overcrowded in the summer with locals as it is. And it’s not fair on the residents of perehipe to put up with congestion and infrastructure doesn’t

support this in that ateaWilliams, Mrs Trish

PRLC17/11 Because it is a public space, lots of people go ther to relax & enjoy a day at the beach. Because the profits go to the Top 10 owners. Also the land is a public reserve, for everyone to use.

Fox, Mrs Delice

PRLC17/12 I don’t believe they should lease it because in the past public has been excluded from all of the Reserve, whether the Holiday Park had leased part of it or not. The Holiday Park have had the use of the Reserve for a number of years, with no recompense to the community, while charging campers for use of this area. I believe it is time for the community to have use of the Reserve. There are many worthwhile activities and groups that could use the land for the benefit of the whole community.

Taylor, Mrs Leena

PRLC17/13 The area is big enough to cater for a reserve for the locals to use and also alllow for an area for the Holiday Park to l ease. Shirkie, Mrs Sally

COPY



PAGE 2

ID Number

Reason Name

PRLC17/14 I do support this as the area is already utilised and maintained by the camp ground. Also, it encourages more tourists and holiday makers info the far north which is good for the economy. A further bonus is that the council can gain a lease for a section of land that is currently vacant. If the public area is well signposted and the campground patrons are kept within the leased area, I believe it to be a win win situation for the council, the campground and the ratepayers and residents of the far north district.

Cant, Mrs Pauline

PRLC17/15 The area is growing and there is a greater need for more reserve areas for people to picnic on. It would be good to have some parking space here as well. At the moment people park beside the road which is a safety issue with children coming off the beach and coming on to the road between cars. It can be hard to see them.

McIver, Ms Jean

PRLC17/16 It will bring more visitors to the area Doolan, Mr KarlPRLC17/17 It is getting harder and harder to keep our reserves parks and play areas ,they are there for the public to enjoy please leave it that way Billington, MrsPRLC17/18 The area should be available to all people not a select few Burrows, Mrs RhondaPRLC17/19 Originally it was in Maori ownership, if the council has relinquished is “USE” by leasing /giving to Top 10 holiday park then should the original owners have the first

right of refusal. And if the council goes ahead with the lease then surely that putea should go to either the original owners or Haititaimarangai Marae to sort out.. In actual fact if Top 10 have made $$$$ off this piece of seafront land then the putea is in the wrong hands. Dont let us start another argument with the now owners, we have a lot to deal with without this nonsense, just give it back please.

Ryan, Ms Sana

PRLC17/20 The purpose of this reserve (all of it) should be to provide space for residents and visitors free of charge. Particularly in the peek of the season when beach space is compromised somewhat by boats being launched and retrieved. Also much of the beach space is taken up by parked boat trailers and 4W Drive vehicles. This one of the smaller beaches in the area and prone to congestion. Council providing a grassy/treescape area immediately across the road from the beach is a much preferred use for this reserve, thereby providing more space for all recreational users. Why would we hand over the use of reserve land to a private enterprise? There are already too many examples of private people capturing public land for themselves in this area.

Tothill, Ms Annie

PRLC17/21 Public land should be available for everyone to use, not for one business to make a profit from. Urlich, Mrs FreyaPRLC17/22 It might as well be used for something Herbert, Mr GeorgePRLC17/23 If the need is there and for holiday makers requiring the extra room off course. Better than Freedom Campers every where. Boyd, MrPRLC17/24 It is a reserve it should not be used for a money making venture .Why should the top 10 get the use of it surely they should have thought about that before they

used there spare accommodation for offices instead of using the land they already have on their golf course.The people who live in the community should be able to use it not for profit gaining . We have another camp ground in the area if accommodation is needed send the people there.

McLeod, Mrs Debera

PRLC17/25 It is public land and should be able t be enjoyed by the public Greig, Mr CameronPRLC17/26 I would actually support leasing however would want to know that the council is getting a good return and are not committed to multiple year lease terms.

Alternatively, I would support a short ‘busy season’ lease term i.e. 4 - 6 weeks after which it is available to the public. Baring these conditions I would not support leasing to the holiday park

Page, Mr Matthew

PRLC17/27 This is public land and should ALWAYS be available FREE OF CHARGE for the public to use, not just outside of the peak season. McDonald, Mr GaryPRLC17/28 It’s a public beach for use by everyone Campbell, Mr GrantPRLC17/29 Because it should be left in it’s “isolated” state Rachael, MsPRLC17/30 This is a reserve. I do not want people charged to park on this land which is ours to share. Woodward, Mrs GaylePRLC17/31 I think that the reserve is the reserve to be used by all people, to allow the leasing of it will deny public access during holiday periods, the camping ground is the

size it is and they can fill it an no more in my opinion.Baker, Mrs Lisa

PRLC17/32 They only want to lease about a third of the area this leaves plenty for community use. Whatuwhiwhi Top 10 (Shirkie, Mrs Sally)

PRLC17/33 It is reasonable for all parties concerned Shirkie, Mr StewartPRLC17/35 I think that it is good to bring tourists & and their $ spend into the area, and providing space at the camp ground allows more tourists to stay during peak season. McKibbin, Mrs NataliePRLC17/36 Increased tourism. The Holiday Park ensures the reserve is maintained. Abrahall, Mrs Berit

COPY



PAGE 3

ID Number

Reason Name

PRLC17/37 Because at least then the area is maintained, mowed and rubbish free. Cramond, MrsPRLC17/38 With the amount of commercial activity on that beautiful piece of coast already I don’t think we need anymore right now. Hudson, Mr WallisPRLC17/39 Leasing the reserve to the Whatuwhiwhi Holiday Park will stop freedom campers from using the site. Bags of rubbish are often left behind for local residents to

clean up. The site could be improved dramatically by leasing the land to the Holiday Park. The site will continue to deteriorate and be abused otherwise. It’s not a desirable part of Tokerau Beach so I support the proposal.

Corcoran, Mrs Barbara

PRLC17/40 Has been utilised for the last 20 years with the park,and maintained to a high standard.Has provided a great camping facility for many schools around the area,and would be ashamed to see it revert back to an unattractive area,which may attract undesirable activities.

Narbey, Mr Harris

PRLC17/41 There are limited public spaces on the peninsula and leases this space to someone who will make money from it does not sit well with me, The owners of the motor camp have had use of this for free for many years and are now only trying to formalise an agreement because they have been found out. I strongly support the council talking to the local marae about what happens with this space.

Wallace, Mrs Lesley

PRLC17/42 I think the Perehipe Reserve should be returned to being a Reserve for the use of the general public. The Top Ten Holiday Park has had the use of the reserve land now for a very minimal cost for many years. The Haititai Marangai Marae has objected to this previously but has not had a favourable outcome at all or satisfactory response. I believe the FNDC should return the use of the land to public and not lease to a private owner. Top Ten Holiday Park has already had the use of this land for private financial gain and I think it is the incorrect use of Public Reserve Land.

Snowden, Mrs Caroline

PRLC17/43 That piece of land is designated a “reserve” and as such should be reserved for members of the community for use. Section 17 (1) of the reserves act 1977 states: It is hereby declared that the appropriate provisions of this Act shall have effect, in relation to reserves classified as recreation reserves, for the purpose of providing areas for the recreation and sporting activities and the physical welfare and enjoyment of the public, and for the protection of the natural environment and beauty of the countryside, with emphasis on the retention of open spaces and on outdoor recreational activities, including recreational tracks in the countryside. IBy leasing this land you are in breach of this, just so the holiday park can make money.

Sanders, Mr Vaughan

PRLC17/44 I do not support because its a stupid idea and you need to focus on getting the penisula back to how it was. ReihanaPRLC17/45 The park are willing to return 2/3rds of the leased land back to the community, and lease the remainder. I dont see any problem with that. What will the returned

land be used for anyway!Black, Mrs Gael

PRLC17/46 To keep summer people in one place. The holiday park can maintain the grounds to save money for the council. The camp has facilities for campers otherwise they will free camp and leave waste everywhere.

Ange, Dr

PRLC17/47 Locals would like to utilise the reserve. I have been turnes away with my children from the playground there. Too unfriendly and not for the locals so they dont have my support.

Rhonda, Mrs

PRLC17/48 Its a reserve! For the general public. Harrison, MrsPRLC17/49 I believe they have enough property there for camping and it also leaves this space for the public/ Rate payers to enjoy. Darrin, Mrs DebbiePRLC17/50 A reserve is a piece of land for use of general public and not for commercial use. This is the only area on that beach front that public can use and if it was leased

to the Whatuwhiwhi Top 10 it would no longer be available for picnics or any such use. This land would have been a donation at subdivision time at no cost to the rate payers and was not as a gift to enable camp ground owners to make a profit from There is a small cost to the council in up keep but this is covered by our general rates and I would be very disappointed to lose access to that area. In the past, Christmas campers have used that area as an overflow from the campground which I have not agreed with. I do not want that as of right for the camp ground owners.

Darin, Mr Steve

PRLC17/51 I believe it is really good for all New Zealanders and overseas visitors to be able to enjoy the beautiful position of the camp Mortlock, Mrs JoannePRLC17/52 I believe they only want to retain part of the reserve and as such I think that the way they look after their land and holiday park, will be beneficial to the percentage

of land that they wish to retainMortlock, Mr Bill

PRLC17/53 I dont think any public land should be leased to business for their profit. I also do not believe this beautoful reserve should be leased to a business in the peak summer me nths when it is most used by the public

Corrigan, Mr Mike

PRLC17/54 I feel that leasing will relieve the ratepayers of the burden of paying for the maintainence of the grassed area, retain access to the reserve and playground for the general public and provide extra accommodation, especially over the holiday period. With Tokerau beach Motor Camp on the market, accommodation is going to be at a premium in the future. This support is contingent on the leased part of the reserve being clearly identified on the ground, possible with bollards, to ensure there is no overflow. The bollards adjacent to the toilet block could be removed, to allow easier public access to the playground and reserve. If option 3 is adopted, this will result in the reserve being used by freedom campers and as a parking lot. IOption 1

Page, Mr Brian

COPY



PAGE 4

ID Number

Reason Name

PRLC17/55 I feel that the Whatuwhiwhi Top 10 Holiday Park will not be used as a park for tourists, campers or recreational users and that the demands on local resources such as water, sewerage, roads and shellfish will be adversely affected. I fear that the park will be used to house migrant workers used to develop the Carrington estate.

Sleep, Mr

PRLC17/56 This has been part of the public reserve for a longtime now and it should still be available for public access for future generations. They already have enough land where they are!!

Grace, Mrs Korina

PRLC17/57 Because it belongs to everyone as reserve, not to top ten who will make a hell of a lot money out of it and community be locked out n not enjoy the reserve. DEAD AGAINST IT !!!!.....

Lawrence, Mr Boyce

PRLC17/58 It is a reserve, what possible reason could you have to lease it to Carrington. Reihana, Ms OliviaPRLC17/59 Keep it as a reserve for all to use perhaps turn it into a park with picnic benches Hokai, Mrs KeriPRLC17/60 there are better options for community use such as playgrounds bbq and picnic areas ,extra parking for beachgoersand visitorsin this very popular bayand in an

area that is beginning to show signs of steady growth.Once a lease is in place probaly with a right of renewal ,these options are gone for numerous years.Allison, Mr

PRLC17/61 It should be for everybody to enjoy Joe, MrsPRLC17/62 There is no good reason not to, the land is under utilised Miranda, MrPRLC17/63 Simply no. That takes more from our kids to play or parking for the locals.. There camping site is big enough.. Do the tangata whenua get anything from this

barring headaches and rubbish???Trista, Mrs

PRLC17/64 I do not support it and feel I don’t need to explain why. Tania, MrsPRLC17/65 I absolutely appose to the leasing part of perehipe reserve because it will only be for the financial gain of the top 10 holiday park and the council. Lawrence, Mrs DaphnePRLC17/66 I do not support this because it is unnecessarly for the financia gain of the top 10 business and most likely the council. Part of the land of the perehipe reserve

has a historic value to the tangata whenua of perehipeTipene, Mr

PRLC17/67 This holds years of memories and I would like the option to keep returning to this special place Dixon, Ms AnnaPRLC17/68 Sensible commercial decision. With no social/environmental impact. The same concept should be extended to cover freedom camping sites throughout the Far

NorthThompson, Mr Daniel

PRLC17/69 The property is big enough if the new owners are unsatisfied with this they should on sell it and move on. This precious place is a Tsonga (treasure) that should stay open and accessible to the community and wider community for now and generations to come. Big companies continue to develop and will continue to keep GETTING RICHER if thus carry on keep going within New Zealand. Small local communities should help support and strengthen local families and build upon their economic status into their own people. By allowing the camp owners access to thus PRIME WATER FRONT PROPERTY will impact on our grandchildren. Keep this beautiful slice of Paradise open!!!

Tom, Mr

PRLC17/70 Chinese taking over they can’t have everything Chris, MrPRLC17/71 if maori asked to lease the land to stay on would it be ok Judy, MsPRLC17/72 I SUPPORT the formal lease of a Council Reserve for camping at Top 10, Whatawhiwhi. 1 Private camping Grounds are become fewer in Coastal and Urban Areas.

2 The Camp is a “good neighbour” by supplying water and mowing lawns at NO COST to FNDC 3 ALL WAYS of reducing the negative effects of FREEDOM CAMPING are beneficial to ALL citizens of FNDC by reducing rubbish and un-hygienic HUMAN WASTE

Cornwall, Mr Steve

PRLC17/73 My understanding is that only 1/3 of the reserve is subject to the new lease and the whole area in question has been leased for the past 10 years or more. Because the Top 10 holiday park has been sold does not seem a valid reason for the lease to be terminated. Is it because the Holiday Park has been brought by Foreigners? Where were the people who are not supporting the proposed lease when the initial lease was granted?

Dunn, Mrs Diane

PRLC17/74 The Reserve is for the Public and should not be used for Commercial gain by a private profit seeking company. Scahill, Mr RoyPRLC17/75 because its a reserve and if our people the maori tangata whenua cant lease land that was owned by them and put into lease then why should anyone else and

especailly why should the asians of top 10.Golf, Ms Theresa

PRLC17/76 The Top 10 would not have the publics interest at heart, you would be privatising a public space. Definitly NO! Laird, MrPRLC17/77 As public reserve i do not think it should be leased out where the community have to pay to utilise space there, its been “leased” out for far too long and i think it

would be better used as a park/space for the community:)Whalen, Ms Georgina

COPY



PAGE 5

ID Number

Reason Name

PRLC17/79 I believe there are enough camping grounds in the area to accommodate those campers who miss out on a site at the Whatuwhiwhi camp ground. I think the reserve is better left for use of the general public, and community.

Kelly, Mrs

PRLC17/80 Perehipe is the only Reserve offering shade and shelter on Tokerau Beach. It is well-used by locals and visitors. Granting this lease would set a precedent for FNDC to be coerced into leasing other Public Reserve Land to individual businesses. No business or individual should be permitted to have sole use of any FNDC Reserve land.

Matthews, Mrs Margaret

PRLC17/81 no coment Hetaraka, Mr WiremuPRLC17/82 I live in Auckland. I Whakapapa to Whatuwhiwhi and I do not support the conciliatory leasing part of Perehipe Reserve. It’s a beautiful place to stay I’d like to keep it

that way..more building and more people equals to more pollutionEdwards, Ms Sonja

PRLC17/83 Born and raised in Whatuwhiwhi my home. Land we borrow from our future generation, Our Whenua. I have seen the impact Top 10 Holiday Park has on Whatuwhiwhi as a Iwi/collective. Our food and resources have been impacted by the result of overpopulated tourists flooding our community. WE PLEAD TO ***NO LEASE*** OF PEREHIPE RESERVE TO WHATUWHIWHI 10 top ***RESERVED FOR A REASON***

Sheral, Ms

PRLC17/84 A reserve that is linked to business will exclude those the reserve was reserved for. Thank you Neho, Ms ShirleyPRLC17/85 The land should be returned to the ownership and control of Te Whanau Moana Te Rorohuri and decisions on its use ought to be left with them, not the Council

or the ratepayers.Herbert-Graves, Ms Anahera

PRLC17/86 Ngati Kahu have consistently shown that there is a waa�hi tapu on that site that needs protection. The council need to consult with the local hapu. Cole, Ms DebPRLC17/87 Because it is public land for public use, not for private profit. MacLean, JessicaPRLC17/89 The land rightly belongs to whanau of Te Whanau Moana Te Rorohuri so it needs to be returned to them, and any decisions about its use ought to be left with

them to make - not FNDC or itse ratepayers.Reti, Mrs Siobhan

PRLC17/90 The land rightly belongs to whanau of Te Whanau Moana Te Rorohuri so it needs to be returned to them, and any decisions about its use ought to be left with them to make - not FNDC or itse ratepayers.

Reti, Mr Jason


Reti, Mrs Carol


Thrupp, Mrs Sara


Reti, Mr Henry

PRLC17/94 The land rightly belongs to whanau of Te Whanau Moana Te Rorohuri so it needs to be returned to them, and any decisions about its use ought to be left with them to make - not FNDC or its ratepayers.

Murray, Sera

PRLC17/95 At our marae hui held on Saturday 11th Feb 2017 this matter was again discussed. Subsequently we are advised that the Te Hiku community board has recommended to the FNDC that following public consultation that the FNDC enter into a lease agreement with the owners of Carrington Holiday Park. The recommendation seems something of a contradiction in that surely a legitimate public consultation process will be the determinant as to whether a lease for the reserve is the appropriate course of action. The position of Haititaimarangai Marae is clear. We do not support a lease to the Holiday Park and ask that the FNDC ensure full public access to the reserve at all times for recreational and community activities. We are very concerned tthat the Te Hiku Community Board continues to promote a lease agreement with no reference to the whanau/hapu of Haititaimarangai Marae, these being the tangata whenua. It is an affront to our Marae that the FNDC has failed to seek our view on this matter particularly as the reserve area has particular cultural significance and that Koiwi have previously been unearthed within 30 metres of this site among other things. We ask that council amend the recommendation from the Te Hiku Community Board to read simply “ That the FNDC seek public consultation on the future use of Perehipe Reserve”Any resolution which proposes a lease to any party before a proper consultation process will be viewed as a serious challenge to the mana whenua of Haititaimarangai Marae, our hapu and whanau. Refer to Submission ID 204

Haititaimarangai Marae Chair - Lawrence, Mr Hori Speaker - Windleborn, Mr Hazely

PRLC17/96 Perehipe Reserve should be available for whanau without having to pay the Holiday Park Stephen, MrPRLC17/97 It should.be a maintained area for all public to use. It should not be used to support commercial gain Hita, Mrs Karena

COPY



PAGE 6

ID Number

Reason Name

PRLC17/98 As it is a beautiful place for the general public to have a picnic at and I find there are too few places where I can take my family and friends with easy access to water view and a place to relax and have a picnic, I also do not think any campers should be allowed to camp there over night as we pay high rates to live close to and with view of the sea and I find it an insult that campers that contribute very little or nothing to our community have it all for free and we are left to clean up their mess or damage.

White, Mrs Joy

PRLC17/99 The summer time is the main time that we all want to enjoy the Perehipe area so we do not want it taken away from us then. Mary, MrsPRLC17/100 The council has legitimised the erection of a building on reserve land by continuing with the proposed lease venture, I’m sure if others were to build on their

private property the council would swoop in and and take the necessary legal action to remove said structures (on private land) and then demand the owners to buy a permit to either rebuild or legitimise said structures. The ‘gentleman’ who mows the lawns and gives water seems to have done so knowing the outcome of the leasing process as a ‘DONE’ deal with FNDC. Corruption at it’s lowest and most obvious.

Davidson, Ms

PRLC17/102 I do not support the proposed lease, there needs to be more land for the public to use down there Perry, Mr NickPRLC17/103 This is a public reserve and as such it is not for lease or sale .Our children,grandchildren and elderly surely have the right to enjoy this area with out it becoming

another money grab by the business men and the local council. ,the money for the upkeep of this land is paid for by the rate payer. As this area is fast becoming a popular beach destination it is important for there to be areas where people can go to enjoy family time.

Billington, Mrs Judy

PRLC17/104 I would like this site in the future to be developed further with picnic tables, like Tokerau Beach, possibly a playground and more parking. I am sure the Public, locals and tourists, and fishermen would benefit more than if the Reserve was leased to a Commercial enterprise. No one should be able to benefit from a Public Reserve! Wagener Holiday Camp is an example of FNDC property that is not managed correctly and at the end of the lease the same operators are given preference over others to aquire the lease! I do not want a similar situation to happen at Perehipe Bay. John Coxhead....resident Whatuwhiwhi

Coxhead, Mr John

PRLC17/105 NO to lease of Perehipe Beach for Top 10 Holiday Park. They have easy access to the beach as it is, please don’t clutter it up with tents and campers. This is one of the most beautiful beaches in the Far North, and I’m talking natural beauty. I pay my taxes, and have done so for many years, to keep it that way. Public Beach for ALL to enjoy, the whole lot of it.

Moore, Ms Clare

PRLC17/106 Because I believe this land should be accessible and FREE to all to use. I also believe there needs to be an urgent investigation into why and how this area was allowed to be ‘leased’ to previous campground owners at no cost, and obviously, no benefit to local ratepayers and visitors. The fact that us locals were kept int he dark about this and it went on for years is a disgrace and I believe somebody needs to be held accountable.

Hodgson, Ms Petrina

PRLC17/107 There are other camp grounds that can supply accommodation for overflow. The way the council and top 10 holiday park have gone about their current “lease” seems very underhanded and should come to an end.

Vinac, Mrs Stephanie

PRLC17/108 Because the majority of people that will have better utilisation of the reserve will be the local public. Doesn’t that make more logical sense?? Lawrence, Ms NelleighPRLC17/109 It’s Chinese owned, bugger all if any profit will see the local economy. There end game is to fly the <racial slur deleted> in and out so there will be no local

spending again. SRichard, Mr K

PRLC17/110 It will take the land out of our (northlanders ) controll ...something we as people have entrusted the council with it is ours to use as of right . Morris, MrPRLC17/111 This ground belongs o all the ratepayers of Karikari peninsula, and no one entity should have sole rights to occupy. You think? Carol, MrsPRLC17/112 Tourism brings good money into our economy. It looks like part of the plan includes small row for beach access, good idea. Johnston, Ms SharonPRLC17/113 Reserves are fir the public not the chinese Cann, Mrs DebbiePRLC17/115 This has been done for years and it has never been a problem.the more people stay there, will keep campers of the beach and the area around ramp road Anita, MsPRLC17/116 Since when did the council even want to tell the Public out here in whataz that, that’s land is public reserve? We could have made good use of that area seens half

the neighbourhood kids + Familys are always swimming down perehipe. It’s all about MONEY at the end of that day isn’t it. Grrrrrrrrrrrrr!!!!Victoria, Ms

PRLC17/117 I do not support the proposed lease of part of Perehipe Reserve Scully, Ms SimonePRLC17/118 Council need to start charging for the land use Nicholson, Mrs Mel

COPY



PAGE 7

ID Number

Reason Name

PRLC17/119 This is a public reserve and it is not clear that Council will meet it’s obligations under the Reserves Act to ensure continued “public recreation and enjoyment”. The Holiday Park is a commercial entity and it’s selling of accomodation prevents recreational and enjoyment of a valuable local reserve by the general public. The Council and Te Hiku Community Board create a risk that the Holiday Park, now owned by the owners of Carrington Resort, could be used for accomodation for workers of the resort thus further depriving the public enjoyment of the reserve and potentially creating unanticipated issues such as pressure on sewerage systems and the knock on effect on the environment. There is a concern that the Far North District Council and the Te Hiku Community Board are not meeting their obligations under the Health & Safety Act by accepting the Holiday Park operators construction of a play ground and structures on the reserve, it appears without formal permission, that may not meet safe standards. The construction of powered sites on the reserve which do not seem to have been assessed or inspected by council also presents a further liability to both council and the community board. Given the history of unauthorised use of the reserve and the vagueness of the report provided to the Te Hiku Community Board about prior activity, it would be prudent for the council to require the reserve be reinstated as a reserve and all commercial activities stopped and any structures removed unless an independent report finds them safe for public use.

Pirrie, Mr Phelan

PRLC17/120 Given the congestion and busyness over peak periods we feel this land should be kept for public use. Wylie, MrPRLC17/121 Because of the change of ownership the property should go back to reserve for all NZ to enjoy. Parking of boat trailers and vehicles using the beach area has

become an issue at times of the year with the increase in property development over the years.I also do not believe in overseas ownership of our precious NZ land

Callaghan, Mrs Sharon

PRLC17/122 I believe this reserve should be available for all to use. McCloy, AvrilPRLC17/123 Whatuwhiwhi is already overcrowded during holiday periods and we dont need anymore idiots starting fires and leaving rubbish around our beautiful home and

beachesHetaraka, Mr

PRLC17/124 I don’t support the Councils proposition to Lease part of Perehipe Reserve if the Council hasnt considered My Family the People of the Land and Community and Residents First. And then Consider: What is the councils purpose for Leasing? Who are the Council? Who’s on the Lease? How long is the Lease for? What are the Terms and Conditions of the Lease Agreement?

Renee, Ms

PRLC17/126 I do not support them in leasing this whenua to the top ten holiday park. They have enough space at the current ground. Marriott, Mr RangiPRLC17/128 What guarantee would there be that the owners dont end up putting their own chinese workers there instead of local campers? This is a public reserve, meant for

public use, not another money making venture for wealthy chinese. Therefore, my answer is a very firm NO!Pio, Mrs Rererangi

PRLC17/129 Because it was made a reserve to stop businesses from over developing. The holiday park needs to be grateful for what they already have. Phillip, MrPRLC17/130 It has worked fine without a lease up until now YvonnePRLC17/131 Because it is a waahi tapu and is located on stolen land that must be returned to Ngati Kahu. Walker, Ms StephaniePRLC17/132 Because the land is not self sufficient enough to maintain itself, the surrounding areas may not be kept in the ristine & crisp state that it is in. Hetaraka, Ms Toni-

LeeannPRLC17/133 Public reserve should be a public reserve. Murray, Mr BartPRLC17/134 You are giving a commercial enterprise free use of a facility that ratepayers are paying for and then they are being excluded from using the reserve what more do

u need to know??Conrad, Mrs Tania

PRLC17/135 My Tupuna come from this area, I live in the south island, an I visit northland often but not enough.. These lands were stolen from my ancestors an we the people of the land deserve to have it back..

Hetaraka, Ms Sharlene

COPY



PAGE 8

ID Number

Reason Name

PRLC17/136 Because it is a public reserve, and the public want to use it. Because allowing campervans and other paying campers there will further detract From the general publics ability to use our reserve as well as the beach, as both Will be packed with holiday makers (mostly from out of our ratepaying district) over the Summer. Because the public have already been deceived about there being a reserve There previously. We want an explanation how this has occured, and we want to know who gave Previous holiday camp owners permission to use our reserve while preventing Ratepayers and other members of the public using our recreation reserve. Because the locals are fed up with the council supporting the influx of Foreigners on to the peninsula to the detriment of the locals. Because there is no gaurantee the leasees will not change the purpose of The land use during the lease to something even more annoying. Because the local community need a recreation reserve to allow provision Of activities which will regain some community cohesion, following the closure of Our local kura/school. Because the locals want to use the reserve for recreation for local adults And children to enhance water safety skills, healthy sporting activities, and A sense of community promoting a general well being for all. Because we the ratepayers and other local members of the public think we Should be given priority as the land is deemed for our use as a public recreation reserve. Because not giving us back our public reserve will further detract from the reduced Confidence the public have that the fndc are acting in their best interests. Because its ours and we want to use it. Everyone is horrified it has been kept from us so long. GIVE IT BACK NOW!!!

Foley, Mary

PRLC17/137 Where does it end??? Reserve is public park domain and a public space for public to get enjoyment. It is not for some <expletive deleted> to make money to line their own fancy profiteering pockets. What they’ve been doing for the past 15-20 yrs - It’s a blatant case of ripping the public people off, the people of Whatuwhiwhi and those within our local community! MY ANSWER IS ...NO WAY! KEEP IT A PUBLIC SPACE!

Perkinson, Ms Jeanine

PRLC17/138 Kia ora. This is a Public place were we would like to enjoy with my family and friends, if we privatize everything, what will happen with New Zealand? where everything is nature, everything is enjoy the beautiful places that mother earth gave us, and we can not sell it to the person who want to pay the most... I think the Council take the right decision. Thank you for your time. Kind Regards.

Nacho, Mr

PRLC17/139 Because it is a public reserve, and the public want to use it. Because allowing campervans and other paying campers there will further detract From the general publics ability to use our reserve as well as the beach, as both Will be packed with holiday makers (mostly from out of our ratepaying district) over the Summer. Because the public have already been deceived about there being a reserve There previously. We want an explanation how this has occured, and we want to know who gave Previous holiday camp owners permission to use our reserve while preventing Ratepayers and other members of the public using our recreation reserve. Because the locals are fed up with the council supporting the influx of Foreigners on to the peninsula to the detriment of the locals. Because there is no gaurantee the leasees will not change the purpose of The land use during the lease to something even more annoying. Because the local community need a recreation reserve to allow provision Of activities which will regain some community cohesion, following the closure of Our local kura/school. Because the locals want to use the reserve for recreation for local adults And children to enhance water safety skills, healthy sporting activities, and A sense of community promoting a general well being for all. Because we the ratepayers and other local members of the public think we Should be given priority as the land is deemed for our use as a public recreation reserve. Because not giving us back our public reserve will further detract from the reduced Confidence the public have that the fndc are acting in their best interests. Because its ours and we want to use it. Everyone is horrified it has been kept from us so long.

Henderson, Ms Jodi

PRLC17/140 It is a reserve and I do not support the proposed lease of part of the Perehipe Reserve. There are a number of houses in the vicinity and no doubt people could access that reserve for use as a playground and picnic area for example. The clients of the Holiday Park could also access the area as members of the general public. The FNDC needs to be consistent about camping on reserves in the “Real” Far North area and avoid creating confusing situations. The owners of the Holiday Park also own a substantial acreage adjacent to the Holiday Park and seem to have the means to further develop their holdings. In that light I don’t think they have any need for using the public reserve, considering the Holiday Park is a commercial operation and reserves are basically public assets.

Page, Mrs Ere

PRLC17/141 1 - Have Council asked the iwi why they are opposed to this reservation being divided? 2 - Reservations were owned by the iwi/hapu of the area. Iwi would be upset if they are not heard!

Haretuku, Ms Ellen

PRLC17/142 I believe the community could get better use from this reserve once it was opened up to public use. Obviously in the past it has appeared to be a part of the Camp and not Public. I feel the new Owners could take advantage if they have a lease on this part of the reserve and take over the rest of the Public reserve in Car parking etc. Another possible use for council would be to open it up to freedom campers. I also believe the on going maintenance costs are exaggerated., I can not believe it would cost that much per annum to cut the Grass and council could easily install there own Rainwater supply system for the water supply. I do not support the lease and propose Council look at improving this area for more public use.

Jorey, Mr Mark

PRLC17/143 Community needs to get ALL funds from lease if it is agreed. Tamariki (kids) funding solely for them. Lawrence, Mrs MichellePRLC17/144 Because it is a public reserve and should be kept for that purpose. Surely there are other ways the council can find to generate revenue. Keep the reserve a

reserve for the people!Rehu, Mrs Rayleen

COPY



PAGE 9

ID Number

Reason Name

PRLC17/145 This reservation was in the past been denied access by the public because it was being used for camping. I tabled the original document council put out in 1993. At our Ratepayers association meeting. That document stated that the reservation was to be used for boat trailer parking only. Since then a playground has been put in . This is great. Wish local children were not turned away from using it. As per document from council. We are in desperate need of boat trailer parking especially in holiday seasons. Long weekend’s etc. The beach and roadside are so packed with vehicle’s and trailers that it’s hard to get to the beach. And very little area for people with children to get a place to sit and play on the beach. As per document I found and tabled at the meeting. We need to stop having no access to our public reserve and have full use of this area for boat trailer parking as set out in that document. Previous Chairman of the Residents and Ratepayers association. Still on the committee.

Mitchell, Mr Glen

PRLC17/146 This is the third time I have submitted on this subject. The first time was with Sir Graham Latimer and the Ngati Kahu Trust Board, the second time was as the Environmental Manager of Te Runanga-a-Iwi O Ngati Kahu and now we have the same problem as before. Perehipe Reserve is a Maori Reserve and the Far North Regional Council has a legal obligation to retain ownership and title to this land so that it can be returned to its legal owners: The Local Maori Iwi. Perehipe Reserve and the reserve opposite (part of the beach front) is, was, or has been part of an old urupa or burial ground, or land used for burial rites; therefore the said land is tapu and should not be used for any other purposes. Under these circumstances I and all of my family, Caroline, Tanya, Sonja, Moana and Steven Holloway, object to this proposal.

Holloway, Mr Victor (and Family)

PRLC17/147 Because it is not there land to lease JaynePRLC17/148 I support the proposal provided the lease has a clause terminating the lease should the holiday park cease to operate as a holiday park. I see this as a means

Council can support one of the relatively few holiday parks remaining.Fox, Mr Michael

PRLC17/149 This land could well be Maori land. Further investigation is warranted. It is a PUBLIC RESERVE, not for private use and profit! Thomson, Ms JosiePRLC17/150 This land belongs to the community. It must not be held for private use and profit. Oturu School

(Principal Mr Fraser Smith)

PRLC17/151 I oppose the Perehipe Reserve being leased. This reserve should be for the community to enjoy. We value our reserves, we should be creating more, not leasing them.

Phillips, Mrs Carolyn

PRLC17/152 This is not land owned by the council to lease out it is reserve Urlich, Mr RandolphPRLC17/153 Because it is public reserve and should remain 100% so Unkovich, Mr ColinPRLC17/154 Because it is public reserve and should remain 100% so Kidd, Ms Sarah-JanePRLC17/155 I don’t believe this should have leased to Whatuwhiwhi Top 10 Holiday Park without fair consultation to ALL of the Whatuwhiwhi/Karikari Peninsula people in the

first instance. I’ve lived in Whatuwhiwhi for 32 years prior to my current residence.Lawrence, Mr Paki

PRLC17/156 I believe that formalising this arrangement, which frankly should never have occured is a very bad idea and would set a precedent which might allow other commercial interests to @poach@ our precious reserves with impunity. The reserves are an amenity to be enjoyed by everyone and leasing them, even in part, conflicts with this. It doesn’t matter what form the lease takes, whether it be money or kind (maintaining toilets , supplying water whatever). It is wrong in principle. Some things are more important than the currently fashionable bottom line of financial gain and I believe free public access to the beauty of our area via reserves is one of them. There are quite enough commercial campsites in the area as it is. I say this as a keen camper/caravanner.

Stather-Dunn, Dr Loise

PRLC17/157 I understand the land was donated to be used as a boat trailer park for local fisherpeople. That being the case and at this point in time, there is no need for the land to be developed into a boaties park, as the beach parking seems to be sufficient. So it makes sense to continue to lease the land out to the camp as is, until such time in the future where as it could be retrieved and used for the original reason if need be.

Mann, Mrs Christine

PRLC17/158 I think option 1 will be the best outcome for both Council and the locals. I do not think that either Council or local people should spend any money on providing additional boat trailer parking on the reserve (as has been suggested) as being a local fisherman myself, I just don’t believe the visitors will walk that far after parking their car/trailer and will sneak in somewhere closer. I have never seen or heard of locals using the reserve, but I guess that is because they have considered it part of the camping ground.

Wilkinson, Mr Des

PRLC17/159 This is area is needed as a public reserve and retained as it is for the benefit of all. The Top 10 holiday park already has land for their business and this land needs to be available for all not just those who use the holiday park. We have enjoyed walking and using this green space and would hate to see it lost to a private enterprise. Thanks for your consideration. This is an important decision you are making. Do not make it lightly.

Anderson, Mrs Lisa

COPY



PAGE 10

ID Number

Reason Name

PRLC17/161 In the 1800s the land where the Perehipe Reserve is was part of the larger Kauhoehoe block illegally taken from Ngati Kahu. Ngati Kahu have repeatedly asserted ownership of te Perehipe Reserve since the 1800s and they have repeatedly expressed their concern for the wahi tapu adjacent to the Perehipe Reserve. Those assertions and concerns have been repeatedly ignored by authorities and the illegal transfer of the land from Ngati Kahu has never been addressed and remedied. Building on the reserve has already been allowed to occur despite Ngati Kahu Kaumatua Timothy Flavell expressing his concerns. that building is a continuation of the alienation of Ngati Kahu land. Any more building and development on the reserve will further alienate it from Ngati Kahu and the community. This has been the history of Maori land loss and now community land loss for decades. FNDC should not allow it to continue. Recently in Parliament I opposed the acquisition of Public Reserve at Pt England by developers. In that instance the developers were Tamaki tribe, Ngati Paoa. In both the Pt England case and the Perehipe case I believe that Recreational/ Public Reserve land should be kept as reserve for the public and not opened for development. It would be hypocritical of me to oppose Pt England land being taken for development and to condone through my silence the loss of the Perehipe Reserve to development. I believe the just and moral option for Perehipe reserve are for FNDC to negotiate with Ngati Kahu the return of the land to the tribe and to maintain its access to the public while also maintaining the integrity of the adjacent wahi tapu.

Davis, Mr Kelvin (MP)

PRLC17/162 We support the proposal to lease subject to the following conditions: 1. The lease of the strip alongside lot 29 be excluded from the lease area. 2. No further structures are to be placed on the lease area without the express permission of the Council. 3. There is no implied obligation to extend the lease beyond any period specified in the lease. 4. The lessee is responsible for the maintenance (mowing, rubbish, weed control) of both the leased area and the balance of the reserve Council area not leased. 5. The lessee is responsible for the supply of water to the toilets on the Council reserve. 6. The lessee is responsible for cleaning and minor maintenance of the toilets on the Council reserve. Reasons for our support of the proposed lease and the appropriate conditions are as follows - - There are holiday periods when camping space is tight and the leased area provides additional space for this period in particular. - The strip alongside lot 29 in the lease area should be excluded as it impinges unreasonably on this property, with the potential to have either camping or vehicular access on this strip. Walking access to the beach is available across the existing reserve. - The lessee has equipment and staff on site to manage / maintain the Council reserve and facilities far more cost effectively than the Council does and this should be included as a condition of the lease. This is also a tangible and effective way of demonstrating to the community that there is a direct benefit of the lease. - Water supply to the toilets is a continuation of the informal arrangement for the use of the reserve area. If these or similar conditions are not able to be included then we do not support the lease proposal

Young, Mr R

PRLC17/163 I feel that with the growing number of visitors to the local area at Holiday times, there needs to be as many “public areas” available as possible not less. Saggers, Mr TPRLC17/164 It is public land and should be used for public use, not private / corporate greed. The location is subject is a prime spot for kiwis to enjoy year round, the beach

and parking spaces are limited and therefore this access should be opened for all public to enjoy.Motu, Mrs Makareta

PRLC17/165 The Perehipe Reserve would be better utilised as a place for multi-purpose use. I support it to be used as a reserve for families to picnic or park their cars. Over the summer period there are far too many vehicles on the beach. A lot of them are parked on the beach because there is no designated parking areas for trailers for boats. They end up parking on the roadside verge, leaving no room for day trippers. Day trippers then go and park on the beach as well. Vehicles on beaches destroy eco-systems. Lots of people parking on beaches are able to walk, carry their daily needs. Often it’s just ‘habit’, not smart message to moko or mokopuna. As a ratepayer and neighbour, my voice is the same as others. I do not give preferential treatment to Maori. Maori have not show me ‘smart use’ of land. They have land for recreational use at waka ama.

Lawrence, Ms Deborah

PRLC17/166 Perehipe Reserve is a recreational reserve for the public of New Zealand, ratepayers and boat users. During the summer, the influx of people and boat users on the useable part of the Reserve as it is now cannot cope, therefore the extra piece of reserve from the toilets to the Top 10 boundary should remain in the ownership of the public and be clearly fenced and clearly shown open to public usage, remaining in the hands of public ownership.

Billington, Mr Robin

PRLC17/167 I object to the use of this recreational reserve by a commercial operator (Top Ten Perehipe). I find the information pack misleading, inaccurate and not transparent. (The maps alone a joke, and the % of land wanted). The holiday park have illegally built on a reserve and the FNDC have failed to address this issue within the code. The informal arrangement see as illegal and now the Council is covering up and lost its memory. The overflow onto the reserve of the reserve at peak times is an abuse and a denial that the public has a right to enjoy recreation of this reserve (and who made the profit). IN the 18 years I’ve lived here there has never been signage from the road that this is a recreation reserve. The water supplied to the public toilet - the majority of people using it are from the Top Ten during peak times. The mowing - The camp mowed for their own use. The mowing cost inflated by 200% (FNDC beancounters). The youth that have little need this reserve and future to grow. WE WANT IT ALL BACK!!

Walsh, Mr Nicholas

PRLC17/168 Reserve should not be used for commercial reasons. Smith, Ms DonnaPRLC17/169 Should be maintained for the use of all. Yelash, Mr Peter

COPY



PAGE 11

ID Number

Reason Name

PRLC17/170 I oppose the reserve being leased and want to see it go back to the community. Oneroa, Ms Mori AnnePRLC17/171 No Top Ten camping development and lease. Taylor, Mr StevePRLC17/172 No to a camp, yes to a public reserve. Henwood, Mr AndrewPRLC17/173 No to the lease of our reserve. Taylor, Mrs RobynPRLC17/174 Make the reserve available for the public and not to be used as part of the camping ground. Henwood, Mrs JodenePRLC17/175 Don’t want to see the land leased. Evans, Mr JohnPRLC17/176 Property to be a park for the public only, not developed by a camping ground. Evans, Mrs DiannePRLC17/177 This should be left as a public reserve for all to enjoy. de Waal, Mrs SherylPRLC17/178 Public reserve should be for locals! NOT free for foreign investors!! Masters, Ms AndrewPRLC17/179 This is public land and needs to be preserved for the use of the public! Bradley, Dr JohnPRLC17/180 Public land should be used by all public, not private vendors. Lunjevich, Mrs WendyPRLC17/181 Financial Benefits to the council and public Windelborn, Mr HazelyPRLC17/182 The proposal seems to indicate a new access road will be created to the Campsite. If so, we are 100% against it. Why do they need this? A new road would direct

more people to access the beach from the campsite directly onto the most erosion prone part of the beach. Currently, people access the beach either from the current campsite road or by walking across the reserve by the public toilets (as they need to walk around the drainage trench on the reserve). Even now, some people do try to climb down the unstable bank rather than walk to either end of the beach where there are steps to access the water. The road is already in danger of falling into the sea & more people accessing the beach here will only hasten this process. In addition, vehicles turning into this point, especially long vehicles with trailers, will pull over onto the verge to make the sharp turn, putting more pressure on the bank. 30 years ago, the road was 10-12metres from the edge of the beach face, now there is less than 1metre. Unless a substantial strengthening of the beach face is carried out in this area of the road, it is likely there will be considerable cost in the future. If the strip of land from the campsite to the beach is to be used for tents and campervans, then it is largely unsuitable as it is not level and has a drainage trench along 2/3rds of its length. There are also several substantial trees that would need to be removed to allow camping there. Surely the flat area inside the confines of the L shaped drainage trench would be more suitable? Finally, should this lease go ahead then a boundary fence should be built between the reserve & the private properties adjacent to it, namely; Lot 1,2,3 DP44395 at some cost to the council.

Gavin, Mr

PRLC17/183 I am a regular visitor for several decades now bringing my family to enjoy the area and Perehipe reserve. We have observed the campers slowly encroaching further into the reserve for the last few years. This recent holiday period campers were parking and setting up tents right on the front fence by the beach. I am sure this is pushing the boundaries of any agreement. After reviewing the proposal I am concerned about a number of issues. I do not see the need for the strip of land requested alongside neighbouring properties. I can only assume this is either for beach access OR a second entrance for the campground. If for beach access then this seems redundant as they already have access across the park. If as an entrance this also seems redundant as there is already a perfectly good entrance/exit in a position that is safe for traffic. The position of this strip of land exits at a place on the road which is less safe for pedestrians and vehicles. This would also create extra noise and disruption for neighbouring properties. I am also concerned about existing trees and shrubbery being removed from this strip of land removing privacy and weather protection for neighbouring properties. I am not objecting to the concept of a formal arrangement with the camping ground for some of the land around the playground etc. However the strip to the road alongside the neighbouring property seems unnecessary and setting a future precedent and additional friction in the community against the campground. I recommend changing the proposal to the rear block only without the side section and then enforcing this area for camping so the community can use the rest of the reserve without tents and vehicles scattered across it.

Prior, Mr Phil

PRLC17/184 I have lived in whatuwhiwhi for 20 years. As children we would sometimes play on that reserve (without knowing it was a reserve) and being told it was only for paying campers. This “gentleman’s agreement” that previous owners had with.council robbed our community of years of opportunity on that land. It could be used for various activities events and even storage for water sports for the youth out here. The fact that the previous owners stuck a fence around it makes it deceiving as to how big that reserve really is. Please, leave the reserve alone, and let the community have it back. It has already been taken away from us for years... This will also not help the tensions between locals and the shanghai cred investors, they already have so much of this peninsula, our youth and our future generations need to see that money can’t always win.. that their voices matter, and that the council actually care about the community. Yes, letting the reserve remain a reserve means council will have to maintain it, and this agreement would mean the council even make money... but for the sake of our young people - give the land back. The fact it was even leased in the first place is a gross injustice with people who even grew up here not knowing it’s a reserve! Right your wrongs fdnc and do the right thing. Give perehipe reserve back to the people!!! It’s the people that matter. Not money.

McDonald, Mrs Ashleigh

COPY



PAGE 12

ID Number

Reason Name

PRLC17/185 Having been a landowner since the early 1970s, I have watched the reserve being looked after by the previous owners and have no objection to the new owners keeping it as well, and using it mainly at Christmas, as others have done for years.

O’Donoghue, Mrs A

PRLC17/186 Our submission is on the grounds that our boundaries are closes to the reserve and therefore we are most affected. We strongly object to the leasing of the strip of Reserve bordering on the side of Lot 1, DP44395, 29 Whatuwhiwhi Road. 1 - This strip contains sewerage, manhole cover, open drainage channel and covered 15” culvert pipe to creek. As well as shelter trees, including pohutukawa trees, and there not much use as camp sites. 2 - As owners of number 29, it would seriously affect the value of the property to have a right of way too close. 3 - It would encourage campers to cross the road and jump down the bank, which is already having serious erosion problems. 4 - We have no objection to the leasing of the other part of the reserve, but NOT the part on our side boundary, however, we think the Perehipe Reserve should remain as such for the general public to enjoy. (An aerial map has been provided showing the location of the culvert pipes.)

Reeve, Mr Brian

PRLC17/187 Because this should be for the community and for years some people have been making off this land. It stinks. Albert, Ms MyraPRLC17/188 This land should be retained for public use. Griffioen, Dr AnnePRLC17/189 We need to keep it locally owned, NOT for foreign investors!! Keep it for locals as a public reserve. Wild, Mr RyanPRLC17/190 It should be kept for locals as a public reserve, NOT to be given free for foreign investors!! Pitchford, Ms NadiaPRLC17/191 This is public land and should be left for all public to use. Rogers, Mrs SaraPRLC17/192 The Urlich Descendants of R.J and S.M.Urlich would like to submit an agreement between L Nicholson Transport Ltd and RJ Urlich and SM Urlich an agreement of

approx 2 acres be put in their name as a result of supplying a General Goods License to L Nicholson Transport. A copy of the agreement dated 16th November 1954 will be provided to the council at our verbal submission.

RJ & SM Urlich Descendents (Urlich, Mr Randolph)

PRLC17/193 The reserve is a recreational reserve to be used by the public! From the toilet to the Top Ten boundary should remain in ownership for the public to be used by families, youth, kaumatua etc.

Van Rens, Dr Joost

PRLC17/194 Should stay as public. Masters, Mrs MyraPRLC17/195 . Warena, Ms RosinaPRLC17/196 I am the owner of 31 Whatuwhiwhi Road. Our property adjoins the reserve and in particular, that part of the reserve that Council are considering leasing to the

Top 10 Holiday Park. For over a decade, owners of the holiday park have shown scant regard for neighbours, or the community at large. Access to the reserve has been restricted and they have illegal buildings and power connections, which there has never been consent given for. As our neighbour, our property (particularly our fruit trees and grapes) have annual been raped and pillaged by campers over the Christmas/New Year period. The fact that the current owners turned 13 accommodation units into offices while there is surplus land within the holiday park makes the proposal to lease the reserve for overflow campers seem ludicrous. Has all of their own land been developed? In addition, Carrington have hundreds of acres of other land they could use for camping.

McMahon, Mrs Larraine

PRLC17/197 The Perehipe Reserve should be for the community and its visitors to enjoy. I have always felt it was wrong for the Whatuwhiwhi Top 10 Holiday Park to use part of this community land. The number both of residents and visitors continues to increase, the Perehipe Reserve must be for the community to enjoy as a meeting place, picnic area etc, not used as part of a commercial enterprise to add profit. Bear in mind that the increase in numbers for the Holiday Park coincides with the increase of non-commercial visitors and residents who are outdoors enjoying our beautiful part of New Zealand.

Anderson, Mrs Janet

PRLC17/198 I only just became aware of the dirty dealings with FNDC - where is all the money? My kids have been kicked off the reserve playgrounds many times over the years by both the old and new owners. The whole community should be able to enjoy the reserve - particularly over Christmas/New Year, when it would get the most use. Front up Council officers and elected members resign - show some integrity - WE deserve better.

Rahanuhi, Mrs Rhonda

COPY



PAGE 13

ID Number

Reason Name

PRLC17/199 Doubtless Bay is a treasured place of rest and renewal for many and it has been so for myself and my extended family for three generations. Seasonal growth in the area over the last several years has seen, undoubtably, many changes to the peninsula, some less desirable than others. The essential allure of Doubtless Bay and it’s beaches and surrounds has thus remained; a casual feel of ease, a slowness of pace and a sense of safety and security. A celebration of these things and the activities played out in their pursuit is what has kept our family returning to our little home in the bay through varying seasons each year. The informality and ease of lifestyle on the peninsula is undoubtably a shared passion amongst many who reside and visit. But for this sense of informality to ‘evolve’ into the practises of local council and community bodies, involving the lease of public reserves, is an absolutely unacceptable abuse of power and of trust, regardless of the suggested benefit to local rate payers. For this looseness of practise to come to light recently, at a time when the requesting leasee is now owned by a group with openly large scale commercial interests in the greater peninsula area, is furthermore troubling. Our public places, reserves and beaches, are places of community, of communal well being and recreation, and it is imperative that they remain known as such and are able to be used. They are not for sale. Councils are trusted with protecting, maintaining and enhancing these public areas, not selling them off in lieu of spending our rates. To say that the public is ‘saving rates money’ in this regard is just lazy backwards thinking. The area should be returned to the public as an accessible reserve and it’s upkeep be managed properly by the council, making use of the rates already paid to the council by the public, for such purposes. I firmly believe that this should be a straightforward decision and a swiftly made one at that. There should be no such option of ‘leasing’ this reserve on the table and it never should have occurred in the first place. Public reserves should not be for sale. The fact that many residents and visitors to the bay have never known this area to be an accessible reserve, that it has been so casually ‘leased’ is an abuse of power and local trust. For the council to argue that the agreement has saved ratepayer money is lazy and backwards thinking. We pay rates for a reason, part of this being the maintenance and safekeeping of our reserves. There should be no option of a formal lease agreement here, regardless of who the leasee request comes from. The land should be returned to the public as a reserve and the council should get on with maintaining it the professional and open manner that they are expected too.

Rodewyk, Ms Anna

PRLC17/200 Having read the story about the old Lease agreement to the above mentioned PEREHIPI RESERVE a parcel of land with great access to our Beautiful Tokerau beach, and by its Survey pegs allows TOP 10 Motor Camp this close border,allowing it too be with out the full sign boarded PARK name looks as if it were actually the Tokerau Beach TOP 10 MOTOR CAMP site as far back as 1958. My Dad an Mum Mr Hurae [ Jack ] Larkins,Ngawaiata [ Song ] and all of there Whanau,have still got Whanau members present at Whatawhiwhi, to name a few, my Aunty Roma,her whanau, Aunty Sophia Poharema an her whanau my 2 sisters Norma Stevens, Merita Tobin,brother Trevor Wi Kaitaia, inlaws Robert Stevens,Bob and Julie, then l have the Matiu whanau,the Reihana Whanau, the Urlich Whanau, not forgetting Margaret Mutu an whanau, Young Thompson Lawrence, this is a small collection of Whanau, that knew the place back then as TEXAS. These mentioned names of Whanau members will also know this Parcel of Land that is up for lease, and l would like to present my views on how this issue of this Lease Land could be leased out, and before l go down that road l would like to add this comment, that question being that under its current an legal ownership, can the management of this said Block be Managed by our people under Maori trustee’s, can you explain for me wether or not this can be done legally, and the likely response needed by Trustee’s to activate, wether there is a legal right to purchase. My views on the type of Land Lease that could be used too benefit both Parties, that maybe the Lease period should be a 3X3 year,and that the Rental payment per year, be based on the cost too F.N.D.C. that would cover the Maintainence Equipment [ Mower ] / Transport costs / Labour cost and that at a guess we say that to drive to the job site off load your work gear, do the job including ground edging,would set you back $230 +gst per trip and because your against the shores of a great Beach and making sure that all of our Public Holidays and School Holidays are catered for this Perehipi Reserve would need to be serviced no less than 50 times per year, so total cost approximately would be = $11.500.00 +gst per year. The need to ensure that the so called Toilet Block and water are cared for by either Party be it the owner F.N.D.C. or the Tenant whom could also be given this the Maintainence package. The payment on this Lease Package would depend on wether they the Tenant took on the Maintainence package, if they did take the maintainence pack, the Lease rental would become $6500:00 + gst per year, payable by the Tenant in full at the signing up date, and should they not want too take on the Maintainence package then we would ask for an in full payment for the sum of $11:500.00 + gst\ again on signup date. Just then too conclude can l please say this whom ever gets the right to lease this the PEREHIPI RESERVE BLOCK that l wish you well and l sincerely hope that all an everyone venturing out that way get to enjoy the area thats not covered by this Lease.

Larkins, Ms Moa Harris

PRLC17/201 I strongly object to any lease of Perehipe Reserve being entered into to a private individual or business. This land is a reserve for the public to use and that it’s purpose. The councils “reason for the recommendation”�is “The annual rental from the lease would generate additional income and Council would not have the cost of maintaining the reserve. This would also formalise a historic arrangement on a reduced area to be leased “. Considering the major historic bumble now acknowledged in the non formalised loose lease arrangement with previous Top Ten owners, council should be embarrassed by their historic incompetence and deceitful treatment of the local community.

Urlich, Mrs Glenys

PRLC17/202 Leave it as a reserve, how it was meant to be, for future generations to enjoy, not for someone to make money out of it. Dean, Mrs Noeline

COPY



PAGE 14

ID Number

Reason Name

PRLC17/203 Reasons against leasing: - shared a bach for over 20 years next to the Perehipe reserve, saw many changes encroaching on the reserve by past owners of the holiday camp. - A reserve is a space for the public to use and enjoy. Green spaces are becoming scarce. - Ratepayers money has been spent on a new toilet facility on the reserve. Will the camp people use this facility, as it is close by. - The holiday park is big enough. Too many people puts pressure on the local environment. The road, parking, beach, rubbish, stormwater, sewerage, water supply and erosion.

Evered, Ms Irene

PRLC17/204 Reasons we would like to tell at public hearing - Refer to Submission ID 95 Haititaimarangai Marae Chair - Lawrence, Mr Hori Speaker - Windleborn, Mr Hazely

PRLC17/206 I am not if favour of the council leasing the Perehepi reserve to anyone. It is a public reserve and should be retained for public usage. Carrington jade has approximately 2700 acres adjoining the Top Ten camping ground. I can’t see the need for any small area of public land to be available for their use. I am in favour of option 3.

Urlich, Mr Simon

PRLC17/207 We the residents living in this area love the natural beauty, clean air, clear night sky for stars etc. Pleasant beaches, walking tracks, reserves etc. Peace and quiet. We expect the amenities to be available to ALL residents and visitors, not visitors or businesses or rich people alone.

Armstrong, Mrs Hazel

PRLC17/208 Because this should be kept for the public use as a ratepayer here in the north and a boatie, there is no future plans for extra parking facilities as this period around Christmas and long weekends parking now is at maximum, let alone when more section sell and more boats will use this area being Perehipi launching off beach as there are no ramps in the area. Beach launching is too dangerous a lot of the time. This large area could also be used for a lot of other uses as it is now made aware that it is a reserve and ratepayers own it why should the camp have sole use of this land and make a lot of money out of reserve land. Also the corner before the toilets is not very safe and widening may be necessary in the future. Also illegal, unpermitted building should be removed. These were built with Council knowledge.

Thompson, Mr Kevin

PRLC17/209 1 This reserve is needed for future public use as a carpark/boat trailer park, which requires the total area. 2 This reserve should not be used for commercial gain. 3 The current road frontage/beach area is a hazard at holiday times due to the narrow road, boat trailers parked on grass on beach side etc. It is obvious there is a need to develop the reserve for parking and other maritime activities for the community. 4 The current illegal structures on the reserve should be removed and land reinstated. 5 This community was not even aware that this reserve existed, while a commercial entity was gaining from exploiting public land. 6 This application should be denied in its entirety, the buildings removed and land reinstated, then developed for community use. The Community Board should not hear this application due to conflict of interest. This must be heard by delegated authority of Council or Commissioner.

Greenfield, Ms Pam

PRLC17/210 No to the leasing of the reserve. Hunt, Mr ShanePRLC17/211 Reserves should be for public use. Atchison, Mr TrevorPRLC17/212 I would rather the land could be used by everyone. Atchison, Mr ChrisPRLC17/213 Because I want access - it is Council land for the people. Atchison, Ms KyliePRLC17/214 No to reserve lease. Davidson, Mr NeilPRLC17/215 Want this to remain a reserve for all to benefit. Mitcalfe, Mr MikePRLC17/216 Would like to see it remain as a reserve. Mitcalfe, Mrs PamPRLC17/217 Traffic and to many people taking seafood from our shore. More people means less for the local Iwi. Hack, Mr HakeagaikiPRLC17/218 It’s a reserve ground. Hack, Mr SunteliPRLC17/219 It is a reserve and no one or no company should make money from it. We who live here should be able to use it whenever. Rhind, Mrs KatarainaPRLC17/220 It is reserve ground of the people, not for companies to make money off. It is still to be for the people. Hack, Mrs LisaPRLC17/221 The reserve belongs to the people and should not be leased to a private company. Hack, Mr PakiPRLC17/222 . Turua, Mrs HayleyPRLC17/223 No to the reserve lease. Mitchell, Mr JaxPRLC17/224 No to reserve lease. McNally, Mr Bruce

COPY



PAGE 15

ID Number

Reason Name

PRLC17/225 No to reserve lease. McNally, Mrs RomaPRLC17/226 No to reserve lease. Donovan, Mr PeterPRLC17/227 No to reserve lease. Day, Mrs LeannePRLC17/228 No to reserve lease. Day, Mr RichardPRLC17/229 No to reserve lease. Blundell, Mr AlfredPRLC17/230 Public access ways are becoming limited for use for everyone. The community locals should be taken into consideration as this has a huge impact on their lifestyle

and limits their access. They should have the right to access local reserves/areas and are no denied the enjoyment our bay has on offer.Atchison, Mrs Karen

PRLC17/231 I would like to see the Perehipe reserve remain in recreational use for the activity and enjoyment for the general public for generations to come. Rodewyk, Mrs JillPRLC17/232 I want to see the Perehipe Reserve remain in recreational use for the enjoyment of the general public. Rodewyk, Mr PeterPRLC17/233 Currently I pay rates that include the costs of maintaining the reserve and water supply for the toilets etc located at Perehipe Reserve to the Far North District

Council. The reserve has not been available for my use due to the campsites occupation of the land, which is what my portion of my rates is allocated for. There have been many occasions where I have not be able to use Perehipe due to overcrowding. Having the reserve available would significantly increase my ability to use this area. During the summer months, this area receives a substantial increase in visitor numbers, which places increased strain on the current available reserves and amenities. Returning this area to the ratepayers will aid in reducing the current overloading. Council has received remuneration from ratepayers for many decades for maintenance of this reserve and has not had to use this funding due to the occupation. These monies I would trust are being held in trust by Council for this or we will receive credit for these monies and a reduction in our current rates should the lease proceed.

Britton, Mr Craig

PRLC17/234 As a ratepayer, my family and many others should be able to go to this reserve (which in the rates Council get x amount to maintain) and enjoy the reserve and beach area. As a holiday park, we cannot do this. Perehipe is always so busy with cars and boats - better suggestion: for this reserve such as increased parking or left as a reserve to be enjoyed would be more useable and suitable for the region. The road to Perehipe is challenging, with boats, parking and cars everywhere. I would hope funds we have thus far been paying in our rates for maintenance would be returned to ratepayers or actually utilised by this reserve - not to benefit the holiday park!

Britton, Mrs Kyleigh

PRLC17/235 It’s a recreational reserve owned by the public and funded by ratepayers. This should remain for the public to use, not leased to private ownership. Ruth, Mrs DonnaPRLC17/236 It’s a recreational reserve owned by the public and funded by the ratepayers. This should remain for the public to use and not leased to private ownership. This

was not intended to be leased for financial gain by speculators. I object strongly to the proposal.Ruth, Mr Martyn

PRLC17/237 The land was given to be a reserve. Previous owners and current have gained from this reserve, leasing out to campers. The Tangata Whenua - Te Whanau Moana me Te Rorohuri have never received anything. If Council should not be leasing or receiving any monies from this reserve. All monies should be reinstated to the Hapu of this area.

Hakeua-Hack, Ms Marilyn

PRLC17/238 Reserve land is just that, land reserved for the people, for the benefit of the people. By leasing the land, only the corporate companies will benefit, and not the local community. Once a lease is granted, locals will lose access to the land. The size of the camp ground is more than adequate. If it is increased, the local beaches will suffer (increased water, traffic etc). If you look at who will benefit form this lease, there are only about three or four businesses. I believe the bad will created by this outweighs the benefits. The Council are elected by the people for the people. Not by the people for the corporates. There are no long term benefits from this proposal, but a long term distrust if this goes through.

Hack, Mr Edward

PRLC17/239 I am concerned as a local and tangata whenua that the reserve will become a commercial venture that will increase amenities required to support campers. Who benefits? Carrington. What will be the impact on the environment? The addition of more campers means more traffic, rubbish, pollution and road use. The erosion of the bank or shoreline along Perehipe Beach is constantly eroding. Traffic will not help. Boats, another negative factor. Our sealife is quickly disappearing. Our so-called ‘clean, green’ image will not be worth a cent. (It will go to COuncil, who will what? Just watch this beautiful whenua disappear.) I think NOT, so I say NO to the Council leasing part of Perehipe reserve.

Turua, Mrs Lucy

PRLC17/240 I object to the lease of part of the Perehipe Reserve: 1 The reserve was created in 1958 to be a RECREATIONAL RESERVE. 2 FNDC has allowed a private business - holiday park - to use and build on the reserve, AND to fence the reserve to appear as a part of the holiday park. 3 There is supposedly an “informal agreement” that has no documentation at FNDC. 4 To this day there is no sign on the reserve before the camping ground was established the public was able to park on the reserve (which is now fenced). 5 In 1993, of the 80 unites the owner applied for as a camping ground, consent was given for 40 only for access, wastewater, parking etc reasons. Why should ‘overflow camping’ be established now?

Haufler, Ms Ursula

COPY



PAGE 16

ID Number

Reason Name

PRLC17/241 This is the first step toward FNDC justifying a sale of the reserve to Top 10. The whole process is and has been corrupt for 10 years. Winks, Mr BarryPRLC17/242 For over a decade the wider community have not been able to utilise and enjoy this unique reserve at the time of year when they could make the most of it. This

is an attempt to legitimise what is illegitimate, legalise the illegal and sweep the unethical, unprofessional, unacceptable conduct of both Council employees and elected representatives under and ever growing carpet of cover.

McMahon, Mr John

PRLC17/243 I, like many other residents on the Karikari Peninsula and the general area and beyond, were unaware that the Perehipe Public Reserve was indeed a reserve and not part of the holiday park. There has never been any signage indicating the area was public reserve as such, to my knowledge, but I do seem to have a vague recollection of a sign somewhere there, stating “campers only”� or suchlike. It is very odd that there is a reserve sign at the end of the beach on a scrap of land on the roadside. It is obvious the previous owner (Narby) treated the reserve as his own private domain with the fencing and hedging along the roadside and behind the toilet block. The children’s play area with large signage stating “Property of the Top 10 Holiday Park”� and camp site numbering virtually over the whole area, powered camper van sites and cabin accommodation all giving the indication of being Holiday Camp grounds, and I contend that the intention was to deter the general public from entering or making use of the reserve. I am appalled that since 2011, when the Council decided not to go ahead with the public notification to lease Lot 4, and received $1724 for rent of the reserve. (Explanation required here! If it wasn’t leased, why did Council receive this payment?). Why was the previous owner allowed to go ahead and utilize the area anyway, and develop as he saw fit without any objection of anyone, it seems. How very convenient for him. Who was responsible for allowing his actions, and why has the Community Board representative not served the community, rather than the activities of the business owner who just happened to be the Ratepayer’s Association Chairman over a considerable period of his tenure? Obviously at the time of the most recent sale, the fact that the buyer had a public reserve attached to the holiday park, already developed for their use, rates and rental free, and all they were required to do was maintain it, would have very much enhanced the purchase and very likely influenced the purchase price. As to the maintenance (mowing etc), surely it was in the interests of the owner to keep the area tidy for his clients, and it was not as if he was actually doing it with the public in mind, ie the public were not, in fact, utilizing the reserve in any number because they were unaware they could. The fact that the Council now seeks to absolve themselves from mowing and maintaining this reserve because it is a cost they have not previously had to budget for, is because they allowed an informal, historical arrangement to exist, which was not in the interests of the community of whom they were elected to serve. And as to $9000 estimated costs for water and mowing, I suggest the Council seek a cheaper contractor who most certainly is available. I’m uncertain if the Council is suggesting they have been saved a $9000 expense, annually over the past 7 years or more, that is ludicrous. As to the income stream for the holiday park owner’s usage of our reserve, has there ever been any assessment as to how much it has been over the tenure? Every year the Whatuwhiwhi Community has held fishing competitions to raise money for the fire station and other projects and community hall. It seems outrageous whereby income has been earned by an individual off this public reserve and to my mind, a percentage of such could well have gone to these community projects. If the lease does in fact go ahead, and I am not in favour of that, then perhaps a consideration should be given to a percentage of income being returned to the community. As to the supply of water for the toilet block. I understand originally water was taken for both the camping ground and the toilet block from a stream source above the camp and Narbey put in a bore at a later date because the need for more water driven by the extension of the holiday park. Therefore is there any need to take water via the park, if the original water source is still available? Perhaps this should be investigated. I see a strip of land bordering private residence 29. Presumably this is for an accessway. There is no indication as whether this is for pedestrian traffic or otherwise. Is it for vehicles, boats? Is it to be metalled and fenced off? It is my contention that the reserve be returned to the community and the Council should then seek suggestions from residents and the Ngati Kahu Iwi as to its future usage. The remove of a section of the roadside fence and the formation of boat and trailer parking could well be an option for part of the reserve to clear the beach for beach users, rather than boat trailers and vehicles. And the children’s play area be further formed for public usage or removed to the holiday park’s own property.

Burke, Mr Ian

PRLC17/244 DO NOT SUPPORT COUNCIL LEASING PART OF PEREHIPE RESERVE TO THE WHATUWHIWHI TOP 10 HOLIDAY PARK. (Submission made on behalf of 15 individuals). Steel, Ms Leona

PRLC17/245 Should be left for the ratepayers to enjoy. Clean it up. Mow it. Put in picnic area so we can enjoy it. No more foreign ownership. If we can’t buy land overseas, why should overseas people purchase land in New Zealand. It’s wrong!

Conlon, Mrs Katrina

PRLC17/246 No more foreign ownerships. Conlon, Mr Ivan

PRLC17/247 We are badly in need of car and boat trailer parking as in the holiday periods with vehicles and trailers parked on both sides of our narrow road is totally dangerous. With our growing population we also need the reserve for a playground. I am totally against leasing out or selling any of our reserves.

Abbott, Mrs Marie

PRLC17/248 It is a lovely spot by a nice beach. A great place for a picnic - family outings. There are not enough of these spots. Why give it away - particularly to foreigners. It’s the wrong thing to do.

Anson, Mr Charles

PRLC17/249 Wahi tapu Rutene, Mr Cedric

COPY



Item: 6.4 MEETING: TE HIKU COMMUNITY BOARD - 03 FEBRUARY 2017 Name of item: PEREHIPE RESERVE, WHATUWHIWHI - LEASE

PROPOSAL Author: Mike Colebrook - Manager Facilities Operations

Date of report: 12 January 2017


Executive Summary The purpose of the report is to inform the Te Hiku Community Board of a request from the Whatuwhiwhi Top 10 Holiday Park to lease a part of the recreation reserve adjoining their property on Whatuwhiwhi Road. The reserve is located at 21 Whatuwhiwhi Road on the Karikari Peninsular, NA2D/1387 Lot 4 DP 44395 (Attachment 1)

Recommendation THAT the Te Hiku Community Board makes the following recommendation to Council: THAT the Far North District Council publicly notifies the proposal to lease a part of the recreation reserve Lot 4 DP 44395 to the owners of the Whatuwhiwhi Top 10 Holiday Park and the terms of the lease to be; Term: 5 years Rent: Commercial rate to be determined by valuation Maintenance: Responsibility of the lessee Right of Renewal: A further 5 years if no alternative need identified AND THAT the Te Hiku Community Board is appointed to hear any submissions and/or objections received in response to the public process and then to make a recommendation to Council in respect of the proposal.

1) BackgroundIn 2015 the Whatuwhiwhi Top 10 Holiday Park was sold to the current owners, Carrington Holiday Park Jade LP. Prior to the sale, the previous owners informed Council staff of their intention to sell and enquired about the informal arrangement they had for “peak season” use of the adjoining reserve, providing a water supply to the public toilets situated within the illegal road corridor, at no charge to Council, at an estimated value of $9,250.00.

The playground equipment and structures on the reserve are the property of the holiday park.

The new owner of the holiday park has written to Council requesting a lease of part of the reserve land, between Whatuwhiwhi Road and the holiday park for the purpose of supplying powered and unpowered tent, caravan and campervan short term accommodation sites.

The provisions of the Reserves Act 1977 require public notification of the proposed lease and full consideration must be given to all objections and submissions received in relation to the proposal.

COPY


Historically, on 28 July 2011 Council resolved to seek public submissions on a proposal to lease Lot 4, DP 44395, recreation reserve adjoining the Whatuwhiwhi Top 10 Holiday Park.

THAT the Council seeks public submissions on a proposal to lease Lot 4, DP

44395 being a recreation reserve to the owner of Whatuwhiwhi Top 10

Holiday Park and the terms of the lease to be:

Term 10 years

Rent Commercial rate to be determined by valuer

Rates and maintenance Responsibility of the lesee

Right of Renewal A further 10 years if no alternative need is identified

This public notification did not go ahead as the local iwi notified Council that they were strongly opposed to the lease proposal.

However Council did receive in 2011 two payments from the previous owners:

• $862.50 reimbursement of costs incurred to have a commercial valuationundertaken.

• $1,725.00 for rent of the Reserve

No further money was received thereafter.

2) Discussion and optionsOption 1

Publicly notify the proposal to lease a part of the reserve to Carrington Holiday Park Jade LP for a period of 5 years with a right of renewal for a further 5 years, at a commercial rate to be determined by valuation.

Pros: This option formalises what has been a long standing informal arrangement for the use of the Reserve for a very short period over the summer, and in lieu of this usage the Holiday Park mows and maintains the Reserve at no cost to Council and supplies water to our public toilet, also at no cost. These costs are estimated to be $7,500 for mowing and $1,750 for water.

Should a formal lease be entered into with Council for a part of the reserve, the Holiday Park has offered to continue with the mowing of the remainder of the public reserve and supply water, both at no charge to Council.

Cons: This option gives the impression that the reserve forms part of the holiday park and that during the peak summer period, it is unavailable for use by the general public.

COPY


Option 2

Grant the holiday park a “licence to occupy” the recreation reserve from November to March in each year (5 months) for a 5 year period at a commercial rate to be determined by valuation.

Pros: This would make the reserve available to the general public for 7 months of the year.

Cons: Whilst the licence holder would mow and maintain the reserve from November - March, Council would be required to carry out this activity for the remainder of the year at a cost of $4,375.00 per annum.

Option 3

Not to permit any use of the reserve by the holiday park operation and require that all structures be removed from the reserve. The holiday park would there to remove all structures from the reserve at considerable cost to themselves.

Pros: This would enable public access to the whole of the reserve year round.

Cons: Council would need to fence the reserve boundary with the holiday park at a cost of $2,600.00, however, this cost could be shared 50/50 by negotiation with the holiday park. Council would incur additional operations costs of $9,250.00 for the mowing and maintenance of the reserve, along with additional water charges.

Option 4

Do nothing and continue with the existing informal arrangement. This is not recommended as it would not satisfy the local marae and community.

3) Financial implications and budgetary provisionA lease of this reserve could bring in additional income to Council without Council incurring any additional costs. The estimated maintenance costs for the reserve would be an unbudgeted expenditure and would require a drop in the level of service elsewhere in the Te Hiku ward.

4) Reason for the recommendationThe annual rental from the lease would generate additional income and Council would not have the cost of maintaining the reserve. This would also formalise a historic arrangement on a reduced area to be leased.


Attachment 1: Location plan of reserve and camping ground - Document number A1815621

COPY





a) Seek to identify all reasonably practicable options for the achievement of theobjective of a decision; and

b) Assess the options in terms of their advantages and disadvantages; andc) If any of the options identified under paragraph (a) involve a significant

decision in relation to land or a body of water, take into account therelationship of Māori and their culture and traditions with their ancestral land,water sites, waahi tapu, valued flora and fauna and other taonga.

2. This section is subject to Section 79 - Compliance with procedures in relation todecisions.


The provisions of Council policy 5108 encroachments on Council administered land and Reserves Act 1977.


Local Marae and Iwi consultation would be required.


Public notification is proposed in order to ascertain the views of the community as well as to comply with the Reserves Act 1977.


Yes.


This report is to the Community Board as they have the delegated authority.



The Chief Financial Officer has reviewed this report. Option 1 would seem to be the best option financially for Council as the additional service provided to Council by the owner is significant.

COPY

Docum

ent number A

1887495P

age 1 of 1

CO

PY


mlagerstedt

Polygon Line

mlagerstedt

Typewriter

Boundary 6.0 from building

mlagerstedt

Typewriter

stake by R11

mlagerstedt

Typewriter

mlagerstedt

Typewriter

Stake by peg

mlagerstedt

Typewriter

X

mlagerstedt

Typewriter

X

mlagerstedt

Typewriter

X

mlagerstedt

Typewriter

Lot 4 DP 44395 Mangonui CC Perehipe Reserve

mlagerstedt

Typewriter

Boundary marking between Perehipe Reserve and Top 10 Holiday Park

mlagerstedt

Rectangle

Attachm

ent 6

Docum

ent number A

1887498P

age 1 of 1


Attachment no.

The Reserves Act 1977 – Extracts

17 Recreation reserves

(1) It is hereby declared that the appropriate provisions of this Act shall have effect, in relation to reserves classified as recreation reserves, for the purpose of providing areas for the recreation and sporting activities and the physical welfare and enjoyment of the public, and for the protection of the natural environment and beauty of the countryside, with emphasis on the retention of open spaces and on outdoor recreational activities, including recreational tracks in the countryside.

(2) It is hereby further declared that, having regard to the general purposes specified in subsection (1) of this section, every recreation reserve shall be so administered under the appropriate provisions of this Act that—

(a) The public shall have freedom of entry and access to the reserve, subject to the specific powers conferred on the administering body by sections 53 and 54 of this Act, to any bylaws under this Act applying to the reserve, and to such conditions and restrictions as the administering body considers to be necessary for the protection and general well-being of the reserve and for the protection and control of the public using it:

(b) Where scenic, historic, archaeological, biological, geological, or other scientific features or indigenous flora or fauna or wildlife are present on the reserve, those features or that flora or fauna or wildlife shall be managed and protected to the extent compatible with the principal or primary purpose of the reserve:

(c) Those qualities of the reserve which contribute to the pleasantness, harmony, and cohesion of the natural environment and to the better use and enjoyment of the reserve shall be conserved:

(d) To the extent compatible with the principal or primary purpose of the reserve, its value as a soil, water, and forest conservation area shall be maintained.

http://www.westlaw.co.nz/maf/wlnz/app/document?docguid=I3269ec35e15f11e08eefa443f89988a0&&src=rl&hitguid=I2b553561e01e11e08eefa443f89988a0&snippets=true&startChunk=1&endChunk=1&isTocNav=true&tocDs=AUNZ_NZ_LEGCOMM_TOC#anchor_I2b553561e01e11e08eefa443f89988a0

http://www.westlaw.co.nz/maf/wlnz/app/document?docguid=I3269ebe6e15f11e08eefa443f89988a0&&src=rl&hitguid=I2b5535a7e01e11e08eefa443f89988a0&snippets=true&startChunk=1&endChunk=1&isTocNav=true&tocDs=AUNZ_NZ_LEGCOMM_TOC#anchor_I2b5535a7e01e11e08eefa443f89988a0

http://www.westlaw.co.nz/maf/wlnz/app/document?docguid=I3269ed24e15f11e08eefa443f89988a0&&src=rl&hitguid=I2b5535a6e01e11e08eefa443f89988a0&snippets=true&startChunk=1&endChunk=1&isTocNav=true&tocDs=AUNZ_NZ_LEGCOMM_TOC#anchor_I2b5535a6e01e11e08eefa443f89988a0


40 Functions of administering body

(1) The administering body shall be charged with the duty of administering, managing, and controlling the reserve under its control and management in accordance with the appropriate provisions of this Act and in terms of its appointment and the means at its disposal, so as to ensure the use, enjoyment, development, maintenance, protection, and preservation, as the case may require, of the reserve for the purpose for which it is classified.

53 Powers (other than leasing) in respect of recreation reserves

(1) The administering body of a recreation reserve may from time to time, in the exercise of its functions under section 40 of this Act and to the extent necessary to give effect to the principles set out in section 17 of this Act,—

(a) – (g) …

(h) At any time and from time to time set apart any part or parts of the reserve—

(i) For gardens, open spaces, footpaths, driveways, or picnic grounds, or for the provision of any other like facilities for public recreation or enjoyment or for facilities and amenities necessary for the public using the reserve; and construct or develop those gardens, open spaces, footpaths, driveways, picnic grounds, or other facilities for public recreation or enjoyment or facilities and amenities necessary for the public using the reserve; and fix reasonable charges for the use of those picnic grounds, facilities, and amenities:

(ii) With the prior consent of the Minister, for baths, camping grounds, parking places for vehicles, or mooring places for boats, necessary for the convenience of persons using the reserve, and construct and develop such baths, camping grounds, and parking or mooring places, and fix reasonable charges for the use of such baths, camping grounds, and parking or mooring places:

(i) – (n) …

(o) Do such other things as may be considered desirable or necessary for the proper and beneficial management, administration, and control of the reserve.

(2) Notwithstanding anything in subsection (1) of this section, but subject to the first proviso to paragraph (d) of that subsection and to the second proviso to paragraph (e) of that subsection, where the administering body is a local authority it shall not be necessary for that administering body to obtain the consent, authority, or approval of the Minister, and it may exercise any power or discretion vested in the Minister by virtue of that subsection:

http://www.westlaw.co.nz/maf/wlnz/app/document?docguid=I3269ec5ce15f11e08eefa443f89988a0&&src=rl&hitguid=I2c637183e01e11e08eefa443f89988a0&snippets=true&startChunk=1&endChunk=1&isTocNav=true&tocDs=AUNZ_NZ_LEGCOMM_TOC#anchor_I2c637183e01e11e08eefa443f89988a0

http://www.westlaw.co.nz/maf/wlnz/app/document?docguid=I3269ec35e15f11e08eefa443f89988a0&&src=rl&hitguid=I2aecaf83e01e11e08eefa443f89988a0&snippets=true&startChunk=1&endChunk=1&isTocNav=true&tocDs=AUNZ_NZ_LEGCOMM_TOC#anchor_I2aecaf83e01e11e08eefa443f89988a0

http://www.westlaw.co.nz/maf/wlnz/app/document?docguid=I3269ebe6e15f11e08eefa443f89988a0&&src=rl&hitguid=I2c986450e01e11e08eefa443f89988a0&snippets=true&startChunk=1&endChunk=1&isTocNav=true&tocDs=AUNZ_NZ_LEGCOMM_TOC#anchor_I2c986450e01e11e08eefa443f89988a0

http://www.westlaw.co.nz/maf/wlnz/app/document?docguid=I3269ebe6e15f11e08eefa443f89988a0&&src=rl&hitguid=I2c98646ee01e11e08eefa443f89988a0&snippets=true&startChunk=1&endChunk=1&isTocNav=true&tocDs=AUNZ_NZ_LEGCOMM_TOC#anchor_I2c98646ee01e11e08eefa443f89988a0

http://www.westlaw.co.nz/maf/wlnz/app/document?docguid=I3269ebe6e15f11e08eefa443f89988a0&&src=rl&hitguid=I2c98646de01e11e08eefa443f89988a0&snippets=true&startChunk=1&endChunk=1&isTocNav=true&tocDs=AUNZ_NZ_LEGCOMM_TOC#anchor_I2c98646de01e11e08eefa443f89988a0


54 Leasing powers in respect of recreation reserves (except farming, grazing, or afforestation leases)

(1) With the prior consent of the Minister, the administering body, in the case of a recreation reserve that is vested in the administering body, may from time to time, in the exercise of its functions under section 40 of this Act, to the extent necessary to give effect to the principles set out in section 17 of this Act,—

(a) Lease to any person, body, voluntary organisation, or society (whether incorporated or not) any area set apart under section 53(1)(h) of this Act for baths, a camping ground, a parking or mooring place, or other facilities for public recreation or enjoyment. The lease—

(i) May require the lessee to construct, develop, control, and manage the baths, camping ground, parking or mooring place, or other facilities for public recreation or enjoyment, or may require the lessee to control and manage those provided by the administering body; and

(ii) Shall be subject to the further provisions set out in Schedule 1 to this Act relating to leases of recreation reserves issued pursuant to this paragraph

--------------------------------------

http://www.westlaw.co.nz/maf/wlnz/app/document?docguid=I3269ec5ce15f11e08eefa443f89988a0&&src=rl&hitguid=I2c637183e01e11e08eefa443f89988a0&snippets=true&startChunk=1&endChunk=1&isTocNav=true&tocDs=AUNZ_NZ_LEGCOMM_TOC#anchor_I2c637183e01e11e08eefa443f89988a0

http://www.westlaw.co.nz/maf/wlnz/app/document?docguid=I3269ec35e15f11e08eefa443f89988a0&&src=rl&hitguid=I2aecaf83e01e11e08eefa443f89988a0&snippets=true&startChunk=1&endChunk=1&isTocNav=true&tocDs=AUNZ_NZ_LEGCOMM_TOC#anchor_I2aecaf83e01e11e08eefa443f89988a0

http://www.westlaw.co.nz/maf/wlnz/app/document?docguid=I3269ebe6e15f11e08eefa443f89988a0&&src=rl&hitguid=I2c986458e01e11e08eefa443f89988a0&snippets=true&startChunk=1&endChunk=1&isTocNav=true&tocDs=AUNZ_NZ_LEGCOMM_TOC#anchor_I2c986458e01e11e08eefa443f89988a0

http://www.westlaw.co.nz/maf/wlnz/app/document?docguid=I3269ed18e15f11e08eefa443f89988a0&&src=rl&hitguid=I2cba1cc4e01e11e08eefa443f89988a0&snippets=true&startChunk=1&endChunk=1&isTocNav=true&tocDs=AUNZ_NZ_LEGCOMM_TOC#anchor_I2cba1cc4e01e11e08eefa443f89988a0


Reserve Act Hearing by Te Hiku Community Board Hearing Committee

Notes of a Hearing by Te Hiku Community Board Hearing Committee held at the Te Ahu Centre, Kaitaia., on 15th June 2017, commencing at 3.00pm Community Board Members Present: Adele Gardner (Chairperson) Lawrie Atkinson Bronwyn Hunt Awhina Murupaenga Councillor Felicity Foy

In Attendance

R Smythe - Hearings Administrator

Perehipe Recreation Reserve, Whatuwhiwhi proposed lease of a part of the reserve. NA26D/1387 Lot 4 DP 44395.

Mrs Gardner opened the Hearing and outlined the process.

In attendance for Council Shaun Clarke, CEO Far North District Council - Left 3.45pm Samantha Edmonds, General Manager, Corporate Services. Mike Colebrook, Manager Facilities Operations Liz Davidson, Manager – District Facilities Operations Kaye Lethbridge, Property Legalisation Officer KathrynTrewin, Corporate Planning Co-ordinator Robert Akuhata, Community Development Advisor

Submitters in Attendance Brian Reeve Hazely Windelborn for Haititaimarangai Marae John McMahon Kevin Thompson Randolph Urlich for RJ & SM Urlich Descendants Roy Scahill Shirley Neho Deborah Lawrence Ian Burke Glen Mitchell Nicholas Walsh Christie Lawrence

1. APOLOGIES AND DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST Apology


• Nuu Ward

• Melanie Dalziel

• Moved Adele seconded bronwyn

2. RESOLUTION TO SUSPEND STANDING ORDERS Recommendation

“THAT Standing orders ‘3.8 Rules of Debate” be suspended for the duration of the Hearing to enable Elected Members to speak more than once and to enable free participation by members of the public.”

3. PROPOSED PEREHIPE RESERVE LEASE – HEARING OF SUBMISSIONS

Brian Reeve: Spoke about the History of the Reserve Land use. Mainly about the existing pipeline, the use and upkeep thereof and their relationship with Council and the camp ground owners. Hazely Windelborn for Haititaimarangai Marae: Read Councils Vision Missions and Principles and Strategic priorities. Haititaimarangai Marae have had serval hui and are feeling insulted that they have not been consulted. Council are not standing by their Vision Missions and Principles and Strategic priorities. Locals have been kicked off that reserve for many years, and Council have not done anything about. Karikari have less than 2 hectares of useable reserve and they see this as more being taken away, if it wasn’t for a big development would Council even be considering this, why haven’t tangata whenua been given the opportunity to lease it. Would like more consultation at their Marae so they know what is going on. John McMahon: Resident of Perehipe for 20 years and a neighbour to the holiday park. For 2 decades the locals have been prohibited from using the reserve during Christmas and New Year. When has a member of the public been able install electricity on a public reserve he asked. Mr McMahon outlined what has happened on the reserve by the camp ground owners without Council doing anything about it. The community has been misled and misrepresented. The Top 10 owners have made a lot of money over a gentleman’s agreement and local constituents have been stonewalled by Council. Over 10 years there have been undeclared conflicts of interest in the Community Board and Council. Prior to purchasing the property the new owners would have known about the status of this reserve, there is a cost for removal of the illegal structure but it is what it is. Has Council ever looked at the playground and checked it for health and safety? This playground is dangerous and has not been maintained apart from installing 2 signs. For 2 decades children have not been allowed on the reserve. The Holiday park has an undeveloped area within their own property and they have turned cabins in to offices. The powered sites need to be compliant; have the powered sites been tested?


Shirley Neho: (video presentation). Signage does not make the public feel like it is a public reserve. Mokopuna and whanau have not been able to use it as a public reserve and it is very unclear where the camp boundaries are. There have not been any opportunities for public the to use the reserve, it could be used for picnicking and be made a safe place, there are not many reserves for the public at Karikari , the public should have the opportunity to use it and it should have signage so public know they can use it. You don’t fix a wrong by doing another wrong. Karen Urlich for RJ & SM Urlich Descendants: Mrs Urlich submitted an agreement between the Urlich family and ? family Doubtless Bay ? gave it to Council as a part of their reserve contributions. The original agreement has never been followed through – Council should never have received this area as a reserve. The Urlich family would like to register their interest in this piece of land. It was originally part of the Parakiraki block, the original block was 3600 acres. Mr Urlich bought the block and partitioned off a part for the school. Other family members lived on the block. The family garden was on the 2 acres – part of the reserve area. Ian Burke: It is not ethical for the Community Board to be hearing these submissions. An independent arbitrator would be unbiased. Option 1 – gives the impression that the land is owned by the holiday park – nothing has changed; the impression has been given that the land belongs to the holiday park. In 10 years when the lease has expired it is hypothetically likely the reserve will go to the camp owners On the map of the holiday park there is no indication what the marked entrance is for. Is it for exclusive use of the holiday park. Will general public be able to use the toilets and hook up to the illegal powered sites Has there ever been an assessment on how much money has been made by the holiday park – community raises money for fire brigade etc., has any money been given by the holiday park. Glen Mitchell: Chairman of ratepayers assn for a yearhe said he has looked at papers from 1993 it was an application for the holiday park to use the land; this was not approved but the reserve was to be used for boat parking so there was area for the children to play on the beach. There should be no lease on a piece of land that is a public reserve. He said he would like council stick with the plan that Council put forward in 1993. Currently the beach gets covered in boat trailers. It is outrageous that a business can use the reserve to make money. Hearing Adjourned at 4.00pm and reconvened at 4.16pm. Deborah Lawrence: Outlined her areas of expertise. She is the landowner behind Whatuwhiwhi Campground. The campground has been well managed and has not been disturbed by noise. It is well kept and easy to get around. There are vehicles on the beach causing congestion on the beach and on the road. There is an area around the public toilets for parking but it soon gets congested. There is nowhere to park, there is very little room for people to move around. Most of the people going to the beach have children and the only place to park is on the beach, Whangamata have the same problem but they let people park on the


reserve and charge them. Ms Lawrence said has to wear he hearing aids on the beach because she needs to be able hear vehicles on the beach. She said she would like to see the parking problem sorted. Public land is where all public utilities usually are but they are not, they are on her land. Recently she had a problem with sewage spill on her land and maps did not show the pipes going through her land. The pipes were linked to the public drain; there was a blockage in Council pipes which caused a blockage on her place. Ms Lawrence said she would like to see all the public utilities on the public land in an environmentally friendly way. Not OK for council sewage to cause blockages on private land.

4. RESOLUTION TO RESUME STANDING ORDERS Recommendation

“THAT Standing orders be resumed.”

Close of hearing 4.30pm.

Perehipe Reserve Hearing

Te Hiku Community Board

15 June 2017

At Te Ahu, Kaitaia

Supplementary Submissions

Submitter ID Submitter Name Page

Submitter 32 Whatuwhiwhi Top 10 Holiday Park 1

Submitter 192 RJ and SM Urlich Descendents 9

Submitter 209 P Greenfield 10

Submitter 242 J McMahon 11


SUBMISSION FOR LEASE FOR CAMPING GROUND PURPOSES

FOR PART OF THE PARAKERAKE (Perihipe) RECREATION RESERVE

WHATUWHIWHI

Whatuwhiwhi Top 10 Holiday Park

April 2017


1

BACKGROUND Location Map

Source: Google Maps

1. Originally established by resource consent in 1993, the Holiday Park was acquired by the

Narbey's in 1995 and by Carrington Jade Holiday Park LP (Trading as Whatuwhiwhi Top 10 Holiday Park) in 2015. Since that time they have been undertaking a series of improvements to the facilities available within the Holiday Park.

2. The Holiday Park offers a range of visitor accommodation facilities including motel units, cabins,

parks for camper vans and tent sites and includes the owners' residence. It is a very popular tourist accommodation facility and has a Qualmark rating of 3.5 stars. This category is described as “Very Good”, achieving consistently high quality levels with a wide range of facilities and services.

3. A small portion of the Reserve was previously used by the former owners of the camp for

temporary occupation of a portion of the reserve for the peak periods. The current owners use the upper portion of the Reserve as an 'overspill' camping area at busy times. They also mow the grassed areas. And weed eat around the bush area on hillside. The Park supplies water for the Public Toilets at Perehipe beach. The current childrens playground is due to be demolished as it is not up to current Health and Safety standards.

4. The applicants wish to regularise the 'informal' use of part of the reserve land via a lease to allow

them to cater mainly for a group of families who have been camping on part of Reserve for last 20 years.

PARAKERAKE RECREATION RESERVE 5. The Reserve, which is 1.0144 hectares in size, is largely in grass with scattered trees and an area

of trees and shrubs on the western side, where the ground slopes down from Whatuwhiwhi Road, and some flax bushes along the southern roadside edge.

6. The only amenities are a public toilet block and streetlight near the southern edge and a bench

seat. These features can be seen on the aerial photograph in Figure 2 and in other photographs, which were taken in 2003, in Figures 3 and 4.

Figure 2 Aerial Photograph


2

Source: Google Maps

7. Behind the toilet block, the land slopes down to an open drain which runs through the central

portion of the grassed area which effectively serves the Reserve into two parts. The open drain takes floodwater following periods of prolonged heavy rain. On the seaward side of the road, a narrow grass verge provides some space for informal parking alongside the bank which backs the beach.

Figure 3 Road Frontages and Toilet Block

Figure 4 Views from Holiday Park towards Reserve


3

8. The Reserve has been in existence for many years. There was a proposal to purchase the land

but this was not pursued. There is no Reserve Management Plan prepared under the Reserves Act 1977.

9. The Reserve is included within the Muriwhenua Land Claim under the Treaty of Waitangi. WHATUWHIWHI TOP 10 HOLIDAY PARK MANAGEMENT PLAN 10. The adjoining Holiday Park has a Management Plan. That Management Plan draws upon a

number of operational and administrative matters which fall within the following categories -

Hours of Operation Occupancy Car parking Trailer parking Lighting Fire Safety Animals Waste Water Management Water Supply Stormwater Management Solid Waste Management Noise Amenity Facilities Access to Campground


4

Landscaping Host Responsibility Reporting

ADMINISTRATION PLAN FOR LEASE FOR CAMP GROUND PURPOSES: PART OF PARAKERAKE RECREATION RESERVE Because of the operational linkage between the Holiday Park and the Reserve the Administration Plan draws upon these categories as appropriate.

• Hours of Operation The camp ground would operate every day throughout the year in the same manner the Holiday Park operates. Guests are asked to arrive no earlier than 1.00pm and when departing from their stay to leave no later than 10.00am [Camper Vans] and 11.00am [Campers].

• Number of Sites The part of the Reserve that Carrington Holiday Park Jade LP would like to lease has a total of 15 camp sites.

• Car parking One car parking space is provided for each camp site to meet the requirements of the Camp Ground Regulations. These car parks adjoin the respective camp site.

• Trailer parking Trailer parking for guests is provided within the Holiday Park. Guests are asked to use this area in preference to parking on the road reserve area adjoining the beach access point to Parakerake Bay opposite the Campground.

• Lighting There is no lighting within the Reserve. Security and safety lighting are provided within the Holiday Park.

• Fire Safety Fire safety equipment is provided within the Holiday Park facilities.

• Animals No animals are to be brought on to the Reserve except where these are used by visually impaired persons.

• Waste Water Management There are no waste water connections within the Reserve. The Holiday Park is connected to the Whatuwhiwhi Waste Water Treatment plant.

• Water Supply There are no water connections within the Reserve. The Holiday Park draws potable water from an existing bore and the adjoining watercourse.


5

• Stormwater Management Piped and overland storm water drains are located within the Reserve. These follow the existing natural flow paths which lead into the water course which bisects the Reserve. Surface water from the mown grass is collected by cut-off drains and discharged into the watercourse. The existing overland storm water flow paths shall be maintained and shall not be disturbed without the appropriate consents.

• Solid Waste Management Recycling facilities are provided within the Holiday Park.

• Noise The Reserve and Holiday Park is located within the valley of a gully area that in part is surrounded by residential properties. Noise from the Holiday Park activities could create concern to these adjoining land owners. The Holiday Park operators require all guests to ensure that noise is kept to the minimum as to not cause concern to other guests or the surrounding property owners. The hours of 11.00pm to 7.00am the following day are considered to be” quiet time”. In situations where guests do not take a responsible approach they will be evicted from the Holiday Park.

• Amenity Facilities The Holiday Park provides an onsite waste water dump station for guests who require services. Ablution facilities including kitchen, laundry and toilets are also provided within the Holiday Park including a spa and outdoor facilities including BBQ area, lunch tables, wash down areas. A large outdoor play ground is located within the Reserve. This is used by camp ground guests as well as other members of the public.

• Access to Reserve All vehicle access to the Reserve is via a Right of Way that leads off Whatuwhiwhi Road. Pedestrian access is available from the road frontage as there is no security fencing

• Visual Amenity There will be no permanent buildings. The Reserve will have the appearance of a camp ground with a range of tents in various shapes, forms and colours.

• Host Responsibility The Reserve guests will be required to abide with the Host Responsibility program which is implemented at the Holiday Park. This is passively achieved through an initial vetting of guests upon arrival and directly through providing all guests with a copy of the Campground Rules and Responsibilities. A copy of those Rules is attached as Appendix 3. Details of any amendments / modifications required within the Administration Plan.

SUMMARY 11. The small area of the Reserve that Whatuwhiwhi Top 10 Holiday Park would like to lease is

considered to have limitations which preclude its use for formalised sporting activities, namely size, topography and drainage limitations.


6

12. Whatuwhiwhi Top 10 Holiday Park believes that the community should have access to the Reserve and that the lease of a small part of this area would not unduly affect any member of the community.

13. The 'usefulness' of the reserve lies in its closeness to the beach and its role as open space

compared to the adjacent built development. Using the land in conjunction with the Holiday Park does not destroy its openness. This open space function will be prevalent at all times of the year.

14. Use of part of the reserve for provision of tent sites does not hinder its availability for other uses

should circumstances change in the future as there would be no buildings or impermeable areas to remove. This also applies to any change in the land status which could occur as a result of Treaty of Waitangi negotiations.

15. The use of the Reserve in this manner facilitates the further provision of campgrounds but does

not require local government funding. The applicants have the expertise to operate the facility but are constrained by the amount of land at their disposal. The community benefits from the better utilisation of land, enhanced facilities for beach users, reduced costs to Council in terms of maintenance, and retention of flexibility in respect of longer term use of the land.

16. Leasing the Reserve does not pre-empt any decisions which may be made by the Treaty of

Waitangi Tribunal. While the applicants will receive income from the operation of the camp site, they are also relieving Council of its maintenance responsibilities and furnishing a lease payment back into the Councils financial stream.

17. The Carrington Holiday Park Jade LP trading as Whatuwhiwhi Top 10 Holiday Park would like the

Far North District Council to consider a formal lease for the small part of the Reserve for a period of not less than 10 years for an amount to be agreed to.


1

Kathryn Trewin

From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

pamelag <> Wednesday, 7 June 2017 5:28 p.m. Submissions

Perehipe reserve

Hi I am no longer able to attend the hearing.

My additional submission material again underscores the innapropriateness of the community board hearing

this matter. Please explain their delegated authority from council....and even if this has been formalised they

having already made a recommendation to council should stand aside and ir appoint a commissioner as they

clearly have a conflict of interest. This hearing is not in keeping with the principles of the Local Govt Act and

is open to formal review.

Pam Greenfield

Sent from my Samsung device


Submission Re: Proposed Perehipe Reserve Lease

John McMahon

15 June 2017

For 2 decades the local community on the Karikari Peninsula have been excluded

from utilising Perehipe Reserve at the most desirable and advantageous time of the

year.

In the past decade, this has happened as a result of illegal and illegitimate activity.

Activity, which has been allowed, encouraged and condoned by both Council

employees and elected representatives.

Clearly, honorariums are more important than honour and the truth a tradable

commodity. There has been clear partiality and inconsistency and this council has

failed miserably in its duty

. When and where has any member of the general public been permitted to:

1) Erect a building on a reserve – complete with power etc

2) Rent the building to the public

3) Erect powered sites for the purpose of camping on a reserve and rent those

sites to the public

4) Lay concrete foundations, place and then remove a second building leaving

its concrete base behind

5) Erect and maintain a toilet on a reserve

6) Lay a roadway within the reserve for vehicle traffic to access powered sites

Frankly, this is an affront to the community and to the proposition of democratic

responsibility.

The current process is little more than an attempt to legitimise the illegitimate and

legalise the illegal. No accountability, no transparency – a blatant move to cover up

systemic failures in respect of this matter within the FNDC.

The fact is that this is not about the applicants or the previous owners of the Top 10

Holiday Park, or even about the leasing of the Perehipe Reserve. This is about the 4

things that every candidate spoke of prior to last year’s local body election.

Honesty, integrity, accountability, transparency.

Our community has been misled, has been misdirected and flatly treated with

contempt by those who are called to be public servants and elected representatives

who evidently believe they are, (as they have been) a law unto themselves.

Then illegal and unauthorised activities were not as a result of Council resolution but

rather, we are told by the former community board chair, the basis of a “gentlemans

agreement”.


Despite concerted efforts and endless questions there is no “gentlemen” owning that

decision.

A complete lack of transparency and zero accountability.

Harsh criticism? Let me read you an email dated 17 September 2015, some 2 years

ago.

The answer is evident :

Do what we have done to him and others for years …….

Treat them with the mushroom syndrome ie keep them in the dark and feed them on

bull

As a result, a ratepayer who asked a fair and reasonable question was stonewalled,

deferred, told half-truths and mislead to the point of giving up.

The writer of the email was the Manager – Facilities Operations of the FNDC at that

time and the recipient was the Chairperson of the Te Hiku Community Board and

local elected representative. Clearly a case of collaborative deception and

misrepresentation of the facts.

Furthermore, the ratepayer in question had pursued answers on the matter of the

lease from the Local Ratepayers Association (the owner of the Top 10 was at the

time, the Chairperson of the Association) and working closely with the Local

Community Board member who became the Chair of the Board for over 3 years.

Now we see some of the same people who dealt with this matter being called on to

consider this matter and make a recommendation to the Council. Clearly there are

serious undeclared conflicts of interest here.

From: Mike Colebrook

To: Lawrie Atkinson

Hi Lawrie, I have searched the files and minutes and there is no formal resolution or record of any

agreement between the Council and the Top 10 Holiday camp in regards to the new Chinese owners.

The only information I can obtain is that Council requested that they discuss with the local iwi the

issues before selling, of the use of the adjacent reserve. A Tom Getty of Tokerau Beach seems to not

want to let the issue die. I will need to ring him with an update, but will only advise we are still

investigating. How do you want to deal with the issue. I am on leave for the next two weeks.

Regards, Mike C.


Reminiscent of the wolf in the hen house. If it wasn’t so serious it would be

laughable!

So to the proposal to lease a part of the reserve over the busiest part of the year.

One of the rationale around a continuation of the illegal activities under a lease was

the cost to the applicant of removing the illegal and unconsented property from the

reserve and returning it to its original state.

This is frankly the most ludicrous logic I have heard.

The applicant in this case is a multi-billion dollar corporation. It purchased the

Holiday Park and in the process I can only assume utilised highly paid professionals

to undertake due diligence, planners, lawyers, etc.

In the course of that process this matter would have surely been identified as a

potential risk and therefore been catered for as a contingency, from a financial

perspective.

It is definitely not a reasonable basis for legalising the illegal. The cost of removal is

what it is. Hundreds of thousands of dollars have been generated by this activity –

not one dollar being returned to the community.

Then we have the much-acclaimed playground. When was the last time anyone from

FNDC undertook a health and safety review of this structure and its environs? I can

tell you that it is absolutely non-compliant on several matters and apart from the new

signage telling everyone that it is the property of Top 10, it would appear to have had

no ongoing maintenance.

As a child’s play facility on a Council reserve, the onus must surely be on Council to

ensure: 1) Compliance and 2) the health and safety of users.

Interesting that this unsafe, even dangerous and uncompliant play structure has

again been promoted as some sort of positive, free contribution to the children of our

community. Truth is we now have 2nd generation children who will relate how they

have been kicked off the playground and told it is private property, as recently as

2016.

Then there is the premise that this proposed lease is only to cater for the overflow of

campers over the Christmas/New Year period. The applicant has in recent times

converted 13 accommodation units in the park into office space.

Is the biggest private land holder on the Peninsula and proposes the construction of

a billion dollar development. The holiday park has undeveloped land with its

boundaries in addition. The applicant has any number of locations which it could cost

effectively convert to camping areas – it is not reliant on Perehipe Reserve for land

to facilitate camping, if providing camping opportunities to holiday makers wanting to

make the most of our piece of paradise is in fact their aim.


In respect of the powered sites:

1) Was an Electrical Certificate of Compliance issued to the Council as the

owner of the land? And by whom?

2) Has the FNDC had the powered sites tested for safety and compliance? If not,

why not?

In closing, I want to make 2 points. I say that it is not enough to say lift the carpet

and get a bigger broom.

Not enough to say all that is in the past let’s just move on.

Disrespectful to those who have endured this decade of deceit and deliberate

deception.

Those who held public office, are public servants, who are entrusted with the public

purse and need to be held to account for their action or inaction and their decisions.

If we never hold people to account – particularly those who hold public office – never

identify the mistakes made – we are destined to make them again.

Albert Einstien said the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over

and expecting a different result.

You have heard from the representative of Haititaimarangai Marae of their strong

opposition to the issuing of this lease.

Earlier I read an email which recommended consultation with the local marae.

Despite the marae expressing its serious concerns to the FNDC on this matter over

18 months ago.

No consultation.

Despite Haititaimarangai having mana whenua here.

Elected representatives, council offices, the mayor talk about partnership,

respecting the tangata whenua and their mana whenua – still.

No consultation on this matter directly with Haititaimarangai.

On this matter you talk partnership and promote Te Tiriti o Waitangi

but you have walked tokenism and ignorance

Lastly.

This committee and Council should not be considering legitimising the illegitimate or

legalising what is illegal.


What message does this send? What precedent will you establish?

Can I or somebody else place a small 1 person accommodation unit on a FNDC

reserve and expect based on this matter to have a decade of non intrusion from the

Council?

This is not about the Top 10 or its owners or a lease.

It’s all about historic incompetence, unprofessional practices, ignorance, arrogance,

pride and self-indulgence.

A systemic failure to deliver on the promises of honesty, integrity, transparency and

accountability.

Stop trying to ignore the failures – return the reserve to ALL the people and address

the serious matters that have been raised for several years.



Item: 8.1 MEETING: COUNCIL - 10 AUGUST 2017 Name of item: FINAL CONSIDERATION OF PROPOSED FAR NORTH

DISTRICT PLAN CHANGE 15 - RURAL PROVISIONS

Author: Greg Wilson - Manager District Planning



Executive Summary The purpose of the report is to obtain formal approval to declare 'Plan Change 15 – Rural Provisions’ operative in terms of Schedule 1 of the Resource Management Act 1991.

Plan Change 15 has now progressed through all statutory processes and will make amendments to the Operative Far North District Plan 2009. All appeals have now been resolved and the rules in the plan change are deemed operative.

An awareness campaign will accompany public notification of operative status to highlight the changes and enabling provisions, such as the new ‘Minor Residential Unit’ rule.

This report was submitted to the 19 July 2017 Strategy Committee meeting. The Committee makes the following recommendation to Council:

Recommendation THAT Council approves Plan Change 15 - Rural Provisions pursuant to Clause 17 of Schedule 1 of the Resource Management Act 1991; AND THAT Council, pursuant to Clause 20 of Schedule 1 of the Resource Management Act 1991, Plan Change 15 - Rural Provisions be publicly notified as being operative on 17 August 2017

1) Background Proposed Plan Change 15 - Rural Provisions (PPC15) was prepared as part of the ‘Rolling Review’ of the District Plan to address deficiencies contained in the provisions of the District Plan’s Rural Environment Chapter. The origin of PPC15 dates back to 2011 with preliminary investigations into rural environment issues. The plan change represents a substantial shift of the operative plan provisions for the dominant zone in the District, the Rural Production Zone. Its development has been marked by many iterations of consultative process, and subsequent appeal processes.

PPC15, as notified, contained three components:

(a) Objectives, policies and rules aimed at enhancing the integrity and productive potential of the Rural Zones,

(b) Provisions aimed at addressing potential adverse cumulative effects of activities and reverse sensitivity form non farming and forestry activities

(c) Provisions aimed at enabling the well being of rural communities, including

1. controlled activity status for Minor Residential Units,

2. a permitted activity Temporary Events rule,


3. increased setbacks under the Keeping of Animals Rule and

4. Amendments to the Setback from Boundaries Rule for accessory buildings on smaller rural lots.

Council resolved to publicly notify PPC15 at its meeting on 23 May 2013. Following Council's resolution, PPC15 was notified with public submissions closing on 5 July 2013 and further submissions closing on 5 September 2013. Council received submissions from 41 primary submitters and 15 further submitters.

Council passed a resolution to delegate its powers to hear and make recommendations on PPC15 to an Independent Hearing Panel. The hearing was held on the 24th and 25th of February 2014 and on the 28th March 2014 with Commissioner William Smith as Chairperson and Commissioner Kim Hardy on the Hearing Panel.

The Hearing Panel recommended approval of the PPC15 with some modifications.

Council subsequently adopted the recommendations made by the Independent Commissioner and notified the Decisions on PPC15 on 3 September 2014.

A total of three appeals were lodged for PPC15.

Mediation took place in February 2015, and subsequent stages through to June 2015. Whilst many matters were resolved by mediation some key issues were unresolved and an Environment Court Hearing took place on 27 January 2016 involving Turners and Growers Horticulture NZ and Horticulture NZ.

The Environment Court decision was handed down on 17 March 2016. Both appeals were dismissed. Notably, the decision identified PPC15 as broadly appropriate for the entirety of the Rural Production Zone but recommended that the current consolidated plan review deliver more targeted solutions to issues in the District.

A subsequent appeal against this decision from Turners and Growers NZ was lodged with the High Court claiming a variety of legal errors made in the Environment Court decision. The High Court Hearing was held 9 months later on 1 December 2016. The High Court decision was handed down on 24 April 2017. The appeal was dismissed and Council was awarded costs.

No further appeals were lodged and therefore Council can now consider giving final approval to PPC15 in accordance with Clause 17 of Schedule 1 of the Resource Management Act 1991 (the Act).

2) Discussion and options The High Court decision represented the conclusion of the appeal process on PPC15. The appellant indicated that no further recourse would be sought via the Court of Appeal. This means that all PPC15 is free of challenge.

Section 86F of the Act provides for a rule to be treated as operative if no submissions or appeals have been lodged, or if all submissions or appeals have been withdrawn or finally determined. This means that the enabling provisions of PPC15 are deemed operative now.

Council has the role of selecting a date to publicly notify the operative status under Clause 20 of Schedule 1 of the Act. There are a variety of tasks to complete to coincide with and follow the public notification. The operative text of the plan must be updated and an accompanying update schedule provided with the plan. The new status will be conveyed via Council’s District Plan website and correspondence


issued to participants in the PPC15 process and to all plan holders. The operative date selection should allow for these tasks to be completed.

Creating broader awareness of particular elements of the plan change through a media campaign will be valuable. For example, the incorporation of the new Minor Residential Unit rule for the Rural Production Zone provides rural communities and landowners of sites of 5000m2 or greater in area much greater choice and flexibility in providing for affordable housing, creating resilience and economic development potential. A media campaign supported by graphic representations of the provision will highlight the opportunities now available in the Rural Production Zone, which covers 70% of the District.

Clause 20 of Schedule 1 of the Act requires Council to publicly notify PPC15 as being operative at least 5 working days before the date on which it will become operative in the Plan.

Public notification on 16 August 2017 for an Operative Date of 24 August will allow for preparation of all associated administrative tasks to be completed and development of a media campaign.

A later date may be chosen by Council. The effect of a later date would be a delay in the broader awareness of the new policies, provisions and opportunities.

3) Financial implications and budgetary provision Final approval of the plan change and declaring operative status involves public notification and associated administrative tasks and costs. These costs will be met through the existing operational budget for the District Plan.

4) Reason for the recommendation Approval under Clause 17 of the Act means that PPC15 will be formally incorporated into the District Plan.

Under Section 86F of the Act the rules in proposed plan changes are automatically considered operative, unless an appeal is received or appeals are resolved. This item seeks to formally acknowledge PPC15 operative status and to advise the public.

Manager: Kathryn Ross - General Manager Strategic Planning and Policy Group








d) This section is subject to Section 79 - Compliance with procedures in relation to decisions.


The proposed plan change is consistent with existing policy and outcomes.


The possible implications for maori and their culture and traditions with their ancestral land, water, site, waahi tapu, valued flora and fauna, and other taonga have been considered as part of the plan change process, particularly through reference to lodged iwi and hapu management plans and consultation with affected parties.


There are no known implications for people with disabilities, children or older persons.

Does the issue, proposal, decision or other matter have a high degree of significance as determined under the Council's Policy #2116?

In relation to Section 79 of the Local Government Act 2002, these issues are considered to be of low significance.


There are no known implications for Community Boards. Community boards were consulted during the proposed plan change processes.


Chief Financial Officer Review.

As identified above, there is adequate budget to finalise the plan changes.

The Chief Financial Officer has reviewed this report.


Item: 9.1 MEETING: COUNCIL - 10 AUGUST 2017 Name of item: KAKA STREET, AHIPARA - DRAINAGE EVALUATION Author: Steven Smith - Stormwater Engineer



Executive Summary The purpose of the report is to present a recommendation to the Committee, following multiple requests and a petition from Kaka Street residents asking for action to be taken to alleviate regular flooding on Kaka Street.

This report was submitted to the 06 July 2017 Te Hiku Community Board meeting and the Operations Committee meeting of 20 July 2017. Both meetings make the following recommendation to Council:

Recommendation THAT The Far North District Council does not undertake any upgrades of the current road and stormwater system until other priority projects have been completed. AND THAT it is intended that the piped solution still be considered for the Long Term Plan 2018/28.

1) Background The purpose of this report is to provide the Council with information in regard to the problems and remedies for the stormwater problems occurring within Kaka Street, Ahipara.

Flooding regularly occurs in the low point of Kaka Street, which is situated near property #24 and #17. This low area consists of a portion of Council road and a large section of berm on either side before reaching raised residential properties.

Currently the only stormwater assets in this location are 2 small soakage pits. The pits often fill up with sand from the beach but are currently given a light clean every 6 months or after a storm event.

Whilst the flooding is an issue, Council believes that it only affects the road and does not cause any damage to private property.

It is also reasonable to note that this issue has been raised before in 2016, when the Far North District Council investigated and concluded that remediation outlined in Option 4 would have high initial costs of approximately $150,000 and also high regular maintenance costs in range of $5,000 a year, the cost outweighed the potential benefit.

Concern regarding flooding on Kaka Street was again raised in March 2017 by the public via the request for service system and was then followed up by the Community Petition titled “Remove the lake on Kaka Street, Ahipara”. This includes a number of signatures from residents affected by the poor drainage on Kaka Street.

In response to this, the Far North District Council carried out further investigation into the feasibility of a stormwater system being installed to take flood water away from the low point in the street and discharge it into the sea via a pipeline.


The investigation included a survey of the road by taking GPS heights in respect to the sea level; this would help determine if the required fall is available to discharge the flood water.

The survey showed that the required fall is available but it also confirmed that:

1. A hill in between the low point and the beach was large/long enough to add a substantial cost to a piped solution.

2. In order to reach the sea, a long pipeline will be required. The suggested pipeline will have a minimal slope, which will leave it vulnerable to blockages.

3. The associated maintenance costs will increase as sea levels rise.

4. A significant rise in sea level such as the rise experienced during a king tide or a cyclone will render Options 2 to 4 inoperable for the duration of the event. The low point in the road is only 2.5m above the high tide level, with the pipe outlet in Option 4 being a maximum of 1m above the current high tide level.

It has been mentioned previously that there is a large section of berm on either side of the road. This allows Council to consider forming a significant system of modular soakage pits which would be installed as an extension to the existing soakage pits. The total area of suitable berm is large enough for Council to form a system which would reduce the flood water by a maximum of 60%, see option 2.

In a recent newspaper publication, it has been mentioned that an automatic pump is another option. The pump would take away flood water is once it reaches the low point of the road. Through a catchment assessment, Council has determined this new pump would be required to discharge 130 litres per second in order to cope with a 1 in 10 year rain event. More specific information can be found under Option 3.

2) Discussion and options After considering the background and our current position on this matter, we have considered 4 possible options to resolve the issue.

Option 1 (recommended option)

The Far North District Council does not undertake any upgrades of the current road and stormwater system until other priority projects have been completed. It is intended that the piped solution still be considered for the Long Term Plan 2018/28.

Pros: There will be no unbudgeted expenditure as the current maintenance programme of the road and existing soakage pits will continue.

Cons: This will result in the current situation continuing and the road being flooded, but with no private property damage.

Option 2 The Far North District Council would take the existing soakage pits situated in the low point of Kaka Street, and increase their holding capacity.

This would have an initial cost of approximately $50,000 to achieve a significant reduction in flood levels. This option is confined to the roadside berm, which will limit the capacity. There is also a limited depth before reaching the ground water level.

The land available is sufficient to reduce flooding levels by 35%. To put this in perspective, it will stop flooding from smaller regular rain events but will only reduce flooding from heavy rainfalls such as the ones experienced earlier this year.


The entrance to the new soakage pits proposed will also need to be cleaned a minimum of once every 6 months, which would come at a cost of approximately $2,500 a year.

Pros: This option will stop flooding occurring during smaller regular rain events and reduce flooding from storm events. The extent of the soakage pit system is able to be increased or decreased depending on the desired level of flood reduction.

Cons: An estimated cost of $50,000 of unbudgeted expenditure will be required to install a mid-range soakage pit system. This also results in an increased regular maintenance cost to a total of $2,500 per year. The extent of the soakage pit system is confined to the roadside berm, this results in a maximum possible reduction of 60% which means the area will still flood in significant rain events.

Option 3 The Far North District Council would setup an automatic pump system which in times of heavy rain and flooding, would turn on and pump the flood water to a specified point (over the brow of the road or onto the beach).

There are other features required for this option, such as an underground pipe (approximately 75mm – 100mm diameter) to carry water from the pump to the outlet point, an outlet structure, to disperse the flow, sealed concrete chambers to house the pump, a separate filter system to deal with the sand and a new power source and meter installed by Top Energy.

A more significant rain event will cause a small amount of flooding. The design of the pump has to balance the long life and operating costs against capacity available. The water level will drop quickly as the rainfall eases.

To install a complete system including the pump, filters, outlet pipe and structure, sealed concrete chambers as housing and a power supply, we would estimate the initial cost to be $55,000. In addition there will be a $10,000 discharge consent allowance.

Pumps also have extra ongoing costs, such as power supply and regular specialist services, not to mention cleaning and likely blockages due to sand.

The new system is estimated to cost $8,000 a year for regular maintenance and the pump itself will need to be replaced every 3 years at a cost of approximately $5,000.

Pros: The pump will remediate regular rain events with limited surface water collecting on the street.

Cons: The pump system is the most expensive option in the long term, with an initial cost of $55,000 of unbudgeted expenditure and then high regular maintenance and renewal costs. Given the location, the pump will be vulnerable to sand blockages and has a high risk of blocking during a storm. The pump also requires power and other additional features which the other 3 options do not. There will also be need for a discharge consent to the beach which will require additional time and funding.

Option 4 Overhaul the current drainage system on Kaka Street. This would include a new pipeline, which will replace the current soakage pits and take flood water from the low point of the street and discharge it into the sea.

This option would only be practicable if there is a suitable private easement available so the new pipeline can be put across private property as a more direct route to the sea.


Alternatively, FNDC could install the pipe alongside the road and have it discharge near the beach access. As mentioned earlier, a hill in between the low point and the beach was large/long enough to add a substantial cost, this would also incur reinstatement costs for the road and footpath. The preferred pipe location avoids these additional costs.

This is the only option which will alleviate the flooding for regular rain events except during very high tides/sea levels.

However this is the also most expensive option of the 4 as it is estimated to have an initial cost of $150,000 along with a $10,000 discharge consent allowance. In addition it would have high regular maintenance costs in range of $5,000 per year.

Due to the funding required, if selected, this option should be prioritised, alongside other projects as part of the Long Term Plan 2018/28 development.

Pros: The pipeline will alleviate flooding from regular rain events whilst having low ongoing costs. This will also greatly reduce flooding due to heavy rain events.

Cons: This has the highest initial cost of all 4 options, however there are relatively low ongoing maintenance costs when compared to Option 3 (Pump). Very high tides/sea levels will affect the pipeline, preventing it from discharging. There will also be need for a discharge consent to the beach which will require additional time and funding.

3) Financial implications and budgetary provision The following costs are estimated expenditure for the suggested options above. Options 2, 3, and 4 all require unbudgeted expenditure for both capital work and ongoing maintenance.

Cost Estimates for each option are as follows: Option 1 - $1,000 yearly for maintenance

Option 2 - $50,000 initial cost + $2,500 yearly for maintenance

Option 3 - $55,000 initial cost + $5,000 every 3 years for replacement + $8,000 yearly for maintenance + $10,000 discharge consent allowance

Option 4 - $150,000 initial cost + $5,000 yearly for maintenance + $10,000 discharge consent allowance

4) Reason for the recommendation The reason for the above recommendation is that Option 2 (New Soakage Pits) will not resolve the issue. Option 3 has unacceptable ongoing maintenance and renewal costs.

As part of the recommendation, Option 4 (Pipe) should still be considered as part of the Long Term Plan 2018/28 development.



Attachment 1: Community Petition titled “Remove the lake on Kaka Street, Ahipara” - Document number A1887582

Attachment 2: GPS Heights Map of Kaka Street - Document number A1887583

Attachment 3: Accumulative Cost Comparison Graph - Document number A1887584





b) Assess the options in terms of their advantages and disadvantages; and

c) If any of the options identified under paragraph (a) involves a significant decision in relation to land or a body of water, take into account the relationship of Māori and their culture and traditions with their ancestral land, water sites, waahi tapu, valued flora and fauna and other taonga.



No budget allocated in the current LTP. As expressed in the petition attached, the matter is important to a number of Kaka Street residents.


For Option 3 (Pump) and Option 4 (Pipe) a discharge consent will be required. During the consent process the Ninety Mile Beach Board will also need to be consulted.


Depending on the recommendation the community board puts forward, this will affect only the land owners in question.


No.


Community relevance. Community Board members have been involved. As expressed in the petition attached, the matter is important to a number of Kaka Street residents.



No current budgeting provision.

Chief Financial Officer review. This report has not been reviewed by the CFO.


$-

$50,000.00

$100,000.00

$150,000.00

$200,000.00

$250,000.00

$300,000.00

$350,000.00

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

Acc

um

ula

tive

Co

st (

$)

Time (Years after Installation)

Accumulative Cost over Time Comparisson

Option 1 (Existing)

Option 2 (New Pits)

Option 3 (Pump)

Option 4 (Pipe)

page 1 of 1


Item: 9.2 MEETING: COUNCIL - 10 AUGUST 2017 Name of item: OMANAIA-RAWENE WATER TREATMENT PLANT

PROJECT Author: Ruben Wylie - Infrastructure Planning Manager



Executive Summary The Omanaia and Rawene water treatment plant project involves building a new water treatment plant in Omanaia to service the communities of Omanaia and Rawene. The project is provided for in the 2015-2025 Long Term Plan. Detailed design for the project has been completed and Council is very close to obtaining long term resource consents for the activity. However, the previous Council resolutions regarding final delivery of this project were not clear and it has been concluded by staff that approval should be obtained from Council before construction is commenced.

This report was submitted to the Operations Committee at their meeting of 20 July 2017. The Committee makes the following recommendation to Council.

Recommendation: THAT, subject to the procurement of the project going before Council for approval in accordance with Council’s procurement policy, the delivery of the capital work associated with the Rawene and Omanaia water treatment plant project is approved.

1) Background 1.1) Introduction The Omanaia and Rawene water treatment plant project involves building a new water treatment plant in Omanaia to service the communities of Omanaia and Rawene. The project is provided for in the 2015-2025 Long Term Plan (LTP) and Council has sufficient budget allocated to deliver the project. Moreover, after the annual plan deliberations, Council was awarded a Ministry of Health (MOH) subsidy for the project equivalent to $1.8M. That subsidy was not taken into account for budgeting purposes and so the actual impact of the project on rates is significantly less than what was set out in the LTP. However, the most recent Council decision on the subject was set out at its 10 August 2015 meeting as follows:

“…THAT the construction of a new water treatment plant and raw water flow balancing for Omanaia/Rawene proceeds with the obtaining of a long term water take consent and undertaking detailed design”

The above resolution is not clear about whether or not Council have approval for the full project to be delivered. Now that the detailed design for the plant is complete, and there is certainty around the resource consent process, staff now consider that it is necessary to bring the matter to Council for a final decision in respect of the delivery of the capital works associated with the project. It should be noted the procurement of the capital work associated with the project still requires approval in accordance with Council’s procurement policy.


1.2) Current Situation The Rawene water supply was established in the late 1950s. Raw water is abstracted from the Petaka Stream, which is located within the rohe of Ngati Kaharau and Ngati Hau (Nga hapu o Omanaia ki Hokianga). A 13km long water pipe transfers the raw water from the Petaka Stream to the existing Rawene water treatment plant. This raw water pipe also acts as the water supply for many houses in the Omanaia area (around 44 households). The raw water supplied to the Omanaia community is untreated and so is not suitable for potable use. Despite this, those households in Omanaia that are connected to the scheme pay the same capital connected water rate that the Rawene community pays. The capital connected rate pays for the infrastructure and the associated loans. This means Omanaia have been equally contributing to the cost of the Rawene water treatment plant, reservoir and the extensive urban reticulation for some time now, but without receiving any benefit. Because the community of Omanaia is connected to a public water supply, FNDC is required (under the Health Act 1956) to provide a safe supply of drinking-water, which complies with the New Zealand Drinking-Water Standards. The current supply is in breach of the Health Act 1956 and presents a risk to the health and wellbeing of the Omanaia community. This risk has been partially mitigated through the issuing of a permanent boil water notice. However during consultation with the Omanaia community, staff have been advised that people regularly become sick through drinking non-potable water.

1.3) Subsidy Applications FNDC has been meeting with the Omanaia community since 2006 to consider options for providing the community with potable water. FNDC was successful in its application for Ministry of Health (MoH) subsidy in 2009. This application proposed a new treatment plant on near the Petaka water source in Omanaia. The subsidy agreement was for 59% of the cost not exceeding $2.09M in funding. Land required for the project was purchased in 2011. Scheme based rating came into effect in the 2012 Long Term Plan and the affordability of the project was questioned. As a result the project was stopped and the subsidy was forfeited. Later, in 2014, FNDC sought a further subsidy application from the Ministry of Health. That application proposed a dual water supply for Omanaia. A small treatment plant would provide potable water to houses in addition to the existing raw water supply for non-potable uses. The subsidy application was unsuccessful because the cost per household was too high and a relatively low proportion of households would benefit from the scheme. Finally, in 2015, FNDC lodged a third subsidy application. That application sought a subsidy for what was in effect the same proposal that was granted a subsidy in 2009. The subsidy application was successful. The current subsidy agreement is for 85% of the cost, with MoH contribution to not exceeding $1.87M.

1.4) 2015-2025 Long Term Plan As part of the 2015-2025 Long Term Plan (LTP), Council proposed via its consultation document to construct a new water treatment plant at Omanaia. The purpose of the project was to provide both Omanaia and Rawene with potable water. Following the consultation process, Council decided to retain the funding necessary to deliver the project. It should be noted that the rates impact that was consulted on


in the LTP was developed in the absence of the 85% subsidy granted by the Ministry of Health. This was because the subsidy application was yet to be determined at the time of the LTP deliberations. The LTP estimated the capital rates for the water scheme would increase to $1,200 per annum (this is additional to the current rates). Prior to the project commencing (i.e. in the 2016/17 rating year), the capital rate for Rawene water scheme was $274 per SUIP. Staff have since reviwed the rating model and concluded that the actual rating impact will be significantly less than the $1,200 per annum increase that was estimated in the LTP. This is because the LTP estimated assumed full costs of $2.2M would be paid for by FNDC (i.e. loan funded). The actual contribution is now estimated to be $330,000, with the remainder payed for by the subsidy. This means the loan interest for the asset will be significantly lower than initially estimated. Moreover, the project was not treated as a renewal, meaning renewal funding that was budgeted for the current plant (which is funded through deprecation) was not considered in the LTP estimate. Approximately $156,000 renewal funding is available for the current water treatment plant. The effect of all of the above is that the total capital water rate will be closer to $700 per annum.

1.5) Options Considered In order to determine the most appropriate method of providing treated water to the communities of Rawene and Omanaia, FNDC, along with external technical experts, considered a selection of alternative water sources and treatment plant options. These options are summarised a table attached to this report (Attachment 1) In summary, the option to build a new treatment plant at Omanaia, to serve both Omanaia and Rawene, was considered most suitable option as it would have the lowest long term costs with a single plant to be operated, reduced pipe network to maintain, and reduced pumping requirements. The treatment process itself is a conventional coagulation and filtration plant like the one at Rawene. This plant is expected to have the greatest reliability in rain events or slips when the raw water is dirty. The plant is relatively simple to operate and the design is common; comprising “off the shelf” components easy to source and fix.

1.6) Consultation The cancelation of the 2009 proposal to construct a water treatment plant was not well received by the Omanaia community, who still feel this action by Council was treating them like second class citizens. Despite this, significant consultation has been undertaken with Omanaia hapu as part of the resource consent application process. The resource consent application and project in general, has been endorsed by hapu representatives. Two recent public meetings have also been held between staff and the Rawene community. These meetings were facilitated by the Rawene Area Residents Association and were held on 11 May 2017 and 8 June 2017. Generally speaking, it can be said that the attendees accepted that the Omanaia community should have access to potable water. However, concerns were raised by a number of the attendees with regard to the impact of the project on their rates. It was explained in detail at the second meeting that the rates impact of would be significantly less than what was consulted on through the LTP. Staff have committed to continue to work with the ratepayers association. A further meeting is to be held on 13 July 2017.


1.7) Project update Resource Consent and Notice of Requirement A resource consent application to renew the existing water take and for a new consent to discharge WTP supernatant to a nearby stream, was lodged with NRC in April 2017. Department of Conservation, Te Runanga o Te Rarawa, and Omanaia Hapu are supportive of the project and associated resource consent applications. NRC has confirmed that FNDC can continue to take water from the Petaka Stream under the current resource consent until the new resource consent application has been determined. NRC has also advised that it intends to process the resource consent applications on a non-notified basis. With that in mind, it is expected resource consent for the activities associated with new water treatment will be issued in August 2017 with broadly the same condition as the current resource consent. Project Design Consultant CH2MBeca has completed the design and draft tender documents. There has been a significant delay in the completion of the design due to unforeseen ground conditions revealed by a detailed ground investigation. This has resulted in re-designing the layout of the plant and also having to incorporate some land drainage. This has also had a knock-on effect on the preparation of tender documents. The tender documents are in the process of being reviewed by staff. Following the review, it is anticipated the construction tender will be issued to the open market following Council’s August 2017 meeting. Note that Procurement Board approval for the tender will be sought prior to Council’s August meeting. Any approval to issue the tender will be subject to the Council resolution on this report. The reason for seeking approval at roughly the same time is to limit further delays with the project should Council give approval for the project to proceed in accordance with the recommendation put forward in this report. Site access The Council owned bridge over the Ohaupea Creek is the only access to the Ayrton’s Farm, the existing water intake and the proposed new WTP site. An inspection last year revealed it was not able to carry construction traffic, nor livestock trucks, for the farm. A replacement bridge has been constructed and is now operational.

2) Discussion and options This report is seeking a decision in respect of whether or not to progress with the capital works associated with the project. As has been identified in earlier sections of this report, significant work has been undertaken over the years to eventually arrive at the option to build a new treatment plant at Omanaia; and that option was identified as the preferred option by Council at the conclusion of the most recent LTP process. In effect, a decision is now required in respect of whether or not to proceed with the project. With that in mind, only two options have been considered. These are set out below. Option 1: approve the capital work associated with the project (preferred option) This option involves approving the capital work associated with the construction of a water treatment plant at Omanaia with a 85% subsidy from the Ministry of Health and is budgeted for in the 2015-25 Long Term Plan. The procurement of the work would still require approval in accordance with the FNDC procurement policy.


Advantages

1. This option would result in the Omanaia community being provided with potable water. Once operational, the risk of people getting sick from water produced from the water supply scheme will be within levels considered acceptable under the New Zealand Drinking Water Standards.

2. $1.8M of the capital costs are subsidised with a MOH subsidy. This option represents the most cost effective means of providing potable water to the Omanaia community. It is also the last opportunity for FNDC to access subsidy funding for the project, with the subsidy scheme no longer available.

3. This option is consistent with what has been budgeted for in the LTP and,

with the subsidy, the actual capital costs FNDC will be contributing towards the project will be substantially less than what was estimated in the LTP.

4. The Omanaia community has contributed towards the capital rates for the scheme, including the treatment plant, since it was constructed. However, the community has not benefited from the treatment plant. This represents a significant disparity between the Omanaia community and the Rawene community. This option will address that disparity.

5. This option includes raw water storage. That storage will have the effect decreasing the non-compliance risk FNDC will be exposed to during dry weather. That will be achieve by enabling peak demand to be balanced throughout the day, reducing the instantaneous rate of take and therefore the impact of the activity on downstream flow rates.

Disadvantages

1. This option will result in a rates increase for all those people who have the ability to connect to the water supply scheme. The Rawene and Omanaia communities are ranked at deprivation 10 communities on the New Zealand Deprivation Index1. Any projects that are subject to Council’s current targeted rating model need to be considered alongside the affordability of the increase in rates. Although the project is likely to have a much lower rating impact than originally estimated (and consulted though the LTP), the final rating impact may still be unaffordable under the current rating model.

2. The existing Rawene treatment plant has an estimated remaining life of 10-20

years (depending on the outcome of ground stability issues on the site). This project will result in that plant becoming redundant.

Option 2: do not approve the capital work associated with the project This option involves declining to approve the capital work associated with the Omanaia and Rawene Water Treatment Plan Project. In effect, this option would result in the status quo, with the Omanaia community continuing to receive untreated water

1 The New Zealand Deprivation index is a scale that ranges from 1 to 10, where 1 represents the areas with the least deprived scores and 10 the areas with the most deprived scores.


Advantages 1. This option would result in a reduced rates impact on the community by

continuing to use the existing water treatment plant for the next 10 to 20 years.

Disadvantages

1. This option would mean the Omanaia community continues to be exposed to a public health risk. FNDC is required (under the Health Act 1956) to provide a safe supply of drinking-water, which complies with the New Zealand Drinking-Water Standards. The current supply is in breach of the Health Act 1956 and presents a risk to the health and wellbeing of the Omanaia Community. Far North District Council staff are aware, anecdotally, that Omanaia residents connected to the water supply getting sick. This is a transgression and has risk implications similar to those that have come to light within the Havelock North Drinking Water Enquiry.

2. This option would result in a lost opportunity to receive significant subsidy funding for the new treatment plant.

3. Whilst this option would result in an initial reduced rates impact (compared to what is set out in the LTP), the rates of the Omanaia community appear to have been incorrectly charged because it is not reasonable to charge to full capital rates given that community does not benefit from the treatment plant. A reasonable outcome from this option would be that the capital rates for Omanaia community are reduced to reflect the fact that they do not benefit from the treatment plant. This will result in rates for the Rawene community increasing to make up the shortfall of no longer having the Omanaia community contribution (equivalent to around 16% of connections the full capital rate). It is also arguable that FNDC would be liable to refund that community up to five years’ worth of the capital rates given he community has been contributing towards the depreciation of an asset that they do will not benefit from.

4. Moreover, the Rawene water treatment plant will require replacement in the next 10 to 20 years due to significant ground instability issue at the current site. The community will therefore be exposed to the costs of a new water treatment plant within 10 to 20 years. It is reasonable to assume there will be no subsidy for that project. Thus, this option will be forgoing a new treatment plant that will require an FNDC contribution of around $330,000 now; for a new treatment plant in 10 to 20 years that will require and FNDC contribution at least $2.2M (not taking into account inflation).

3) Financial implications and budgetary provision Option 1 – approve the capital works associated with the project A breakdown of expenditure, based on subsidy milestones, is provided in Table 1 below. It should be noted that the project will be delivered for substantially less than what was set out in the LTP. This is because the LTP rating impact did not take into account the subsidy $1.8M; nor did it consider the renewal funding available for the current treatment plant (approximately $156,000). These two factors will mean the rates increase will be substantially less than set out in the LTP and the total water capital rates are now estimated to be around $700 per annum once the project is delivered.


Table 1 Subsidy Milestones. It should be noted that the dates for the milestones may be subject to change to reflect the contractor’s construction programme.

Milestone Revised

completion date

Subsidy FNDC TOTAL

Detailed Design inc. tendering & contractor appointment

end October ‘17 $187,000 $33,000 $220,000

Pipework April‘18 $280,500 $49,500 $330,000

Site Development April ‘18 $187,000 $33,000 $220,000

Raw Water Storage April ‘18 $280,500 $49,500 $330,000

Treated Water Reservoir April ‘18 $280,500 $49,500 $330,000

Structures / Building April ‘18 $280,500 $49,500 $330,000

WTP commissioning & water main flushing May ‘18 $374,000 $66,000 $440,000

TOTAL $1,870,000 $330,000 $2,200,000

Option 2 – decline to approve the capital works associated with the project This option will result in a rates increase for Rawene customers due to the Omanaia community no longer contributing to the capital costs associated with the old water treatment plant. Moreover, it will result in the loss of a $1.8M central government contribution towards a new plant. Due to the land stability issues at the existing site, a new plant will be required in 10 to 20 years. Thus, this option will result in a lower rates increase in the short-term but a higher impact on the long-term due to the full capital costs of the replacement plant having to be met by ratepayers. 4) Reason for the recommendation The recommendation is to approve the capital work association with the Rawene and Omanaia water treatment plant project. First and foremost, Council has a legal obligation to supply the Omanaia community with potable water. That the community is not being provided with potable water is a transgression against the New Zealand Drinking Water Standards and therefore the Health Act 1957. That transgression needs to be considered against the preliminary findings of the Havelock North Drinking Water Enquiry, particularly given staff are aware of anecdotal evidence that people connected to the water scheme at Omanaia are getting sick. In addition to the above, the preferred option represents the most cost effective means of providing the Omanaia community with potable water. A decision to not deliver the project would mean any future projects to provide the community with potable water would be unsubsidised and would expose ratepayers to a much more significant rates increase. In light of the Ministry of Health subsidy no longer being available for any future projects, Option 1 represents the last opportunity for Council to provide potable water to the Omanaia community with a significant subsidy.



Attachment 1: Summary of options considered - Document number A1887589







decision in relation to land or a body of water, take into account the relationship of Maori and their culture and traditions with their ancestral land, water sites, waahi tapu, valued flora and fauna and other taonga



The provision of potable water to the Omanaia community is required by the Health Act 1957.


Staff have fully engaged with the Nga hapu o Omanaia ki Hokianga.


Omanaia residents want potable water.

Omanaia and Rawene residents have concerns about rate increases. Consultation with both communities is ongoing.


Option 1 is consistent with the 2015-2025 LTP and was fully consistent in in accordance with the Requirements of the Local Government Act 2002. Option 2 would be a departure from what is set out in the LTP and would carry with it a high degree of significance for the community of Omanaia.


The Community Board input has not been sought.



The budgetary provision for this project was included in the 2015-25 Long Term Plan. It was included at full cost therefore the implications for Council will be lower now that a subsidy application has been approved. The Chief Financial Officer has not reviewed this report.

Document number Page 1 of 2

Summary of options considered

Alternative water sources considered Reason(s) why this alternative was not considered suitable

The Waima River, located approximately 5km northeast of the Petaka Stream, within the Waima Valley.

The community of Omanaia did not feel comfortable using water from a neighbouring water source, located outside of their rohe. The community indicated a preference for access water from a source located within their rohe

The Whirinaki River, located approximately 6km west of the Petaka Stream, within the Waima Forest.

The communities of Whirinaki and Omanaia were not supportive of this option and it was also established that using the Whirinaki River as a supplementary supply would be more expensive than the Waima River, due to additional pipework required.

The Mangawhero Stream, located approximately 2km north, northeast of the Petaka Stream.

The community of Omanaia was not supportive of this option, and concerns were raised regarding the percentage of water that would potentially need to be extracted from the Mangawhero Stream, (up to 50% of a 1 in 50 year low flow), and the possible adverse effects on the stream, which would result from the water abstraction.

Groundwater options were briefly considered. There was significant uncertainty regarding the quantity and quality of ground water that may be available, hence this option was not progressed for this WPT site.

Desalination was briefly considered This was disregarded due to the comparatively high plant establishment costs.

Alternative water treatment plant options considered

Reason(s) why this alternative was not progressed

Pipe treated water from the existing Rawene WTP back to Omanaia

A new pump station and treated water pipe would be constructed to supply treated water to Omanaia. The new pipeline would be approximately 11.5km in length. Some boost pumping is expected to be required.

Build a new WTP at Omanaia to supply Omanaia, and retaining existing Rawene WTP. Water for the Omanaia WTP is sourced from the Petaka, and water for the Rawene WTP is sourced from the Whirinaki River;

The combined cost of new raw water intake and pipework with new water treatment works makes this option expensive. This option also requires operating two treatment plants which will increase the long term operational costs when compared with other options.

Build a new WTP at Omanaia to supply Omanaia and retain existing Rawene WTP. Both WTP source water from the Petaka Stream;

Estimated capital cost for a single community scheme built at Omanaia was $2,350,000. This option also requires operating two treatment plants which will increase the long term operational costs when compared with other options.

Build a new WTP at Jackson Road, to supply both Omanaia and Rawene. All raw water is sourced from the Whirinaki River.

The communities of Whirinaki and Omanaia were not supportive of this option.

Alternative treatment options considered Reason(s) why this alternative was not considered suitable

A1887589

kbarnes

Typewritten Text

Document number Page 2 of 2

Membrane filtration Higher level of chemicals in the backwash and higher volume of backwash in a rain event or slip when compared to a conventional clarification and filtration plant.

Cartridge Filtration The plant will be unable to produce treated water during heavy rain events or slips in the catchment. Dissolved organics are higher after cartridge filtration than conventional clarification and filtration. Dissolved organics produce carcinogenics when mixed with the chlorine disinfectant.

kbarnes

Typewritten Text

A1887589

kbarnes

Typewritten Text


Item: 10.1 MEETING: COUNCIL - 10 AUGUST 2017 Name of item: USE OF THE HUNDERTWASSER FUND Author: Leslie Trussler - Policy Advisor



Executive Summary The purpose of the report is to consider a request from the Hundertwasser Park Charitable Trust to control and manage its own collection and allocation of donations. The Trust Deed states identical aims to the Council’s Use of the Hundertwasser Fund Policy.

Control over operation and collection of donations at the Hundertwasser building by the Trust would make the administration of the funds more efficient. This would make the Use of the Hundertwasser Fund Policy redundant.

If the recommendation is adopted, the remaining funds of $20,422.86 held by Council could be transferred to the Trust.

Recommendation THAT Council approve the future operation and collection of donations at the Hundertwasser building to be transferred to the Hundertwasser Park Charitable Trust; AND THAT Council transfer remaining funds to the Trust; AND THAT Council revoke the current delegation to the Bay of Islands-Whangaroa Community Board to allocate the Hundertwasser Fund; AND THAT if operation and collection of donations are transferred to the Trust, Policy #5104 – Use of the Hundertwasser Fund be rescinded as a redundant policy.

1) Background Friedensreich Hundertwasser designed and built the public toilets on Gillies Street, Kawakawa in 1999. The Hundertwasser Fund was established as a result of the creation of the Kawakawa Hundertwasser toilets, and a donation box was installed at the Hundertwasser building. At the time, the Kawakawa Community Board resolved to use the donations for the future enhancement of the Hundertwasser project.

At its meeting of 4th November 2002 the Kawakawa Community Board received a verbal request from the Kawakawa Community Trust to take over the management of donations made at the Hundertwasser building. The Board resolved as follows:

THAT the Kawakawa Community Board reiterates its position that the donation box funds collected at the Hundertwasser building will be allocated at the Board’s discretion.

In 2004, it became apparent that the Kawakawa Community Board area would be amalgamated into the new Eastern Community Board. On 2 August 2004, the Board moved to protect the Hundertwasser fund for its area and resolved:

THAT the Kawakawa Community Board requests the Community Services Manager to adopt Policy #5104 – Use of Hundertwasser Fund, subject to the responsibility for allocation for funds being allocated to:


• One member of the Eastern Community Board • One Member of the Bay of Islands College Board of Trustees • One member of the Kawakawa community as nominated by the Eastern

Community Board.

In 2010, the Eastern Board received correspondence from the Kawakawa Hundertwasser Park Charitable Trust requesting that (a) the Trust take over the daily operation and collection of the donations fund box situated at the Hundertwasser building and (b) that Council release funds of $18,126.07 from the Hundertwasser donation account to the Trust.

In response to this request, on 18 August 2010, The Eastern Board confirmed “its intention to continue to distribute funds in the Hundertwasser Donation Account at its discretion and in accordance with the goals, policy statement and procedures set out in Policy #5104 – Use of the Hundertwasser Fund.”

Donations received from the general public are collected by Kawakawa Service Centre staff and are separately identified in the Bay of Islands-Whangaroa Community Board financial reports.

Currently, the Trust must apply to the Board for funding towards particular projects, and the Board evaluates the projects and their compliance with Policy #5104 – Use of the Hundertwasser Fund before approving any funding.

On 3 July 2017, the Bay of Islands-Whangaroa Community Board resolved:

THAT the Board recommend:

THAT Council approve the future operation and collection of donations at the Hundertwasser building to be transferred to the Hundertwasser Park Charitable Trust;

THAT Council transfer remaining funds to the Trust;

THAT Council revoke the current delegation to the Bay of Islands-Whangaroa Community Board to allocate the Hundertwasser Fund;

AND THAT, if operation and collection of donations are transferred to the Trust, Policy #5104 – Use of the Hundertwasser Fund be rescinded as a redundant policy.

2) Discussion and options Correspondence has been received from the Kawakawa Hundertwasser Park Charitable Trust requesting that the Trust take over the collection and allocation of the donations from the fund box situated at the Hundertwasser building.

The public donations collected in Kawakawa are intended for the Hundertwasser Park Charitable Trust. They are collected by Council and allocated back to the Trust by the Board as the Trust applies for funding for various community projects.

Bay of Islands-Whangaroa Community Board has been supporting the use of the Hundertwasser Fund to advance Hundertwasser’s ideals of art, architecture and the environment, and to facilitate the Kawakawa community’s support for these ideals.

These same ideals are specified in the Hundertwasser Park Charitable Trust’s Charitable Purpose (Attachment 2).


Option 1 Approve transfer of the operation and collection of donations to the Trust, and, transfer remaining funds.

This means that the Trust would take over the operation and collection of donations at the Hundertwasser Building. The Trust would no longer need to go through the Community Board to have funds released. The Trust would be able to collect its own funds and allocate them toward projects that are consistent with its Charitable Purpose as listed in its Charitable Trust Deed and in accordance with the Trustees’ Specific Powers in Schedule A of the Deed (Attachment 2).

In addition, the remaining funds with Council could be transferred to the Trust. The uncommitted balance at 30 April 2017 was $20,422.86

Under this option Policy #5104 – Use of the Hundertwasser Fund would be rendered redundant, as the policies within would refer to practices no longer undertaken or regulated by Council. Council would also revoke the current delegations to the Bay of Islands-Whangaroa Community Board to allocate the Hundertwasser Fund.

This option would establish a more efficient process as staff and the Bay of Islands-Whangaroa Community Board would no longer be responsible for the administration of the fund.

Option 2 Status quo This option means that Council will continue to be responsible for collection and allocation of the Fund. This will continue to require administrative work by Council staff as well as regular reporting to the Bay of Island-Whangaroa Community Board as requests for funding are received. This option would retain more control for the Bay of Islands-Whangaroa Community Board.

Option 1 is the preferred option recommended by staff and the Bay of Islands-Whangaroa Communtiy Board to allow the Hundertwasser Park Charitable Trust autonomy in determining how their donations are allocated to the community in alignment with Friedensreich Hundertwasser’s philosophies and love for the arts, architecture, environment and conservation in the community, with special recognition being given to supporting the younger generation.

3) Financial implications and budgetary provision There are no direct financial implications arising from this report. If approved, Option 1 will eliminate the cost of staff time spent administering the Fund and preparing reports for the Board regarding the Fund. The balance of the fund would be transferred to the Trust if all of Option 1 were adopted.

4) Reason for the recommendation Option 1 is recommended to allow the Trust to collect its own funds and allocate them toward the projects that are consistent with its Charitable Purpose and in accordance with the Trustees’ Specific Powers as listed in its Charitable Trust Deed.

Manager: Kathryn Ross – General Manager Strategic Planning and Policy

Attachment 1: Request from Hundertwasser Park Charitable Trust - Document number A1877039

Attachment 2: Charitable Trust Deed - Document number A1877040










Policy 5104 – Use of the Hundertwasser Fund.


None identified.


The recommendation is in response to a request from Kawakawa Hundertwasser Park Charitable Trust.


The decision is of low significance.


The Bay of Islands-Whangaroa Community Board has been consulted and this report presents their recommendation to Council.



The balance of the fund would be transferred to the Trust.



Item: 11.1 MEETING: COUNCIL - 10 AUGUST 2017 Name of item: AMENDMENT TO STANDING ORDERS FOR ATTENDANCE

AT MEETINGS BY AUDIO OR AUDIO-VISUAL LINK Author: Caroline Wilson - Manager District Administration



Executive Summary This report outlines the proposed changes to Standing Orders to ensure the effectiveness of meetings. This is as a result of issues with attaining quorum and general effectiveness of meetings since the new Standing Orders were adopted.

It highlights the statutory requirements for allowing the practice of linking in to meetings. This report is the result of a workshop and formal meeting of the Governance Committee.

Recommendation THAT Council adopt the proposed changes to three clauses within Section 12 of Standing Orders, being, in summary: SO12.7. Attendance via audio or audio-visual link will be by exception; SO12.11. Three accepted conditions where permission will be granted; SO12.12. Clarification of the formal process to request to attend via audio or audio-visual link and availability of resources.

1) Background

New Standing Orders were adopted by Council on 15 December 2016. A new provision within the adopted Standing Orders was the right to attend by audio or audio-visual link (link) and the conditions for attending by link (s 12.11 of Standing Orders). Conditions for attending by link include making a formal request to the Chairperson of the relevant meeting and examples of situations where attendance by link can be approved. These are:

• Where the member is at a place that makes their physical presence at the meeting impracticable or impossible

• Where a member is unwell and • Where a member is unable to attend due to an emergency.

The intent of the legislation is to provide a mechanism by which, in extraordinary circumstances, the decision-making process can still occur.

Under the LGA (Schedule 7, part 25A, cl. 4) members who are not physically present at the meeting are not counted as present for the purposes of quorum. They are still, however, counted as present for the purposes of voting. If a Chair is attending by link then chairing duties will be undertaken by the deputy chair or a member who is physically present.

Most meetings with members linking in have attained quorum however, the quorum issues tend to become apparent on the day of the meeting, as members start to tender their late apologies. In one instance, a member who had tendered their


apologies earlier due to an injury was required to come to the meeting to ensure quorum was met.

2) Discussion and Options There are a number of existing issues with the suitability of technology to facilitate audio or audio-visual link, including the layout of Chambers itself. How the technology replacement will support effective attendance, including document dissemination to members linking into the meeting, is something that will need to be addressed as part of the technology replacement.

The Governance Committee, when they met on the 7th June 2017, were unanimous in their view that attendance via audio and audio-visual link should be by exception, rather than the rule.

Advantages of audio or audio-visual link Time spent travelling is likely to be one of the key factors in the desire of members to attend by link, particularly for shorter meetings (meetings of one to two hours duration). The cost to attend is reduced in relation to mileage and travel time claims.

Participation in decision-making processes – a member in attendance by link is more advantageous than a member tendering apologies and not participating in the decisions of Council or Committees.

Disadvantages of audio or audio-visual link For Committees quorum under statute is a minimum of 2 members physically present. The three smaller Committees could find themselves easily without a quorum if more than one member links in or members are absent for any reason (such as prior commitments or illness). There are knock-on effects with decision-making and legislative compliance when meetings are cancelled at short notice.

There is the cost of public perception of the elected member engagement in the democratic process and key communication nuances being lost when members are remote. The ability for the public to follow the debate may be compromised.

The ability to build a team culture and strength is lost when members are not physically present.

If the technology fails during the meeting, members are no longer deemed to be attending the meeting and cannot participate in decision-making.

Options Options were presented to the Governance Committee for consideration but the Committee agreed that the best course of action was to amend Standing Orders to clarify the conditions where attendance by link may be granted. Therefore, there are only two options presented to Council for consideration but the other options are included in this report for transparency purposes.


Option 1 - Formalise the current conditions and FNDC specific rules

The relevant sections of Standing Orders with proposed amendments are attached. For the sake of clarity, the changes to existing wording are in italics below:

Amend SO12.7 - Attendance by audio or audio-visual link

“Provided the conditions in these standing orders are met, members of the local authority or its Committees may attend meetings by means of electronic link, unless they have been lawfully excluded. In respect of the Far North District Council, permission will be granted as an exception, rather than as a rule. Only the conditions set out in SO12.11 will be acceptable as a reason whereby a member may be granted permission to attend by audio or audio-visual link.”

Amend SO12.11 - Conditions for attending by audio or audio-visual link

“The Chairperson may give approval for a member to attend meetings by electronic link, either generally or for a specific meeting. The only situations where approval may be granted are:

a) Where the member is at a place that makes their physical presence at the meeting impracticable or impossible; or

b) Where a member is unwell; or c) Where a member is unable to attend due to an emergency.”

Amend SO12.12 - Request to attend by audio or audio-visual link

“A member will give the Chairperson and the Chief Executive Officer at least 2 working days’ notice when they want to attend a meeting by audio or audio-visual link. Should, due to illness or an emergency, this not be possible the member may give less notice. Notice must be in writing.

Audio or audio-visual linking will only be made available from Council’s three main offices, being Kaikohe HQ, the John Butler Centre or Te Ahu.

Where such as request is made and the technology and/or facilities are available, the chief executive must take reasonable steps to enable the member to attend by audio or audio-visual link. However, the council has no obligation to make the technology and/or facilities for an audio or audio-visual link available. In the event that the facilities and/or the technology are not available, the member must either attend the meeting in person, or tender their apologies.

If the member’s request cannot be accommodated, or there is a technological issue with the link, this will not invalidate any acts or proceedings of the local authority or its Committees.”

Advantage of this approach is that it aligns to the intent of the existing Standing Orders and provides a fair framework for all members.

It ensures the effect on quorum is minimised as the conditions are clear and only for extraordinary circumstances.

There are no perceived disadvantages of this approach.

This is the preferred option.

Option 2 - Status Quo There is an option to retain Standing Orders as currently written.

The advantage of this approach is that there is no need to amend Standing Orders.

The disadvantage of this approach is that, as currently written, there is a lack of clarity on acceptable circumstances for granting permission.


Recommendation is to adopt Option 1 as the preferred option as it aligns to current Standing Orders and provides a fair framework for all members.

Additional options proposed but not considered Attendance based on meeting type - addition of a new condition

Any member, having fulfilled the requirements of Standing Orders and subject to the appropriate technology and resources being available, is allowed to link into a specific type of meeting or suite of meetings (i.e. Council and workshops but not Committees). This condition would make the other conditions redundant for specified meetings but still applicable to other meetings (i.e. Committees).

Advantage of this approach is that it is clear where acceptance will be granted.

Disadvantages of this approach are the effect on quorum, the effectiveness of the meeting proceedings and building the team culture (particularly within the smaller Committees).

Attendance based on distance - addition of a new condition

Any member who meets the distance criteria agreed by Council is allowed to attend any meeting (or specified meetings) via link. They would have to fulfill the requirements of Standing Orders and would be subject to the appropriate technology and resources being available. This condition would make the other conditions redundant and be only available to members who meet the distance criteria.

Advantages of this approach is that members who live a specified distance from Kaikohe would be able to link in and save travel and time costs – thus increasing the effective use of their time.

The disadvantage of this approach is that with this new condition, and factoring in the geographic distances from Kaikohe, a number of members may choose to attend in this manner. This, in turn, could affect quorum, the effectiveness of the meeting proceedings and building the team culture. It could also be perceived as preferential treatment at the detriment of members who do not meet the criteria and are required travel to meetings.

3) Financial implications and budgetary provision The technology upgrade has been budgeted for and is awaiting a project manager to commence the work.

There are some savings associated with members not claiming mileage.

4) Reason for the recommendation Ensure effective meetings where the conditions by which attendance via audio or audio-visual link are clear, fair to all members and meet the requirements of quorum.

Manager: Samantha Edmonds - General Manager Corporate Services Group

Attachment 1: Proposed Standing Orders FNDC - Document number A1876448






decision in relation to land or a body of water, take into account the relationship of Māori and their culture and traditions with their ancestral land, water sites, waahi tapu, valued flora and fauna and other taonga



Not applicable.


Not applicable.


Not applicable.


Not applicable.


Not applicable.


Chief Financial Officer review

There are no financial implications or need for budgetary provision.


In addition a council or community board may delegate the power to grant a leave of absence to the Chairperson in order to protect a member’s privacy. The Chairperson will advise all members of the council or community board whenever a member has been granted leave of absence under delegated authority. Meeting minutes will record that a member has leave of absence as an apology for that meeting.

12.4 Apologies

A member who does not have leave of absence may tender an apology should they be absent from all or part of a meeting. The Chairperson must invite apologies at the beginning of each meeting, including apologies for lateness and early departure. The meeting may accept or decline any apologies.

For clarification, the acceptance of a member’s apology constitutes a grant of ‘leave of absence’ for that meeting.

12.5 Recording apologies

The minutes will record any apologies tendered before or during the meeting, including whether they were accepted or declined and the time of arrival and departure of all members.

12.6 Absent without leave

Where a member is absent from the council or community board for four consecutive meetings without leave of absence (not including extraordinary meetings) then the office held by the member will become vacant. A vacancy created in this way is treated as an extraordinary vacancy.

cl. 5 (d) Schedule 7, LGA 2002.

12.7 Right to attend by audio or audio visual link

Provided the conditions in these standing orders are met, members of the local authority or its Committees may attend meetings by means of electronic link, unless they have been lawfully excluded. In respect of the Far North District Council, permission will be granted as an exception, rather than as a rule. Only the conditions set out in SO12.11 will be acceptable as a reason whereby a member may be granted permission to attend by audio or audio-visual link.

12.8 Member’s status: quorum

Members who attend meetings by electronic link will not be counted as present for the purposes of a quorum.

12.9 Member’s status: voting

Where a meeting has a quorum, determined by the number physically present, the members attending by electronic link can vote on any matters raised at the meeting.


12.10 Chairperson’s duties

Where the technology is available and a member is attending a meeting by audio or audio visual link, the Chairperson must ensure that:

(a) the technology for the link is available and of suitable quality;

(b) procedures for using the technology in the meeting will ensure that:

i. everyone participating in the meeting can hear each other;

ii. the member’s attendance by audio or audio visual link does not reduce their accountability or accessibility of that person in relation to the meeting;

iii. the requirements of Part 7 of LGOIMA are met; and

iv. the requirements in these standing orders are met.

If the Chairperson is attending by audio or audio visual link then chairing duties will be undertaken by the deputy chair or a member who is physically present.

cl. 25A (3) schedule 7, LGA 2002.

12.11 Conditions for attending by audio or audio visual link

The Chairperson may give approval for a member to attend meetings by electronic link, either generally or for a specific meeting. The only situations where approval may be granted are:

(a) where the member is at a place that makes their physical presence at the meeting impracticable or impossible;

(b) where a member is unwell; and

(c) where a member is unable to attend due to an emergency.

12.12 Request to attend by audio or audio visual link

A member will give the Chairperson and the Chief Executive Officer at least 2 working days’ notice when they want to attend a meeting by audio or audio-visual link. Should, due to illness or an emergency, this not be possible the member may give less notice. Notice must be in writing.

Audio or audio-visual linking will only be made available from Council’s three main offices, being Kaikohe HQ, the John Butler Centre or Te Ahu.

Where such as request is made and the technology and/or facilities are available, the chief executive must take reasonable steps to enable the member to attend by audio or audio-visual link. However, the council has no obligation to make the technology and/or facilities for an audio or audio-visual link available. In the event that the facilities and/or the technology are not available, the member must either attend the meeting in person, or tender their apologies.


If the member’s request cannot be accommodated, or there is a technological issue with the link, this will not invalidate any acts or proceedings of the local authority or its Committees.

12.13 Chairperson may terminate link

The Chairperson may direct that an electronic link should be terminated where:

(a) use of the link is increasing, or may unreasonably increase, the length of the meeting;

(b) the behaviour of the members using the link warrants termination, including the style, degree and extent of interaction between members;

(c) it is distracting to the members who are physically present at the meeting; and

(d) the quality of the link is no longer suitable.

12.14 Giving or showing a document

A person attending a meeting by audio or audio visual link may give or show a document by:

(a) transmitting it electronically;

(b) using the audio visual link; or

(c) any other manner that the Chairperson thinks fit.

cl. 25(A) (6) schedule 7, LGA 2002.

12.15 Link failure

Where an audio or audio visual link fails, or there are other technological issues that prevent a member who is attending by link from participating in a meeting, that member must be deemed to be no longer attending the meeting.

12.16 Confidentiality

A member who is attending a meeting by audio or audio visual link must ensure that the meeting’s proceedings remain confidential during any times that the public are excluded. At such times, the Chairperson may require the member to confirm that no unauthorised people are able to view or hear the proceedings.

13. Chairperson’s role in meetings

The Mayor or Chairperson of the council or community board must preside at meetings of the council or board unless they vacate the chair for a part or all of a meeting. If the Chairperson is absent from a meeting or vacates the chair, the deputy Mayor/chair must act as Chairperson. If the deputy Mayor/chair is also absent the local authority members who are present must elect a member to be Chairperson at that meeting. This person may exercise the meeting responsibilities, duties and powers



Item: 11.2 MEETING: COUNCIL - 10 AUGUST 2017 Name of item: APPOINTMENT OF COMMUNITY BOARD CHAIRS TO

STRATEGY COMMITTEE Author: Kate Barnes - Team Leader Governance Support



Executive Summary Council is asked to appoint the Community Board chairpersons to the Strategy Committee, and remove their appointment to the Governance Committee.

Recommendation THAT Council appoint the Chairperson of the Te Hiku Community Board; the Chairperson of the Bay of Islands-Whangaroa Community Board; the Chairperson of the Kaikohe-Hokianga Community Board; to the Strategy Committee with speaking, but not voting, rights; AND THAT the above chairpersons no longer be appointed to the Governance Committee.

1) Background The chairs of the 3 Far North District community boards are currently appointed to the Governance Committee with speaking, not voting rights. They have expressed the desire to instead be appointed under the same terms to the Strategy Committee as they believe this will better allow them to advocate for their communities on issues of concern and have input into Council’s forward planning across the District.

2) Discussion and options Option 1

Appoint the 3 chairs to the Strategy Committee with speaking, not voting rights, and remove the appointment of the chairs to the Governance Committee.

Option 2

Take no action, in which case the chairs will remain appointed to the Governance Committee.

3) Financial implications and budgetary provision There are no financial implications or budgetary provision related to this decision.

4) Reason for the recommendation To appoint the community board chairpersons to the Strategy Committee and remove their appointment to the Governance Committee.

Manager: Samantha Edmonds - General Manager Corporate Services Group










Community Board delegations and terms of reference.


Will allow community board input into decisions that may affect Māori.


Will allow community board input into decisions that may affect these groups.


Not applicable.


This recommendation is made at the request of community board chairs.



None.

The CFO has reviewed this report.


Item: 11.3 MEETING: COUNCIL - 10 AUGUST 2017 Name of item: CAPITAL CARRY FORWARDS JUNE 2017 Author: Janice Smith - Chief Financial Officer



Executive Summary The purpose of the report is to identify the projects that managers are requesting be carried forward to the 2017-18 financial year. The projects are identified on a project by project basis and a summary by activity including funding requirements is also included.

Recommendation THAT the Capital Carry Forwards from the 2016-17 financial year to the 2017-18 financial year of $20,942,157 be approved.

1) Background At the end of the financial year 30 June 2017 a number of projects are underway but not complete. The budgeted capital works for the year was $66.18m and actual expenditure incurred was $33.74m. This is a “completion” rate in dollar terms of 51% of the total budget. Managers have reviewed the projects and now make a request to Council that the identified incomplete projects be carried forward to 2017-18 for completion.

2) Discussion and options The projects identified for carry forward total $20,942,157 ($14,300,208 at 30 June 2016) and are funded as follows:

$ Loan funding 9,831,673 Depreciation 8,834,512 Reserves 438,206 Subsidy 1,837,766 Total funding 20,942,157

3) Financial implications and budgetary provision The budgets identified in the attached report would be additional to those already identified in the 2017-18 Annual Plan. Overall funding limits will not be exceeded as these projects would have been assumed to be complete in the opening balances shown within the Annual Plan 2017-18.


4) Reason for the recommendation Many of the identified projects are contractually committed. In order to allow the projects to be completed, approval is required from the Council to carry forward the identified budgets to 2017-18.

Manager: Samantha Edmonds - General Manager Corporate Services Group Attachment 1: Schedule of Capital Carry Forwards June 2017 - Document number

A1891341









None


None


None


No


No



The Chief Financial Officer wrote this report.


PROJECTS CAPITAL WORKS PROGRAMMEActual Vs Forecast30 June 2017

Corporate Services

Project Account Number Actual Forecast 16/17 Variance Budget to be carried forward Reason for carry forwardOffice Equipment Renewals

101001 101001114922 25,805 43,142 17,337 17,337

Pool Vehicles

101002 101002114922 101,755 205,667 103,912 103,912

Upgrade of Computer Systems

101004 101004114922 0 191,579 191,579 191,579

Computer Equipment Replacement101005 101005114917 (8,651) 7,073 15,724 7,073

101005114922 44,507 131,367 86,860 86,860

EDRMS Project

101016 101016114922 99,994 275,000 175,006 164,796 101016114928 10,210 0 (10,210)

Video Conferencing101031 101031114922 0 12,868 12,868 12,868

Electronic Property Files Project101045 101045114917 0 73,000 73,000 73,000

GIS Upgrade 101052 101052114922 1,030 91,071 90,041 90,041

Desktop Environment101057 101057114922 14,312 39,449 25,136 25,136

IT Servers & Storage Replacement Khe

101066 101066114917 275,377 425,996 150,619 116,979 101066114922 21,824 23,796 1,972 28,477 101066114928 26,813 111,225 84,412 12,000

IT Comms Equipment renewals101071 101071114922 7,953 30,193 22,240 22,124

101071114928 116 0 (116)

Chambers Audio Video Equipment Upgrade101072 101072114917 16,433 25,921 9,488 6,998

101072114922 0 25,000 25,000 25,000 101072114928 2,489 0 (2,489)

Vehicle tracking (GPS)

101079 101079114917 0 249,750 249,750 249,750

Website renewals

101081 101081114922 0 83,858 83,858 83,858

Peripheral Computer Equipment

101083 101083114922 17,929.96 58,642.84 40,712.88 40,713

Desktop Computer Equipment

101084 101084114922 2,700.86 135,000.00 132,299.14 132,299

Tech One101085 101085114922 0.00 10,071.00 10,071.00 10,071

Contact Centre System101088 101088114917 0.00 10,373.00 10,373.00 10,373

101088114922 0.00 95,916.00 95,916.00 95,916

AP Automation101089 101089114922 23,734.39 25,000.00 1,265.61 1,257

Tablets

101090 101090114922 0.00 7,000.00 7,000.00 7,000

Digitisation Scanning101092 101092112404 16,975.00 80,000.00 63,025.00 63,025

101092112407 176,800.00 176,800.00 176,800 101092112512 2,633.65 3,300.00 666.35 666

Digitisation File Availability101093 101093112407 0.00 57,142.84 57,142.84 57,143

Digitisation eLIM Process101094 101094112407 0.00 28,571.44 28,571.44 28,571

Digitisation Re-engineering101095 101095112407 0.00 50,000.00 50,000.00 50,000

Digitisation IT Hardware101097 101097114917 0.00 62,000.00 62,000.00 62,000

Building Services

101044 101044114917 5,133 25,133 20,000 20,000

101044114922 6,840 26,840 20,000 20,000

Kaikohe HQ extension101078 101078114917 10,491 68,437 57,946 21,616

101078114922 52,229 277,209 224,980 224,980 101078114928 36,331 0 (36,331)

Kaitaia Vehicle Garaging101098 101098114917 0 15,000 15,000 15,000

2,355,219

Operational Project currently in progress

Required for Property File Digistisation project

To be utilised in association with the second stage of Kaikohe Accommodation project PR101078 -First stage of Kaikohe Project will be awarded in May but first payments wont be made until 2017/2018. Second stage of Kaikohe will be spread over 2017/18.

First stage of Kaikohe Project will be awarded in May but first payments wont be made until 2017/2018. Second stage of Kaikohe will be spread over 2017/18.

Project scope currently in progress and work expected to be completed by December 2017

Project delayed due to reprioritisation

Awaiting invoicing - commitments raised

Need to provides for the outstanding Disaster Recovery backup & Exchange requirements. Commitments have been raised

Implementation in progress. Commitments raised

Replacement of Elected Member tablets deferred due to an identified pre-requirement of the E-agenda and resource availability




Project work currently in progress and budget to be moved from renewals to operational in line with Audit NZ decision

Remainder of thermal printer upgrade and various peripheral equipment extended out a year based on a condition assessment of the equipment and to establish a rolling renewal programme

Rollout program has been delayed and deferred throughout the year due to citrix update, accommodation reviews and other priorities

Required to be amalgamated with larger Renewals works included in the 17.18 Annual Plan

Project significantly delayed due to new network connectivity and associated issues. Work expected to be completed by October 2017.

This budget is being utilised in association with the Accommodation Project (PR101078) requirements which are on-going

Vehicle replacements deferred due to change in replacement priorities - commitments have been raised

Renewals are on-going and will be replaced according to the schedule of works which have been deferred due to resourcing and re-prioritising

Network equipment upgrade has been deferred to 2017 - 18 due to resourcing and re-prioritising

Project deferred due to resourcing and reprioritising - to amalgamate with previous budget reforecast to 17/18

Back Up Server Upgrade

Deferred Polycom unit upgrades expected to be completed by December 2017

Project delayed due to resourcing and re-prioritising. Project in progress and expected to be completed by December 2017

Project delayed due to resourcing and re-prioritising. Project expected to be undertaken by 30 June 2018.

VC upgrades deferred due to resourcing and prioritisation

Project delayed due to repricing of contract with suppliers based on a clarification of requirements.


Community Services

Project Account Number Actual Forecast 16/17 Variance Budget to be carried forward Reason for carry forwardKerikeri Sports Complex

141012 141012114922 0 127,374 127,374 63,687 141012114928 2,519 0 (2,519)

Settlers Way

141043 141043114922 8,184 27,988 19,804 19,804

Street Lighting - Mangonui141072 141072114917 1,490 18,000 16,510 16,510

Mangonui Beach Rd Footpath141095 141095114917 0 100,000 100,000 100,000

141095114922 0 8,749 8,749 8,749

Opononi Public Toilet

141181 141181114922 0 27,725 27,725 27,725

Matauri Bay Toilet141196 141196114917 780 105,408 104,628 100,262

141196114928 4,366 0 (4,366)

State Highway 12 Opononi

141227 141227114922 0 90,720 90,720 90,550 141227114928 170 0 (170)

Waima Housing for the Elderly141231 141231114917 3,833 10,381 6,547 6,547

141231114922 565 10,675 10,110 10,110

Kaikohe Housing for the Elderly141233 141233114922 41,691 42,402 711 496

141233114928 215 0 (215)

Parks & Reserves Eastern141237 141237114922 39,431 46,071 6,641 6,641

Opononi Housing for the Elderly141256 141256114917 1,039 1,039 0 1,039

141256114922 36,534 160,565 124,031 123,745 141256114928 287 0 (287)

Rawene Housing for the Elderly141257 141257114922 0 4,795 4,795 4,795

Horeke Housing for the Elderly141258 141258114917 3,833 12,310 8,477 8,477

141258114922 0 7,029 7,029 7,029

Kohukohu Housing for the Elderly141260 141260114917 3,833 25,368 21,535 21,535

141260114922 0 13,602 13,602 13,602

Amenity Lighting Eastern141285 141285114917 4,680 15,000 10,320 10,320

141285114922 44,857 68,746 23,889 23,889

Amenity Lighting Northern

141286 141286114917 0 15,000 15,000 15,000

141286114922 1,367 19,226 17,859 17,859

Amenity Lighting Western

141287 141287114917 0 15,000 15,000 15,000

141287114922 16,441 22,733 6,292 6,292

Lindvart Park Pavillion141324 141324114917 0 25,000 25,000 25,000

141324114922 0 25,000 25,000 25,000

Panguru Maritime Renewals

141374 141374114922 0 1,259 1,259 1,259

Rawene Maritime

141375 141375114922 0 18,200 18,200 17,500

Russell Maritime Renewals141376 141376114917 156,039 260,000 103,961 103,961

141376114922 104,400.00 440,500.00 336,100.00 336,100

Unahi Wharf141378 141378114922 0 48,400 48,400 38,155

Totara North Maritime141379 141379114917 0 50,000 50,000 50,000

141379114922 0 98,500 98,500 98,500

Whangaroa Maritime

141381 141381114922 0 219,700 219,700 219,700

Horeke Maritime Renewals

141383 141383114922 0 25,287 25,287 25,287

Kerikeri Maritime

141385 141385114917 0 35,635 35,635 35,635

Kohukohu Maritime141386 141386114922 0 9,700 9,700 9,700 Work completed - awaiting invoicing to meet commitment

Work completed - awaiting invoicing for commitment raised

Tender awarded July 2017 and work to be undertaken in August 2017

Marlin Wharf tender awarded July 2017 and work to be undertaken in August 2017 - budgets to be added to new project code PR141525

This is a 15/16 carry forward of the Hokianga Harbour Jetties project. Completion delayed due to issues with the contractor. Work has now been completed by alternative contractor and final invoice to be received

Windsor Landing works partially completed. Balance required to meet additional works scheduled to be undertaken in 17/18

Condition assessment received and works programme commenced. Delay in completing works due to small contractor resource in relation to programme of works.

Provision made for professional fees. Awaiting result of public consultation re project scope. Carry forward to add to budgets already reforecast to 17.18


Boat Jetty damage work completion has been delayed due to issues with a sub-contract arrangement. Expected completion date is now July 2017

Russell Wharf Front Pontoon & Access Deck tender to be awarded July 2017. Work to be completed by June 2018 - to be timed to avoid peak season

Work completed - awaiting invoice commitment raisedCondition assessment received and works programme commenced. Delay in completing works due to small contractor resource in relation to programme of works.

Report to May 2017 Community Board meeting for approval of lights requested by Board. Report utilises all the budget and work to be undertaken by 30 June 2018Condition assessment received and works programme commenced. Delay in completing works due to small contractor resource in relation to programme of works.

Delays in obtaining Community Board approval. One light to be completed by year end and balance to be carried forward awaiting Community Board priorities

Bledisloe Domain drainage works. Awaiting invoicing - commitment raised

Delay due to resourcing. Scoping has commenced. Work expected to commence late 2017.

Awaiting invoice for work on ramps

Safe drinking water project commenced May 2017. Awaiting invoicing - commitment raised


Contract awarded and project to be delivered within 12 weeks from end May 2017

Scope of works to be broadened to include issues caused by sea erosion. Work expected to be undertaken and completed by 30 June 2017


Awaiting invoicing - commitment raised

Awaiting quotes before finalising contractor. Expected completion August 2017. Balance of budget not required

Okaihau Hall frontage footpath to be renewed when contractor resources available. Expected completion October 2017

Design completed and LED lights procured. Work to be completed by December 2017.

Work to be undertaken in 17.18 when contractor resources available. Expected completion June 2018

Awaiting District Facilities resources to complete scope. Community consultation required. Expected to be completed by June 2018


Omapere Maritime Renewals

141388 141388114922 0 45,000 45,000 45,000

Rawene Russell Esplanade New Toilet141394 141394114917 52,773 59,375 6,602 3,348

141394114922 967.87 24,087.00 23,119.13 23,119 141394114928 3,254.52 0.00 -3,254.52

Recreation Land Purchase Kerikeri/Waipapa

141396 141396114917 9,670 1,082,496 1,072,826 1,072,826

Totara North Hall Renewals141411 141411114922 16,286 93,332 77,046 77,046

0.00Oruru Hall

141423 141423114922 15,340 240,121 224,781 221,259 141423114928 3,521.90 0.00 (3,522)

Horeke Hall

141425 141425114922 0 239,262 239,262 238,587 141425114928 675.34 0.00 -675.34

Hundertwasser toilet upgrade

141428 141428114922 8,538 49,127 40,589 39,444 141428114928 1,146 0 (1,146)

State Hway 11 Haruru Falls Footpath

141435 141435114917 512,720 1,109,170 596,450 583,225 141435114928 11,912.50 0.00 -11,912.50141435114934 1,312.50 0.00 -1,312.50

Accessible Carparks Eastern

141440 141440114917 0 5,120 5,120 5,120

Accessible Carparks Northern

141441 141441114917 0 5,120 5,120 5,120

Accessible Carparks Western

141442 141442114917 0 5,120 5,120 5,120

Ahipara Footpaths141445 141445114922 157,237 168,392 11,155 2,292

Disability Access Halls Eastern

141450 141450114917 0 25,600 25,600 25,600

Disability Access Halls Northern

141451 141451114917 0 25,600 25,600 25,600

Disability Access Halls Western

141452 141452114917 0 25,600 25,600 25,600

Disabled access Toilets Western

141456 141456114917 0 10,240 10,240 10,240

Te Hiku Hub Sports Fields

141457 141457114917 92,808 594,844 502,036 493,849 141457114928 8,186.25 0.00 -8,186.25

Houhora Parks & reserves

141458 141458114922 3,317 165,579 162,262 160,496 141458114928 1,766.25 0.00 -1,766.25

Kaitaia Parks & Reserves141459 141459114922 74,065 84,026 9,961 9,961

Moerewa Parks & Reserves141463 141463114922 306,558 338,963 32,405 30,972

141463114928 1,432 0 (1,432)

Rawene Old Courthouse

141469 141469114922 31,033 54,363 23,330 23,330

Kaitaia Puckey Ave Housing for the Elderly

141474 141474114922 65,366 140,641 75,275 65,446 141474114928 9,829.25 0.00 -9,829.25

Towai Maromaku Domain141481 141481114922 2,988 164,000 161,013 157,370

141481114928 3,643 0 (3,643)

State Highway 10 Kaeo Footpath141482 141482114917 0 35,000 35,000 33,875

141482114922 4,750 102,039 97,289 97,289 141482114928 563 0 (563)141482114934 563 0 (563)

Disabled access Toilets Northern

141500 141500114917 0 10,240 10,240 10,240 Insufficient budget to undertake works. 2016/17 budget to be carried forward and added to 2017/18 budget to allow sufficient budget to undertake works.

Project in progress. Awaiting invoicing - commitment raised

Exterior cladding repairs and full repaint took priority. Paths and stairs to library still to do and will complete in conjunction with 17/18 renewals programme for buildings

Saving on re-roof only. Balance relates to building roof structure which is to be added to budget already reforecast to 17/18

Awaiting Council decision on delivery of project in conjunction with the community

Tenders closed May 2017 and work expected to commence July 2017

Insufficient budget to undertake works. 2016/17 budget to be carried forward and added to 2017/18 budget to allow sufficient budget to undertake works.

To be utilised as part of Ohaeawai Toilet Project PR141515 which is currently at design stage and work to be undertaken late 2017

Contract dates are as follows:Date of Award: 12/04/2017Date of Possession of site: 1/5/2017 (post sod turning event).Contract period (used for calculating the Due Date for Completion): 160 working days commencing on the date of possession of site. Construction start date deferred to October 2017

Work has just commenced expected to be completed by 31 Dec 2017 - project commencement delayed due to multiple changes of scope as requested by community

Work is expected to be undertaken 2017/18 in conjunction with roading maintenance programme



Awaiting final invoice for commitment raised



Tender has been let but contractor unable to commence in October 2017 expected completion by January 2018

Delay in commencement due to kitchen design issues not yet resolved. Expect to complete works by June 2018

Final scope of works to be determined at the time adjoining building is demolished. Expected to be completed by June 2018

Initial clearing work commenced but majority of works expected to be undertaken by October 2017. Funds required to meet contract



Work commenced May 2017. Awaiting invoicing and expected completion end July 2017.

Conditional purchase agreement dependent upon multi-criteria analysis and due diligence (in progress). Alternative sites are being considered

Contract has been awarded but work not to commence until July/Aug due to contractor availability


Mangonui Tree Protection141501 141501114917 22,527 25,000 2,473 900

Kaikohe Lions Club141505 141505114922 1,328 5,000 3,672 3,672

Ohaeawai Public Toilet Refurbishment141515 141515114922 350 44,532 44,182 44,007

141515114928 175.18 0.00 -175.18

Omapere Freese Park Public Toilet

141522 141522114922 0 58,951 58,951 58,951

Marlin Wharf Maritime

141525 141525114917 0 50,000 50,000 50,000 5,354,364

Stormwater

Project Account Number Actual Forecast 16/17 Variance Budget to be carried forward Reason for carry forwardReactive Response

241026 241026114922 35,537 99,514 63,977 63,977

Kaitaia Commerce Street Stormwater Line

241062 241062114922 16,882 150,000 133,118 133,118

Ahipara Tasman Heights Stormwater Line

241063 241063114917 162,454 600,000 437,546 437,547

Kaitaia Bank Street Stormwater Line

241064 241064114922 35,906 90,000 54,094 54,094

LiDAR Renewal241066 241066114922 134,278 185,000 50,722 50,722

739,458 Regulatory Services

Project Account Number Actual Forecast 16/17 Variance Budget to be carried forward Reason for carry forwardMatting Animal Control261009 261009114922 0 2,573 2,573 2,573

Dog Pound Kaitaia

261011 261011114917 18,957 250,000 231,043 231,043 233,616

John Butler Centre

Project Account Number Actual Forecast 16/17 Variance Budget to be carried forward Reason for carry forwardKerikeri Level One Fit-out271002 271002114917 7,810 13,669 5,859 5,063

271002114928 796 0 (796)

Kerikeri Level Two Fit-out271003 271003114917 22,034 24,819 2,785

271003114922 65,766 78,542 12,776 6,140 271003114928 9,420 0 (9,420)

11,203 Refuse

Project Account Number Actual Forecast 16/17 Variance Budget to be carried forward Reason for carry forwardRussell Transfer Station Renewals361031 361031114922 1,434 12,524 11,090 11,090

Ahipara Landfill361046 361046114917 44,456 53,738 9,282 9,282

20,372 Customer Services

Project Account Number Actual Forecast 16/17 Variance Budget to be carried forward Reason for carry forwardLibrary Stocks

531002 531002114922 11,797 12,226 429 429

Libraries Archives Project531013 531013114922 0 235 235 235

Information Centres

531017 531017114922 0 2,000 2,000 2,000

Library Stocks - Adult Fiction

531018 531018114922 76,477 96,468 19,991 19,991

Library Stocks - Adult Non Fiction

531019 531019114922 53,453 69,096 15,643 15,643

Library Stocks - Child/Young Adult

531020 531020114922 32,660 41,292 8,632 8,632

Library Stocks - Large Print

531021 531021114922 11,887 13,011 1,124 1,124

Library Stocks - Talking Books

531022 531022114922 7,871 9,028 1,157 1,157

Library Stocks - Archive Collection

531025 531025114922 65 1,686 1,621 1,621

Library Stocks - Adult DVDs

531026 531026114922 2,751 3,161 410 410

Te Ahu Centre531028 531028114922 0 1,859 1,859 1,859

Libraries eBooks

531029 531029114917 20,683 25,000 4,317 4,316

Commitments exist for this sum. It represents orders placed but not yet delivered in respect of books due for publication in the next three months.


Deferred Polycom unit upgrades which are expected to be completed by December 2017







Delay in producing Chute design work - dependent on Project team resource availability



Budget can only be spent when items become available which are not within Council's control

Renewal of ticketing system retimed to 17/18. Carry forward balance of 16/17 budget not previously retimed

Commitment raised

Awaiting decision on this project

Delays in acquiring suitable site. This project is on-going and will be required to carry forward all available funds

Budget required for Kaikohe Accommodation project PR 1010078

Budget required for Kaikohe Accommodation project PR 1010078

Marlin Wharf tender awarded July 2017 and work to be undertaken in August 2017 - budgets to be moved from project code PR141381

Budget fully committed due to Marshall Rd works which has commenced. Awaiting invoicing for commitment raised

Scoping work only in progress this year. Expected cost of works to exceed available renewal funding. Work programme expected to commence Nov 2017.

Contract awarded and work in progress. Work expected to be completed by December 2017 taking into account weather conditions

Contract has been awarded and materials paid for. Works priority has been awarded to Tasman Heights due to weather risk. Limited contractor resources available so project works will commence once capacity from Tasman Heights becomes available

Awaiting final invoice - commitment raised

Work in progress and awaiting invoicing - commitment raised

Currently at design stage and work to be undertaken late 2017

Awaiting project scope which will not be undertaken before October 2017 with work expected to be undertaken by the end of summer 2017/18


531029114922 5,199 5,386 187 187

Horizon Library System Upgrade531055 531055114922 0 10,000 10,000 10,000

Paihia I-Site Refurbishment531056 531056114922 64,481 65,388 907 907

Paihia Library - Williams House531061 531061114917 0 3,105 3,105 3,105

531061114922 0 87,074 87,074 87,074

Kaitaia Civic Building531067 531067114917 0 34,425 34,425 32,215

531067114922 1,698.46 12,600.00 10,901.54 10,902 531067114928 2,210.19 0.00 -2,210.19

Paihia Library Book Renewals

531071 531071114922 5,310 8,624 3,314 3,314 205,120

Wastewater

Project Account Number Actual Forecast 16/17 Variance Budget to be carried forward Reason for carry forwardPump Stations Paihia551005 551005114917 8,109 10,000 1,891 1,700

551005114928 191 0 (191)

Reticulation Extension East C

551006 551006114917 9,688 30,000 20,312 20,312

Reticulation Extension Paihia551008 551008114917 47,079 150,000 102,921 101,689

551008114928 1,232 0 (1,232)

Wastewater Telemetry Upgrade551018 551018114917 72,094 99,704 27,609 27,610

551018114922 0 134,555 134,555 134,555

Treatment Plant Upgrade Kerikeri551025 551025114917 25,451 30,000 4,549 4,549

East Coast Treatment Plant upgrade

551105 551105114917 0 73,352 73,352 73,352

Pump Station 8 East Coast551108 551108114917 0 15,000 15,000 15,000

551108114922 41,516 58,000 16,484 16,484

Sludge Management - Opex BudgetsContract Work Annual 15514022405 14,946 30,000 15,054 15,054 External Services 15514012407 214,228 1,140,487 926,259 926,259 Professional Fees 15514012410 0 50,000 50,000 50,000 Contract Work Annual 15514112405 0 170,000 170,000 170,000

Ahipara Sludge Management551138 551138114917 122,288 129,473 7,185 7,185

East Coast PS5551211 551211114922 31,379 52,000 20,621 20,582

551211114928 39 0 (39)

Kerikeri WWTP Consent551229 551229114918 21,264 46,755 25,491 25,491

551229114923 0.00 2,700.00 2,700.00 2,700

Haruru Falls Pump Station

551253 551253114917 98,227 195,844 97,617 96,556 551253114928 1,061 0 (1,061)

Paihia PS1 upgrade551256 551256114917 0 44,000 44,000 44,000

551256114922 0 103,607 103,607 103,034 551256114928 573 0 (573)

Kaikohe Ngawha Springs New Transfer PS and Storage551258 551258114917 125,563 157,955 32,393 31,813

551258114928 580 0 (580)

Kaitaia Reduction of Wastewater Overflows Option

551259 551259114917 21,150 118,581 97,431 6,891 551259114928 445 0 (445)

Kaitaia WWTP Inlet Screen551260 551260114917 0 90,000 90,000 90,000

551260114922 85,099 130,000 44,901 44,579 551260114928 322 0 (322)

Paihia Pump Station 17 Orchard Road551261 551261114922 11,054 77,000 65,946 65,752

551261114928 194 0 (194)

Paihia Pump Station 4 Lonely Valley551262 551262114922 46,971 50,000 3,029 2,466

551262114928 563 0 (563)

Kaeo Pump Stations Electrical Switchboard551263 551263114922 19,692 31,500 11,808 11,808 Work in progress. Awaiting invoicing - commitment raised

East Coast WWTP Perimeter Fence551270 551270114917 0 26,090 26,090 26,090

551270114922 0 23,146 23,146 23,146 2,158,657

Work completed. Awaiting invoicing - commitment raised

Work in progress - commitment raised

Work complete. Awaiting invoicing - commitment raised

Project still at design stage works to be progressed in 17/18. This represents initial stage of total $14m planned project expected to be delivered over next 4-5 years$90k has been reallocated to PR551260

Equipment is on order and work to commence upon delivery. Expected competion by December 2017

Work completed - commitment raised


Project start delayed awaiting Resource Consent outcome of consultation and award by Regional Council. This is the initial stage of the complete project currently timed for 18/19

Telemetry requirements to be met. Expected completion 30 June 2018Work nearing completion. Awaiting invoicing - commitment raised

Unused budget required to meet on-going requirements across the District

Detailed design of network in progress. Required works to be identified from this and undertaken by 30 June 2018


Asset Manager to complete scoping of Coopers Beach sewer overflow work required to be undertaken in 17/18. Timing yet to be determined.

Work is currently in progress, commitment raised awaiting invoicing.

Backup server equipment ordered. Installation to be completed by December 2017Some renewal works in progress, awaiting invoicing - commitments raised

Awaiting invoice for commitment raised

Works delayed due to lack of resource availability in District Facilities to scope and undertake worksCommitments have been raised for some renewal works

Budgets to be transferred to Accommodation project PR1010078


Initial investigations in progress and expect to complete upgrade by 30 June 2018


Work in progress. Awaiting invoicing commitment raised

This project is part of the Kerikeri Wastewater Infrastructure project - PR551249 - currently in progress

Work completed. Awaiting invoicing - commitment raised. Balance to be applied to acquisition of critical spare


Water

Project Account Number Actual Forecast 16/17 Variance Budget to be carried forward Reason for carry forwardOpononi New Water Source571008 571008114917 0 62,963 62,963 61,265

571008114928 1,698 0 (1,698)

Water Telemetry571014 571014114917 11,403 52,787 41,384 41,384

Paihia Treatment Plant Upgrade

571018 571018114922 0 10,000 10,000 10,000

Kaitaia Resource Consent

571019 571019114918 0 26,000 26,000 26,000

Rawene Source

571035 571035114917 0 81,000 81,000 81,000

Okaihau Supplementary Source571040 571040114922 0 15,000 15,000 15,000

Kaitaia Clarifier571046 571046114922 40,890 50,350 9,460 8,986

571046114928 474 0 (474)

Kaitaia Kauri Dam571051 571051114917 26,151 45,000 18,849 6,485

571051114928 1,607 0 (1,607)

Kerikeri Treatment Plant Upgrade571062 571062114917 1,229 52,307 51,078 51,078

Rawene/Omanaia Water Supply Scheme

571063 571063114917 121,796 415,413 293,617 284,755 571063114928 8,862 0 (8,862)

Rawene Resource Consent

571074 571074114918 5,276 52,000 46,724 46,724

Kawakawa Resource Consent

571077 571077114918 0 65,302 65,302 65,302

Opononi Raw Water Main Replacement571110 571110114917 0 60,000 60,000 60,000

Kaikohe Water Meter Renewal571111 571111114922 53,774 63,288 9,514 9,514

Kaitaia Water Meter Renewal571112 571112114922 49,420 69,193 19,773 19,773

Kawakawa Water Meter Renewal571113 571113114922 37,649 52,598 14,949 14,949

Okaihau Water Meter Renewal571115 571115114922 0 1,252 1,252 1,252

Opononi Water Meter Renewal571116 571116114922 11,293 21,224 9,931 9,931

Paihia Water Meter Renewal571117 571117114922 45,873 63,684 17,811 17,811

Rawene Water Meter Renewal571118 571118114922 20,012 22,177 2,165 2,165

Kaikohe Specified Works571130 571130114922 17,804 50,533 32,729 32,729

Kerikeri Specified Works571133 571133114922 0 7,166 7,166 7,166

Structural Works Kawakawa WTP571140 571140114917 13,733 267,331 253,598 250,337

571140114922 3,065 42,500 39,435 39,435 571140114928 3,262 0 (3,262)

Mains replacement Kawakawa571141 571141114922 32,827 84,500 30,695 30,695

Mains replacement Kerikeri571142 571142114922 218 52,000 51,782 51,782

Kaikohe Main Replacements571153 571153114922 248 52,000 51,752 51,752

Kerikeri WTP Structural Work on Clarifier571154 571154114922 0 75,000 75,000 75,000

Kaitaia Donald Road Reservoir571155 571155114922 94,069 104,000 9,931 9,631

571155114928 300 0 (300)

Mains replacement Waitangi - Haruru Falls Footpath571172 571172114922 92,905 145,000 52,095 52,095

1,433,997

On-going multi-year programme delivered as contractor resources available

Project has been deferred to 17/18 renewals programme - scope to be finalised

Works in progress. Awaiting invoicing - commitment raised

Work completed. Awaiting invoicing - commitment raised

Project is awaiting Building Consent before being put to tender. Earliest work commencement date is September/October 2017. Commitments raised






Replacements works scheduled to be completed by 30 June 2018

Works currently being scoped. Expected completion 30 June 2018

Replacement works commenced - commitment raised





Work complete. Awaiting invoicing for commitment raised. Balance is savings

Works are in progress and commitments raised

Subject to Council approval project almost ready to put to tender. Construct only and works to commence November/December17 (timing subject to Procurement Board/Council approval of tender evaluation). Works to include the installation of raw water storage tank PR571035

Resource Consent application lodged. Awaiting NRC decision as to whether consent is to be Notified. If so then budget will be required for this.

Awaiting Resource Consent application decision. Budget required to meet NRC consent fees as yet unknown.

Renewals have been timed for delivery in the 17.18 financial year as contractor resources become available

Work has commenced and commitment raised. Commissioned May 17 - best case position is completion by December 2017

Project is for a raw water storage tank installation and works are to be undertaken with the main project PR571063

Resource Consent threshold requirements are on-going

Work complete . Awaiting invoicing - commitment raised

Bore has been completed and project delivery is now with the Resource Planning team

Backup Server equipment ordered and installation to be completed by December 2017. Commitment raised


RoadingNZTA Subsidised Budgets

Roading Activity Account NumberTotal for Each Work

Category Carry Forward Available Work Category 111 $127,475.00Forestry Sealed Pavement Maintenance 8314.1.1.4922 127,475.00 All NZTA subsidised works are part of

either the 3 year programme or theWork Category 112 8315.1.1.4922 $183,545.00 183,545.00 2 year forestry programme and fundsForestry Unsealed Pavement Maintenance are required to complete works

Work Category 211 $1,399,959.00Unsealed Road Metaling 2015.1.1.4922 372,988.00Forestry Unsealed Road Metalling 8311.1.1.4922 1,026,971.00

Work Category 212 $285,015.00Sealed Road Resurfacing 2014.1.1.4922 79,977.00Forestry Sealed Road Resurfacing 8312.1.1.4922 205,038.00

Work Category 213 $533,074.90Drainage Renewals 2011.1.1.4922 109,215.90Forestry Drainage Renewals 8313.1.1.4922 423,859.00

Work Category 214 $1,276,083.63Pavement Rehabilitiation 2017.1.1.4922 1,276,083.63

Work Category 215 $500,387.00Ferry refurbishment - 8020.1.1.4922 267,074.00Structural Component Replacement 2019.1.1.4922 233,313.00

Work Category 222 $127,627.00Traffic Services Renewals 2022.1.1.4922 127,627.00

Work Category 324 $90,795.66LED Streetlight programme 8276.1.1.4917 90,795.66

Work Category 341 $750,274.74Minor Safety Works 2013.1.1.4917 216,886.24Matawherohia Rd Bridge 5260.1.1.4917 71,658.00Marlow Road Culvert replacement M.I. 5292.1.1.4922 73,518.00Tipene Road Bridge Major Update 5293.1.1.4917 86,668.00Kerikeri Packhouse to SH10 5323.1.1.4917 216,000.00Waima School Road Culvert Replacement 6294.1.7.4922 45,111.50Kaiataia Awaroa Slip 7306.1.1.4917 31,543.00Taipa Sea Wall Replacement 7326.1.1.4917 8,890.00

Pending NZTA Formalisation for SubsidyWork Category 232 (Subsidy pending NZTA A $2,184,000.00 This programme of works is awaiting Preventative Maintenance 2203.1.1.4917 2,184,000.00 formalisation of NZTA subsidy approval

UnsubsidisedCycletrail 2214.1.1.4917 $252,780.93 252,780.93 Required for remaing works on Cycletrail

FNDC funded - no SubsidyVarious ProjectsCB Streetlighting 5327.1.1.4917 $719,133.47 15,000.00CB Streetlighting 6327.1.1.4917 15,000.00CB Streetlighting 7327.1.1.4917 15,000.00Dust Suppression 8270.1.1.4917 517,086.87Walking facilities 8280.1.1.4917 157,046.60

TOTAL CARRY FORWARDS 20,942,157$

Summary New Works Renewal Works Operational Loan Subsidy Depreciation Reserves

Corporate Services 594,789 1,384,224 376,206 (532,789) (1,384,224) (438,206)Infrastructure & Asset Management Community Services 2,859,949 2,494,415 (2,926,015) (2,428,349) Stormwater 437,547 301,911 (490,494) (248,964) John Butler Centre 5,063 6,140 (5,063) (6,140) Refuse 9,282 11,090 (9,282) (11,090) Wastewater 572,238 425,106 1,161,313 (1,767,279) (391,378) Water 974,331 459,666 (1,105,181) (328,815) Roading 3,878,355 4,551,796 (2,724,891) (1,837,766) (3,867,494)District Services Regulatory Services 231,043 2,573 (231,043) (2,573) Customer Services 39,636 165,484 (39,636) (165,484)Totals 9,602,233$ 9,802,406$ 1,537,519$ (9,831,673.39)$ (1,837,766.00)$ (8,834,511.57)$ (438,205.63)$

Reason for carry forward


Item: 11.4 MEETING: COUNCIL - 10 AUGUST 2017 Name of item: TANGONGE DOMAIN RECREATION RESERVE - LEASE TO

AUPOURI NGATIKAHU TE RARAWA TRUST Author: Kaye Lethbridge - Property Legalisation Officer



Executive Summary This report is to inform the Council that a community based organisation called Open the Curtains (OTC) has asked to lease the Tangonge Domain, and to recommend that the Council approves the commencement of a public notification process and appoints the Te Hiku Community Board to conduct a hearing and make a recommendation to Council in due course.

Open the Curtains operates under the umbrella of Aupouri Ngatikahu Te Rarawa Trust (the Trust). The OTC community group propose to develop the domain into a community recreation area with a playground, an exercise track, exercise work stations, a small sports field, native and fruit tree plantings and marakai/community gardens.

The Reserves Act 1977 requires that this lease proposal be publicly notified and consideration given to all objections and submissions received in relation to the proposal.

Recommendation

THAT the Far North District Council, pursuant to its powers under sections 53 and 54 of the Reserves Act 1977, resolves: THAT the public consultation process for a lease to Aupouri Ngatikahu Te Rarawa Trust of Tangonge Domain, part Old Land Claim No 7 contained in CFR NA530/132, is commenced and the terms of the proposed lease shall be; Purpose: The development of a community recreation area as

described in the document entitled “Tangonge Domain Initiative”

Term: 5 years Rent: $100 plus GST per annum Right of Renewal: A further 5 years if no alternative need identified AND THAT the Te Hiku Community Board is appointed to hear any submissions and or objections received in response to the public process, and then to make a recommendation to Council in respect of the proposal.

1) Background Tangonge Domain is vested in Council and is an under-used recreation reserve on the western edge of Kaitaia township. The reserve was leased to the Kaitaia City Rugby Football Club and sub-leased to the Kaitaia Nomads Club, these leases have expired and the clubs have not asked for another lease.

Council records show that the reserve land is poorly drained and in winter the grounds are “unplayable” without proper drainage. The domain was once used for


grazing however this was an informal arrangement which has since ceased. Council does not maintain this reserve.

There is a shed on the domain, built by the Nomad soccer club and now owned by Council. This shed was previously used by Sport Northland for the storage of sports equipment. They have relocated to an alternative storage facility in Kaitaia township.

The domain is currently a designated dog exercise area however the 2016 Dog Control Bylaw is under review and it proposes to remove this designation from Tangonge Domain and establish a new dog exercise area in a different location.

A representative from OTC presented a verbal overview of their initiative to the Te Hiku Community Board in 2016. While the Board supported the proposal there was no resolution to commence the public notification process.. A letter from the Chairperson on behalf of the Te Hiku Community Board supporting the commencement of the public consultation process is attached.

2) Discussion and options Proposal The local community identified a need for a playground/park and social environment for children, families and older adults on the western side of Kaitaia. OTC has raised sufficient funds to commence the initial drainage and foundation works on the reserve.

The “Tangonge Domain Initiative” prepared by OTC outlining the development stages and use of the park is attached. The stages are; (1) Drainage and foundation works on the domain, (2) Grading of field, exercise track and parking area, (3) Kids playground, (4) Laying down exercise track and planting large Pohutukawa trees, (5) Exercise stations, (6) preparing and planting fruit forest, native plantings, marakai gardens, (7) Basketball court, (8) BBQ and tables.

Reserves Act 1977 The Minister of Conservation has delegated to the Council the power to grant leases of vested reserves for the purposes specified in s54 Reserves Act 1977.

Sections 119 and 120 of the Act require that before granting this lease the proposal must be publicly notified and that all submissions/objections to the proposal are to be in writing and where requested, a submitter must be given the opportunity to appear before Council or a committee of Council, to speak to their objection/submission. Every submission/objection in relation to the proposal must be considered before proceeding with the proposal.

Council may appoint the Community Board to hear and consider all submissions/objections and make a recommendation to Council.

Council Policy Council’s Community Garden policy states that where a community group can establish a management entity to run a community garden and where a suitable site can be found, the Council will make public land available for these gardens, subject to an agreed criteria and process.

Both the Reserves Act 1977 and Council’s Reserves Policy require consultation with iwi and other stakeholder groups, as appropriate, regarding the management, development and use of reserves and parks.


The proposed lease would be between Aupouri Ngatikahu Te Rarawa Trust and Far North District Council. The Trust would oversee the development and maintenance of the domain by OTC.

Option 1 (recommended option) That public consultation of the lease proposal is commenced.

Option 2 That the proposed lease is declined. (Other uses of the reserve could be considered.)

3) Financial implications and budgetary provision There would be no financial implications for Council as OTC proposes to fund the development and to maintain the domain and the improvements.

4) Reason for the recommendation The development of Tangonge Domain by OTC would utilise an otherwise under-used reserve to provide a pleasant public space for the local community.

Manager: Jacqui Robson, General Manager, Infrastructure and Asset Management

Attachment 1: OTC Tangonge Domain Initiative - Document number A1883557

Attachment 2: OTC plan of works - Document number A1883551

Attachment 3: Mahere Whenua Aerial - Document number A1853050

Attachment 4: Letter of support from Te Hiku Community Board Chairperson - Document number A1889206










This request is consistent with Council’s Community Gardens and the Reserve Management Policy.


Local iwi are involved with this proposal.


The opportunity to develop the reserve will provide improved access and enjoyment for everyone.


This issue has low significance


The Te Hiku Community Board supports this proposal.



Open the Curtains propose to fund this community project and to maintain the reserve.

The Chief Financial Officer has reviewed this report


Tangeonge Domain Initiative Introduction: Open The Curtains OTC is Kaitaias’ newest level 2 accredited Social Service provider. The operation is a door to door, one on one and community based initiative. In this way we visit every home in our service area and deliver a koha basket, we work with individuals/families and listen for needs in their environment. There is a specific need for a playground/park and social environment for children families and older adults on this side of town. Proposed Park Activities:

• Kids playground • Exercise track with work stations • ½ - ¾ field for sport and recreational activities • Basketball court • Fruit Forrest and designated native planting of trees and groves • Mara kai gardens • Water Pad

Proposed Stages of Park:

1. Dave Foster to drain the domain 2. Far North Roading or Fulton Hogan to grade surface and lay down walking track 3. Lay the first kids playground 4. Begin work on the Exercise track and plant Pohutakawa 5. Place the work stations 6. A. Plant the Fruit Forrest

B. Native Plantings C. Dig Mara kai gardens

7. Mana Tane to build water pad.

Park Building Usage: • Men’s Shed – social and educational support services • Maintenance –mowing equipment and tools for park and K West service projects

Work Plan: To be discussed – Hone suggested approaching business and other agencies about putting their hand up to take ownership of specific stages, we could possibly take a stage each to focus on. Conclusion: The Park concept has been a huge talking point by the residents of K West and their visitors these past holidays. The building has no graffiti on it and all signs show that we are on par with the community voice. There are a lot of obstacles to face however and with your support it will help us overcome these at each stage.


Stage 1. Drainage and Foundation of entire domain

• Dave Foster will make 4 to 5 large drains across the paddock cover them and mole plough the field.

• Quote provided. • Mike Colebrook has agreed to sit down and discuss the quote. • Dave is able to complete the drainage in February.

Stage 2. Grading of field, exercise track and parking area

• Far North Roading or Fulton Hogan to grade the entire Park due to hoof holes left by stock. Area cannot be mowed easily the way it is.

• Quote from FNR and Fulton Hogan pending • Parking area laid with stone from Pukepoto Quarry • Quote from Pukepoto Quarry pending • To be completed in mid-March

Stage 3. Kids Playground

• A large tree and natural playground to be laid by The Mana Tane Men’s Group and NorthTec carpentry level 3 course, Tutor Stephen Rameka has confirmed availability.

• TOLL to be approached about transporting a tree from designated Tree site • Pokaka Timber, Rob Schnider, JNL or Shane Horan to supply Large Wooden Beams

for Swing Structure. TBC. • Quotes for the Swings provided. Add email from Playgrounds. • NorthTec carpentry course to support the swings build. Stephen can possibly sign

work off for OSH. • CBEC to provide bark. • Invite the community to attend and provide helping hands March 30th


Stage 4. Laying down the exercise track and planting large Pohutukawa trees.

• Far North Roading or Fulton Hogan to measure and lay an asphalt track approx.

400m L x 3m W • Exercise track laid in asphalt in April. • Quote pending • Mana Tane to measure and plant 20 large Pohutukawa • Trees sourced from Bushlands Trust or CBEC. • Quotes pending

Stage 5. Adding the 7 Exercise

stations

• Adam has suggested approaching McKenzie Engineering about making suitable structures.


• Mana Tane and NorthTec carpentry course to Insert wooden posts and add engineered work stations. Stephen to sign off.

• Mana Tane to lay asphalt/stones or bark over the workstation area • Signs for life to supply exercise graphics • To be added in May

Stage 6. Preparing and planting

1. Fruit Forrest

• 200 x fruit trees to be planted by the Mana Tane Men’s group • Planting to be done in late July/August. • John Hill NorthTec fruit production level 4 tutor is not yet committed to this but will

follow up. • Quotes from Te Hana Nursery and Waimea nurseries provided.

2. Native Plantings

• Te Rarawa Nursery have agreed to supply varieties of natives that can be planted near and around the workstations. Koha.

• Bushlands Trust has agreed to supply native plants also. • Mana Tane Group to plant. August.

3. Marakai Gardens

• Preperation on designated Marakai garden to be completed by David Foster or

Northtec


• Northtec or Mens Maintenance Group to plant out the Garden in October labour day • K West Community invited to help on Thursday 19th October. • Vegetable Plants supplied by Northtec or CBEC

Stage 7. Basketball Court

• Concrete pad is approximately 30metres by 20metres. Same as K East Park. • Funding either sourced by Private Business or Spark Foundation. • Basketball project to begin Nov.

Stage 8. BBQ and tables

• BBQ area with 2x Stainless steel BBQ features. • BBQ tables to be made by Mana Tane Group and or NorthTec Carpentry Course. • Wood sourced from same supplier • To be added in Dec.

Pending projects

• Beach Volleyball area • Water Pad

2 main events for Community engagement

1. Helping Hands Thursday30th March October 2017 Helping to build kids playground. Community members to help lay bark around tree and swings.

2. Planting Day Thursday 19th October. Planting vegetable Harvest 2018. Community members to help plant vegetables for 2018 harvest.

To do list

Stage 1.


• Meet with mike Colebrook to discuss quote. Mike back at work 31st Jan. I have emailed him and waiting for a time.

Stage 2.

• Meet with Brady from FNR Friday 27th Jan to discuss quote. Plan sent by email on

26/1/2017 • Meet with Warren Gore Friday 3rd Feb to discuss quote. Plan sent by email

26/1/2017

Stage 3.

• Large tree to be located and cut down. Mana Tane. • TOLL to be approached about carting tree to playground site. • Wooden beams and retaining wall timber to be sourced from one of the four groups. • Approach Cliff Calhoun about CBEC providing bark. • Send invite to K West Community about helping hands day on March 31st.

Stage 4.

• Quotes for asphalt will be together with grading quote • Organise meeting with Cliff Calhoun CBEC. • Meeting with Bushlands Trust Manager Steve and Jamie from DOC 27th Jan at 12pm

Stage 5.

• Discuss timber needs with designated Timber supplier. • Adam to negotiate Mc Kenzie engineering agreement on exercise stations • Alternatively discuss with Ruby Anne Reihana 021 0221 5002 how work stations

were sourced and funded for the Allen Bell Park. • Discuss build with Stephen Reihana and finalise tools needed. • Finalise 7 workstations with park committee. • Signs for life to be approached about funding graphics at each station • Discuss options for workstations ground with CBEC. Bark crushed shell asphalt or

crushed scoria.

Stage 6.

1. Fruit Forrest

• Funding of around $5000 needed to be sourced for 200-250 fruit trees • Park committee to designate specialist to oversee • Tools needed to dig and plant trees, need to have water supply.

2. Native Plantings


• Organise pickup of plants to be planted near workstations.

3. Marakai Garden

• Dave Foster to Rotary hoe Marakai garden • Mara will oversee this • Mara asked for Mana Tane to collect cardboard boxes to cover area to kill weeds

prior to planting • Vegetable plants to be sourced by CBEC or others Possibly by seed • Community event to be organized for Thursday 19th October Planting Day.

Stage 7.

• Organise sponsor for basketball court. We are already investigating Spark who have

supplied courts and hoops around the country to vulnerable communities and also supply free Wi-Fi to attract youth to parks.

• Kim is currently following this up.

Stage 8.

• Source wood and organise production of tables with Stephen from NorthTec


Sources and Partners

FNDC https://www.fndc.govt.nz/home Fruit Trees from Waimea Nursuries who retail to Bunnings Mitre 10 etc. http://www.waimeanurseries.co.nz Pokaka Timber http://www.mtpokaka.co.nz Northtec Kaitaia http://www.northtec.ac.nz/locations/kaitaia?gclid=Cj0KEQiAzZHEBRD0ivi9_pDzgYMBEiQAtvxt-DT0pYbG9vOqiqZqLlTfzQHdAm8L5pIPJCHYFqlB7XIaApIZ8P8HAQ Pukepoto Quarries https://yellow.co.nz/y/pukepoto-quarries CBEC covich electrical http://www.cbec.co.nz Fulton Hogan http://www.fultonhogan.com Playgrounds http://www.playgroundcentre.com/ourproducts

Funding Possibilities for park and boxing projects

• Fight Night Kaitaia June Park Fundraiser. • http://generosity.org.nz • http://foundation.vodafone.co.nz/the-world-of-difference-programme KBA • http://www.sparknz.co.nz/what-matters/foundation/sparkjump Broadband

https://www.fndc.govt.nz/home

http://www.waimeanurseries.co.nz/

http://www.mtpokaka.co.nz/

http://www.northtec.ac.nz/locations/kaitaia?gclid=Cj0KEQiAzZHEBRD0ivi9_pDzgYMBEiQAtvxt-DT0pYbG9vOqiqZqLlTfzQHdAm8L5pIPJCHYFqlB7XIaApIZ8P8HAQ

http://www.northtec.ac.nz/locations/kaitaia?gclid=Cj0KEQiAzZHEBRD0ivi9_pDzgYMBEiQAtvxt-DT0pYbG9vOqiqZqLlTfzQHdAm8L5pIPJCHYFqlB7XIaApIZ8P8HAQ

https://yellow.co.nz/y/pukepoto-quarries

http://www.cbec.co.nz/

http://www.fultonhogan.com/

http://www.playgroundcentre.com/ourproducts

http://generosity.org.nz/

http://foundation.vodafone.co.nz/the-world-of-difference-programme

http://www.sparknz.co.nz/what-matters/foundation/sparkjump

Tangonge Domain – Plan of proposed development


PARCEL_Line

HOUSE_ANNOT_NUM

Aerial Low 2002

Satellite 2008

Aerial High 2006

AerialHigh 2000-2003

This map has been provided in good faith and for information purposes only. The Far North District Council is not liable for any errors or omissions. Any persons considering purchasing property are advised to have all boundaries confirmed by a licensed Cadastral Surveyor.

Produced by the Far North District Council 11:36

6/12/2016

Copyright © 2016 Far North District

Council

Page 1 of 1Print Preview

6/12/2016http://khowebmapserv2/gis_live/commands/printadvanced/print_preview_portrait.asp


klethbridge

Polygon

klethbridge

Typewriter

Pt Old Land Claim 7

klethbridge

Typewriter

NA 530/132

klethbridge

Typewriter

Tangonge Recreation Reserve

klethbridge

Typewriter

klethbridge

Typewriter

Tangonge Recreation Reserve - NA530/132

COPY



Item: 12.1

MEETING: COUNCIL - 10 AUGUST 2017 Name of item: MINISTERIAL REVIEW - BETTER RESPONSES TO

NATURAL DISASTERS AND OTHER EMERGENCIES IN NEW ZEALAND

Author: Alastair Wells - Civil Defence Controller



Executive Summary The purpose of the report is to inform the Council of the Ministerial Review of the Emergency Management sector and to brief the Council on the submission made to the review by the Northland Civil Defence Emergency Management Coordinating Executive Group.

Recommendation THAT the report “Ministerial Review - Better responses to natural disasters and other emergencies in New Zealand” dated 17 July 2017 be received.

1) Background In early June the Minister of Civil Defence Emergency Management initiated a review of New Zealand’s Civil Defence operational and legislative mechanisms to ensure that our emergency response frameworks are world leading and well placed to meet future challenges.

New Zealand has been affected by a number of significant events over the last six years starting with the Canterbury earthquakes in 2010/11 and more recently with a series of events post mid 2016 where responsibility for the management of the events lay with three different agencies, namely: Hawkes Bay gastroenteritis outbreak (Health), East Coast earthquake/tsunami (CDEM), Kaikoura Earthquake (CDEM) and Port Hills Fire (Rural Fire).

The current arrangements, of which Civil Defence is a part, is based on the principle that a range of agencies are legislated to lead a response depending on the type of hazard – e.g CDEM for natural disaster, Health for pandemic and Fire Service for management of fire. These arrangements are well understood by those in the CDEM sector but perhaps less so by the public.

The Minister has set up a Technical Advisory Group (TAG) and a Terms of Reference (attached) to review these arrangements and their legislative frameworks to improve the effectiveness of responding agencies. The review suggests that recent events have tested New Zealand’s response framework and its effectiveness in supporting decision making, information sharing and operational capability. The Terms of Reference looks at five outcomes to assess the current decision making models from central to local government, decision making and the chain of command, response capability and capacity and whether legislative changes are required to the CDEM Act 2002.

The review was initiated in early June and stakeholders have been asked to provide submissions on the review by 24 July to allow the TAG to report to the Minister by the end of August. The Northland Civil Defence Emergency Management Coordinating


Executive Group (CEG) have provided a submission to the TAG. The terms of reference and the Northland submission are attached to this report.

The following section outlines the key issues and required outcomes of the review and the Northland response.

2) Discussion and options Outcome One: the emergency response system is fit for purpose and aligns with stakeholder expectations. The Northland submission believes that inconsistent levels of readiness and response across stakeholders are not a function of deficiencies in the legislative frameworks but rather a lack of consistency across agencies and Territorial Local Authorities (TLA) in investing in capability and capacity. The Northland CDEM Group has consistently shown itself to have robust arrangements through MCDEM Monitoring and Evaluation reports and in the management of emergency events since the inception of the CDEM Act 2002. The Northland CDEM Group believes that the CDEM Act is appropriate and the TLA model is a suitable model especially for building community resilience and for staffing in escalating events. The Northland submission recommends a strategy to strengthen stakeholder engagement, ensure that the functions of CDEM groups under the Act are clearly understood and that the Ministry apply consistent standards and support to readiness and response arrangements.

Outcome Two: New Zealand has the appropriate response capability and capacity for civil defence emergency management responses. The Northland submission acknowledges that national response arrangements vary considerably from Group to Group and within stakeholder agencies. We believe that while there are qualified and experienced personnel able to be deployed nationally, there are no national standards to facilitate response, and there is also a lack of planning and coordination for the deployment of people. The Northland submission recommends the urgent development of a national capability framework to support response and that the Ministry investigate international best practice models such as the United Nations Disaster Assessment and Coordination (UNDAC) system as a model.

Outcome Three: Clearer definition of who determines the need for and declares a state of emergency and at what point the Director CDEM can step in to declare a state of local emergency. The Northland submission supports the current arrangements for declarations, appointment of controllers and their roles and functions, provided appropriate preparedness arrangements are in place. The submission recommends no change to the arrangements for declarations and suggests that the reasons for declaring an emergency are restated and clarified to ensure that declarations are only made to access the powers available under the Act.

Outcome Four: The chain of command, control, coordination and decision making during an emergency is effective and appropriate. The Northland submission contends that command and control in an event is a function of the level of expertise that leaders have to manage an event. A lack of


consistent benchmarking, gaps in training and professional development and the lessons learnt from the review of the Christchurch earthquake response need to be led by central government, particularly MCDEM, to ensure a national professional development programme and minimum standards for the use of Coordinated Incident Management System.

Outcome Five: Information flows into, across and out of the emergency response system effectively; allowing timely and accurate communication to Ministers, agencies, stakeholders and the public during emergencies. The Northland submission believes that variability across the country in interpreting and analysing warning information leads to confusion. This leads to inconsistency in the way Groups respond to warnings. Recent events have highlighted the need for a consistent ‘all of nation’ warning system. The group also highlights the fact that MCDEM have devolved responsibility for alerting and warning community to CDEM groups and there is a need to acknowledge the opportunities that smart technology can provide. MCDEM have also not taken advantage of the value of the national Emergency Management Information System (EMIS), whose use is highly variable.

The Northland group recommends a review of international best practice technology and the use of specialist Information Management personnel to source, analyse and report in a timely manner.

In summary, the Northland submission supports the principle of the review but contends that the problems identified that have led to the review are not indicative of operational capability in all regions. The Northland group contends that we have demonstrated through active and engaged stakeholders, strong relationship management and operational experience that the current arrangements can and do work, provided there is a high level of competency and leadership. The Northland submission acknowledges inconsistency across the country and recommends that greater emphasis is placed on providing a consistent national framework that includes investigation of international best practice.

3) Financial implications and budgetary provision No financial implications.

4) Reason for this report This report is for information only.


Attachment 1: Ministerial Review Terms of Reference - Better responses to natural disasters and other emergencies in New Zealand - Document number A1889351

Attachment 2: Submission from the Northland Coordinating Executive Group on the Ministerial Review – Better responses to natural disasters and other emergencies in New Zealand - Document number A1889352






b) Assess the options in terms of their advantages and disadvantages; and

c) If any of the options identified under paragraph (a) involves a significant decision in relation to land or a body of water, take into account the relationship of Māori and their culture and traditions with their ancestral land, water sites, waahi tapu, valued flora and fauna and other taonga.



Not applicable


Not applicable


Not applicable


No


The matter has district wide relevance



Until the review is completed there are no known financial implications.

The Chief Financial Officer has reviewed this report

1 June 2017 Ministerial Review: Terms of Reference

1

Ministerial Review Terms of Reference

Better responses to natural disasters and other emergencies in New Zealand

1. Purpose

This review will provide advice to the Minister of Civil Defence on the most appropriate operational and legislative mechanisms to support effective responses to natural disasters and other emergencies in New Zealand.

The purpose is to ensure that New Zealand’s emergency response framework is world leading, and well placed to meet future challenges. In light of recent events it is appropriate to see how we can further enhance and strengthen the current system.

2. Context

A series of recent hazard events and emergencies in New Zealand have resulted in wide spread reflection on whether the current operational and legislative settings for responding to natural disasters and other emergencies are fit for purpose.

Responsibility for the management of these events lay with three different agencies1. The civil defence emergency management sector was however involved in all three responses as either lead or support agency. In all three cases the effectiveness of the civil defence emergency management sector was called into question resulting in a loss of stakeholder, public and Ministerial confidence in the response system.

The National Security System, of which civil defence emergency management is a part, has a range of lead agencies that operate under different legislative mandates, depending on the hazard type. The complexity of the system is well understood by those agencies that operate within its framework, but are not widely publicised or understood by the public2.

Many lessons from the Canterbury earthquakes of 2010 and 2011 and other events have been successfully embedded into the operation of the current civil defence emergency management system. However there has been no significant review of the organisational structures, roles and decision-making powers, within which responses are orchestrated. It is timely to take a wide look at how the sum of those parts work together. In particular, to consider whether any changes to settings could optimise the civil defence emergency management system’s performance in the response phase.

1 August 2016 Hawkes Bay gastroenteritis outbreak (lead agency Health); 2 September 2016 East Cape earthquake and tsunami (lead agency Civil Defence Emergency Management); 14 November 2016 Kaikoura earthquake and tsunami (lead agency Civil Defence Emergency Management); and 13 February 2017 Port Hills fire (lead agency Selwyn Rural Fire Authority). 2 November 2016, Controller and Auditor General report Governance of the National Security System.


Emergency Management Office Northland Regional Council

Private Bag 9021 Whangarei 0140

Phone: (09)470 1200

Fax: (09) 470 1202 www.nrc.govt.nz/civildefence

File Ref: A963338 7/07/2017 The Chairperson, Technical Advisory Group, Ministerial Review – CDEM Response, Wellington Dear Mr Sowry MINISTERIAL REVIEW Please find attached a submission prepared by the Northland Coordinating Executive Group on the Ministerial Review – Better responses to natural disasters and other emergencies in New Zealand. Due to the restricted timeframes, our submission is on behalf of the Northland CEG, since we have not had the opportunity to meet with our CDEM Group members. If there are matters in the submission that you may wish to discuss further, please contact me directly. Yours Sincerely

Tony Phipps Chairman Northland Coordinating Executive Group


Northland Civil Defence Emergency Management Coordinating Executive Group 1

Submission from the Northland Coordinating Executive Group on the Ministerial Review - Better responses to natural disasters and other

emergencies in New Zealand.

Introduction 1. Thank you for the opportunity to make this submission. The submission is made

on behalf of the Northland Civil Defence Emergency Management Group. 2. The Northland CDEM Group supports the purpose of the review; ensuring that New

Zealand’s emergency response framework is world leading, fit-for-purpose, and well placed to meet future challenges.

3. We understand that recent operational responses may not have been effective as

they could have been; however, we submit that those responses are not indicative of operational response capability in all regions.

4. The Northland CDEM Group has established a high level of capability, capacity and

stakeholder engagement across the Northland region since the introduction of the Civil Defence Emergency Management Act 2002. Through an active and engaged joint committee and Coordinating Executive Group, we have focused upon ensuring that all stakeholder’s clearly understand their roles and responsibilities under the CDEM Act.

5. Through strong leadership and relationship management the Group has ensured

the development of functional and informed Lifelines Utility Group and Welfare Coordination Group.

6. The Northland CDEM Group and its stakeholders have experience in operational

responses to medium scale emergencies within its region and deployment of personnel to assist in other regions for larger scale events. Northland has demonstrated that it has the capacity and capability to deliver an operational response that is fit for purpose.

7. The Northland CDEM Group supports the enhancement of readiness and response

arrangements nationally to ensure that there is capability and capacity to deliver an effective operational response across all regions in New Zealand.

8. Civil Defence Emergency Management readiness and response takes into

consideration the wide variation of circumstances that exist in New Zealand, from the Auckland metropolitan context to the small rural local authority.

9. We have considered each of the outcomes from the terms of reference. Fit for Purpose Response 10. Outcome 1 : The emergency response system is fit for purpose and aligns with

stakeholder expectations. 11. The Civil Defence Emergency Management Act 2002, National Plan, guide to the

National Plan and supporting Coordinated Incident Management Systems doctrine provide a solid platform to support fit for purpose readiness and response arrangements.



12. Amendments to the Civil Defence Emergency Management Act are not required.

13. Some regions, including Northland have in place robust and effective readiness

and response arrangements that have been actively developed and implemented since the inception of the Civil Defence Emergency Management Act 2002.

14. Appropriate levels of readiness and response vary considerably across a variety of

key stakeholders and agencies. That some agencies and members lack an understanding of the responsibilities outlined in the Act, National Plan or the guide.

15. MCDEM Monitoring and Evaluation reports and other reviews have clearly

highlighted that there are Groups that have areas to work on to improve and enhance readiness and response capability.

16. Arrangements and understanding of the capability and capacity of some agencies

with specialist expertise is in our view not integrated at a level that is operationally effective. Often the Defence Forces in New Zealand are available to assist in responding to emergencies however planning, training, and exercising with the defence forces has been limited.

17. The Territorial Local Authority model that applies to CDEM is a suitable

arrangement. Some CDEM groups have invested in Community Response Planning, which is proven to enhance community resilience. The TLA model also provides the ability to scale up in terms of staff resource during response.

18. It is not the framework which is at fault, but more the application of the act and its requirements in a consistent manner across the country.

Recommendations 19. Implement a nationally led strategy to strengthen stakeholder engagement,

enhance relationships, collaboration and understanding of agency responsibilities outlined in the Civil Defence Emergency Management Act, the National Plan and the guide to the plan.

20. Act to ensure that the functions of Civil Defence Emergency Management Groups

(S.17, CDEM Act) are clearly understood and are acted upon by the responsible agencies.

21. Implement a national plan to ensure that adequate consistent standards of

readiness and response arrangements exists across the sixteen Civil Defence Emergency Management Groups and that the standards are supported nationally.

22. Reinforce that the current legislation provides a robust platform for Civil Defence

Emergency Management readiness and response.



Response Capability and Capacity 23. Outcome 2: New Zealand has the appropriate response capability and capacity for

civil defence emergency management responses. 24. New Zealand does not have the appropriate response capability and capacity for

civil defence emergency management responses nationally.

25. Current response arrangements, or lack of them, vary considerably and allow each group to provide for their own arrangements. Recent emergencies have highlighted deficiencies.

26. There are qualified experienced personnel to deploy nationally, however

deployment arrangements are poorly coordinated or planned for, and emergency response arrangements are often confused and muddled, or poorly understood and implemented.

27. Our key concern is that that there are a lack of national standards or models that

have been implemented to facilitate medium scale event response, let alone a large-scale event.

28. An example of a proven model is the United Nations Disaster Assessment and

Coordination (UNDAC) systems which has a history of successful deployments to sudden onset disasters internationally. Assessment, coordination and information management are UNDAC's core mandates in an emergency response mission.

29. The UNDAC system comprises four components:

Staff: Experienced emergency managers made available for UNDAC missions by their respective governments or organizations. UNDAC members are specially trained and equipped for their task.

Methodology: Pre-defined methods for establishing coordination structures, and for organizing and facilitating assessments and information management during the first phase of a sudden-onset disaster or emergency.

Procedures: Proven systems to mobilize and deploy an UNDAC team to arrive at the disaster or emergency site within 12-48 hours of the request.

Equipment: Personal and mission equipment for UNDAC teams to be self-sufficient in the field when deployed for disasters/emergencies.

30. The UNDAC model could be applied to the New Zealand context to provide a

national response capability and capacity.

31. Those government agencies with responsibilities should also be members of any national support arrangements capable of being deployed to a region, including Welfare, Police, MPI, FENZ and other key agencies.

Recommendations 32. Urgently develop a national level capability to support response in the regions or at

the national level.



33. Consider the international best practise models that exist and how best to implement those models into the New Zealand context.

34. Develop and implement a standardised national template for emergency readiness

and response arrangements, including deployment, assessment, information management, command and control, that includes representation from all the key agencies

35. Develop minimum standards for regional readiness and response capability and

capacity across CDEM Groups including Welfare arrangements and Lifelines Utility capability.

36. Any national support system must be a living arrangement, supported by

professional development, human resources policy, memorandums of understanding and resources

Declarations 37. Outcome 3: Clearer definition of who determines the need for and declares a state

of emergency and at what point the Director Civil Defence Emergency Management can step in to declare a state of emergency.

38. The model and the legislation that supports emergency response, particularly

declarations, the appointment of local and group controllers, and their roles and functions is workable and satisfactory in an operational setting provided the appropriate preparedness arrangements are in place.

39. The current devolved decision-making model from central to local government, and

framework of lead and support agencies to manage response is a model that is appropriate for emergency management in the New Zealand context.

40. Recently we have seen the thresholds for declarations alter, whereby there has

been a shift from the long held rational of declaring an emergency was to have the Controllers powers in the CDEM Act. Through other pressures, we have recently seen declarations made for reasons other than to use the powers of the Act. We do not support the approach of declaring emergencies for reasons other than to access the powers.

41. We do not support any interim arrangements and believe that the current

declaration processes and appointments of persons authorised to make declarations, if applied, are both timely and rigorous.

Recommendations 42. Reinforce that the current arrangements for declarations are robust and there is no

requirement to change or alter the current legislative mandates.

43. Consideration be given to clarifying, in an updated guideline, the reasons for declaring an emergency i.e. powers v public interest.



Command and Control 44. Outcome 4: The chain of command and control, coordination, and decision making

during an emergency is effective and appropriate.

45. Whether command and control is appropriate in any event will depend upon those in the leadership roles and the level of expertise to carry out the appropriate functions

46. We submit that there is a need for consistent levels or benchmarks nationally for

each of the sixteen groups to achieve in terms of capacity and capability. There is currently considerable variation in the levels of readiness, including capacity of Welfare arrangements, Lifelines arrangements and more significantly in the training and experience of those personnel who will be required to respond.

47. Gaps in training, professional development and consistency in applying response arrangements have been identified nationally. The lessons learnt and gaps identified from the Christchurch earthquake response were the subject of a detailed report and “corrective action plan,” and it seems that these corrective actions may not have transferred into the operational response arrangements.

48. These include such things as – inability to identify and efficiently deploy in a timely manner appropriately qualified and skilled personnel; inability to appropriately manage and share information across an emergency event (including to the public); confusion around organisational roles and responsibilities, and inability to manage and coordinate a response, including the capability to carry out coordinated needs assessments.

49. Our submission is that central government, particularly MCDEM, should take

ownership of ensuring that there are consistent and well understood arrangements in place for responding to an emergency, and that the arrangements are integrated across the sixteen groups.

50. The New Zealand Coordinated Incident Management System was introduced in 1998, and revised in April 2014. CIMS establishes a framework of consistent principles, structures, functions, processes and terminology that agencies can apply in emergency response.

51. In the forward to the 2nd edition of CIMS Andrew Kibblewhite noted that “CIMS will

not guarantee effective response arrangements by itself. Successful and effective response rests in the understanding and application of the CIMS concepts by the agencies. The responsibility is therefore upon agencies to note and apply CIMS appropriately.”

52. Implementation of CIMS has been inconsistent and to be effective CIMS must be

the baseline operating procedures agreed and used by all responding agencies.

53. The development of the Integrated Training Framework is a step forward in professional development, however, to date the outcomes from the programme have been mixed. It is unclear if there is a strategy for the delivery of the Integrated Training Framework and what MCDEM’s expectations are in regards to it. ITF should be part of a wider Capability Strategy.



Recommendations 54. Implement a standardised national programme of professional development for

response personnel including Coordinated Incident Management Systems. 55. Reinforce the requirement that Coordinated Incident Management Systems is the

standard operating procedure for multi-agency response and ensure that the concept of lead agency is understood and adhered too.

Information Management 56. Outcome 5: Information flows into, across, and out of the emergency response

system effectively, allowing timely and accurate communication to Ministers; agencies; officials; stakeholders with particular interests; and to the public during emergencies

57. Since the Boxing Day tsunami in 2004 the Northland CDEM Group has progressively grown and enhanced regional level warning and alerting arrangements to ensure that communities receive timely notifications. Northland has developed an extensive region wide Tsunami siren network which was installed in 2012. MCDEM developed a guideline in 2015 for tsunami sirens and alerting. Each region’s alerting mechanisms are different and are out of step with each other.

58. The tsunami warning issued immediately after the Kaikoura earthquake is an

example of the inconsistent approaches adopted to emergency response in New Zealand. Despite notification, the urgency and the assessment, there was inconsistency and variation in how groups responded. This event highlighted the desperate need for a consistent all of nation single warning system whereby information is disseminated from a single point of contact at national level across all platforms, including social media to the community and responders.

59. The current system causes confusion and in-consistency since information is

provided to sixteen CDEM groups, who in turn “interpret and analyse” then send out variations of the original message. A single authoritative direction is required.

60. In the months before the Kaikoura earthquake CDEM Groups nationally were made

aware of, and offered the use of the “Red Cross Hazard app,” an alerting platform capable of being used to disseminate alerting and warning information to the public. Several groups, including the Northland CDEM Group took up the offer to utilise this technology. MCDEM were offered the use of the app, which would act to strengthen the national warning system, however they declined the offer.

61. MCDEM have devolved the responsibility for warning and alerting communities to

CDEM Groups and have made little progress in recent years in implementing any form of smart technology to speed up or enhance distribution of information through social media channels or other media channels, instead they have maintained an email, and text based system. The recent review and change in the NWS has neglected the interface with social media.

62. The national Emergency Management Information System (EMIS) has a role to play in managing and sharing information across a broad range of stakeholders during any emergency event, however EMIS has been poorly implemented, it’s use is highly variable and in our view, it’s value is not being optimised. Nothing explicit



concerning the way groups shall use EMIS exists and there are no guidelines for groups about the agreed standards or levels of use. EMIS also lacks a nationwide programme for implementation, which was left to groups.

63. Needs assessment is fundamental to all emergency response, yet in New Zealand

there is no standard practices, agreed protocols, nor agreed technology to gather and analyse information. Internationally there are protocols, standard practices and processes, including a freely available and operative collection data base. International best practise could be easily transferred into the New Zealand emergency management context.

Recommendations 64. Urgently review and incorporate where practical international best practice

technology and processes into readiness and response, particularly impact and needs assessment.

65. Review, consider and implement technology that provides interface with alerting systems, and information management and analysis.

66. Develop at a national level specialist personnel who are information management

specialist capable of sourcing, analysing and reporting on information in a timely and efficient manner.



2

3. Project Definition

The problem

The purpose of the review is to ensure that New Zealand’s emergency response framework is world leading, fit-for-purpose, and well placed to meet future challenges.

The current organisational structures, roles and decision-making powers in the civil defence emergency management response system need to align with the expectations for system performance.

Recent events tested New Zealand’s response framework, and its effectiveness in supporting decision making, information sharing and operational capability. In particular it has been noted that:

- The underlying principle of “act locally, coordinate regionally, support nationally” may not be suitable in all circumstances.

- Decisions are not necessarily made by adequately skilled and experienced people, mandated at the appropriate level of government, and supported by the best information possible in the circumstances.

- Volunteers may not be adequately supported by a professional emergency management force.

- Information is not always readily available to decision makers on the scale, complexity and evolving nature of the emergency, to determine the capacity and capabilities required for the response effort.

- There is a need for timely, consistent and accurate communication to the public.

- Response capabilities are not necessarily deployed as promptly and seamlessly as possible, taking advantage of economies of scale and the experience of senior responders.

In summary, the operational and legislative settings within the system may not be performing optimally to meet current and future needs, and the role that New Zealanders need it to play.

Scope The work will examine:

The current devolved decision-making model from central to local government, and framework of lead and support agencies to manage response to emergencies arising from specific hazards.

Decision making and chain of command, including:

- who has the power to declare a State of Emergency, and

- whether there is a need for an interim mechanism to manage a localised event with significant consequences or that could evolve into a state of local emergency or a state of national emergency.

Response capability and capacity.



3

Whether legislative changes are required to the Civil Defence Emergency Management Act 2002 (and other legislation related to emergency response).

Outcome 1: The emergency response system is fit for purpose and aligns with stakeholder expectations, taking account of the need to prioritise preventing death, injury, and property damage, and the fast-moving nature and uncertainty of emergencies.

Outcome 2: New Zealand has the appropriate response capability and capacity for civil defence emergency management responses.

The system capacity supports the availability of appropriately skilled and responsive resourcing, regardless of the location and scale of the emergency.

Appropriate protocols exist to enable supporting agencies to swing promptly into action.

Agencies with specialist capabilities (such as logistics, aerial surveillance and interpretation) are knitted into the fabric of a response.

Business continuity across the whole of government supports an effective response and prompt recovery.

Outcome 3: Clearer definition of who determines the need for and declares a state of emergency and at what point the Director Civil Defence Emergency Management can step in to declare a state of emergency.

A single lead role across any geographical area affected by natural disaster

The purpose and consequences of declarations of states of emergency are clear

Appropriate interventions and escalations are available.

Outcome 4: The chain of command and control, coordination, and decision making during an emergency is effective and appropriate.

There is a clear operating model and chain of command and control and coordination during response, including the recognition of lead and support agencies.

The system enables decisions to be made quickly, by appropriately skilled and experienced people, mandated at the right level, within the most appropriate agency and incorporating the best available information.

All participants in the system understand the operating picture and their respective roles and responsibilities, including how these might change over the course of the response or as the event unfolds.



4

Outcome 5: Information flows into, across, and out of the emergency response system effectively, allowing timely and accurate communication to Ministers; agencies; officials; stakeholders with particular interests; and to the public during emergencies.

Recognition of the modern news cycle – immediacy of social media and power of factual decisive information delivered as speedily as possible

Stakeholder needs are understood (what information is required; where and how to gather the information, providing it at the right time and in the right format).

Official information maintains pace with media dialogue and social media activity.

The work will not examine the current legislative framework for hazard risk assessment and management set out in other legislation, for example the Resource Management Act 1991, but may make reference to any further work or consideration that may be necessary to better fit other Acts to enable resilience and preparedness.

Consultation and Engagement

The chair of the Technical Advisory Group is expected to agree with the Minister of Civil Defence the overall process, including matters of consultation and engagement. There is significant benefit in direct engagement with key stakeholders, as their contribution will add value to the Technical Advisory Group’s advice. This should include providing for engagement with local government, emergency services, relevant government departments, and iwi and Māori. The means of consultation and engagement will need to reflect the time available and it is recognised that engagement will commonly be though the chair and the secretariat.

Key Deliverable

A review document examining the current operational and legislative settings for responding to emergencies and the recommended options for change.

The document will be provided to the Minister of Civil Defence no later than three months from the date of the agreement to these Terms of Reference.



5

4. Governance

Sponsor Minister of Civil Defence

Technical Advisory Group

A Technical Advisory Group made up of:

Roger Sowry, as Chair;

Benesia Smith MNZM, independent consultant;

Malcolm Alexander, Chief Executive, Local Government New Zealand;

Assistant Commissioner Mike Rusbatch, New Zealand Police;

Deputy National Commander Kerry Gregory, New Zealand Fire Service;

Major General Tim Gall, New Zealand Defence Force;

Sarah Stuart-Black, Director, Ministry of Civil Defence and Emergency Management.

Project Team and Secretariat

The project team and secretariat is headed by Jeremy Corban.



Item: 13.1 MEETING: COUNCIL - 10 AUGUST 2017 Name of Item: CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER’S REPORT - PERIOD:

JUNE/JULY 2017 Author: Ian Robertson - Non Financial Reporting Officer



Executive Summary The purpose of the report is to present the Chief Executive Officer’s Report - Period: June/July 2017 for Council’s consideration.

Recommendation: THAT the report entitled “Chief Executive Officer’s Report - Period: June/July 2017” dated 14 July 2017 be noted.

1) Background The Chief Executive Officer’s report builds on a month by month basis to deliver a chronological, comprehensive and transparent insight into Council that is easily understood by Elected Members and ratepayers alike. Emphasis is placed on relevant issues and pressures Council is experiencing whilst meeting its objectives to the community and covers an overview across all activities that Council undertakes.

The Chief Executive Officer’s report is attached and covers a detailed overview of progress against Council’s activities. His Worship the Mayor and Councillors’ feedback is welcomed.

2) Discussion and options Feedback is encouraged in order to deliver a quality and meaningful report to Council and ratepayers.

3) Financial implications and budgetary provision There are no financial implications or budgetary provision needed as a result of this report.

4) Reason for the recommendation This report is for information only.

Manager: Shaun Clarke - Chief Executive Officer

Attachment 1: Chief Executive Officer’s Report - Period: June / July 2017 Document number A1888634










Not applicable.


Not applicable.


Not applicable.


Not applicable.


Not applicable.



There are no financial implications or the need for budgetary provision as a result of this report.



Chief Executive Officer’s Report To Council Period: June-July 2017

Key Work Plan Areas: Strategy Governance Corporate Operations Communications LGOIMA Community Wellbeing

Introduction Welcome to this CEO report, which provides an overview on the Council’s activities for the period June - July 2017.


Chief Executive Officer’s Report to Council

June - July 2017

Contents

Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 4

Ten highlights from June and July 2017 ........................................................................ 4

Strategy ............................................................................................................................... 5

Annual Plan 2017/18 ........................................................................................................ 5

Long-Term Plan 2018-2028 ............................................................................................. 5

Polices and Bylaws ......................................................................................................... 5

Community and Social Development ............................................................................. 5

District Plan Review ........................................................................................................ 6

Current Plan Change Processes .................................................................................... 7

Iwi, Hapu and Iwi Local Government Chief Executive Forum ...................................... 7

Treaty Settlements / Legislation ..................................................................................... 7

Economic Development .................................................................................................. 7

RBI2 and Mobile Blackspot ..................................................................................................... 7

Tai Tokerau Northland Economic Action Plan ................................................................... 8

Regional Advocacy Projects assigned to FNDC ........................................................... 8

Iwi Relationships ........................................................................................................................ 8

Papakainga Guideline work stream ............................................................................................... 9

Community Broadband Initiatives ......................................................................................... 9

Contact Centre ............................................................................................................................ 9

ICT Architecture Review ........................................................................................................... 9

Governance ....................................................................................................................... 10

Separation of Organisation and Governance responsibilities ................................... 10

Support to Council, Committees and Community Boards ......................................... 10

Terms of Reference ....................................................................................................... 10

CEO Participation in Regional and National Forums .................................................. 11

Corporate ........................................................................................................................... 12

Year End Council Financial Reporting ......................................................................... 12

Risk and Improvement .................................................................................................. 12

People and Capability - Summary of Activity .............................................................. 12

Leaders’ Forum ......................................................................................................................... 12

Leading Change ....................................................................................................................... 12


Report Writing and Reviewing .............................................................................................. 12

People Culture and Performance ......................................................................................... 13

Collective Union Negotiations .............................................................................................. 13

Health, Safety & Wellbeing .................................................................................................... 13

Operations ......................................................................................................................... 15

Customer Service Improvement Initiatives .................................................................. 15

Community and Customer Services Management ...................................................... 15

Te Ahu Transition .......................................................................................................... 15

Annual $15 Library Borrowers’ Fee Scrapped ............................................................ 15

Letter of Thanks ............................................................................................................ 15

Resource Consent Management .................................................................................. 15

Building Consent Management .................................................................................... 16

Compliance and Contract Management ....................................................................... 16

Nga Kuri Auau o Kaikohe Dog Day .............................................................................. 16

Kerikeri Wastewater Scheme ........................................................................................ 16

Allen Bell Drive, Kaitaia................................................................................................. 17

Dust issue on Pipiwai Road .......................................................................................... 17

Resurfacing of Waipapakauri Netball Courts .............................................................. 17

Communications ............................................................................................................... 18

FNDC website content .................................................................................................. 18

Annual resident survey ................................................................................................. 18

General ........................................................................................................................... 19

LGOIMA ............................................................................................................................. 20

Monthly Statistics 2017 ................................................................................................. 20


Introduction The Chief Executive Officer’s report builds on a six weekly basis to deliver a chronological, comprehensive and transparent insight into Council activities. It is our aim that is easily understood by Elected Members and ratepayers alike.

We have divided this report into sections that reflect the committee structure of the Council. Emphasis is placed on relevant issues and pressures Council is experiencing whilst meeting its objectives to the community, and covers an overview across all activities that Council undertakes.

Below we list ten highlights from this report.

Ten highlights from June and July 2017 • Contracts have been signed to develop Iwi Management Plans with NgaiTakato and

Ngāti Kuri.

• FNDC and Kaipara District Council have entered into the joint procurement of a contact centre solution.

• Defibrillators are now installed at Kaikohe HQ and JBC Level 2.

• Learning Resilience Workshops for staff were held in Kaitaia, Kerikeri and Kaikohe.

• A Customer Experience Programme Manager has been appointed, and will promote improvements to the customer experience when dealing with council.

• Annual $15 library Borrowers’ Fee Scrapped.

• The highest number of Building Consent applications since 2008, was recorded in May with building inspection numbers rising from 600 to 900.

• 93% of Compliance related RFS’s are being responded to within agreed timeframes.

• 95 Kaikohe dogs were microchipped for free and 80 signed-up for neutering at hugely successful ‘chip and snip’ Nga Kuri Auau o Kaikohe Dog Day on Friday 9 June 2017.

• Work on the Kerikeri Wastewater Scheme has now commenced.


Strategy

Sustainable District Strategy and Spatial Plan • A first draft of the Sustainable District Strategy was presented to Elected Members at a

workshop that was held after the 19 July 2017 Strategy Committee meeting. The purpose of the workshop was to walk the Elected Members through the draft sustainable development strategy ‘He Whenua Rangatira’ to gain feedback and discuss the engagement programme (including the key stakeholders to be involved).

Annual Plan 2017/18 • The Annual Plan for 2017/18 was adopted on 22 June 2017 and is in the process of

being printed and distributed. The Plan has been uploaded to the Council website along with the Fees and Charges schedule for 2017/18.

Long-Term Plan 2018-2028 • The Long Term Plan for 2018-2028 continues to pick up speed. Operational expenditure

budgets are well advanced, as are plans for our key asset areas. A schedule of workshops is being formulated, with the first workshop occurring towards the end of July 2017. At this workshop we will work with Elected Members to set the direction for the LTP, imparting how far we have come from the last LTP, discussing and confirming community outcomes and strategic direction, and talking through staff ideas for early engagement. We will also seek input to the key parameters of our Infrastructure and Financial Strategies. In the meantime preparatory work is being carried out in other LTP work streams such as fees/charges and level of service measure reviews.

Polices and Bylaws • The draft Dog Control Bylaw and Dog Policy were presented to the Community Boards

at their July 2017 meetings. General feedback and recommended amendments were collected from each of the boards and will be used to contribute to the final draft.

• Work continues on the Significance and Engagement Policy with the current focus being on identifying clear significance thresholds.

• The development of an internal policy and set of guidelines for Building Consents on Māori Freehold Land has been completed. The guidelines were developed to guide building consent staff through the complex nature of ownership and required approvals for building on Māori freehold land. They have been tested with building consent staff and discussed with specialists working in the Māori freehold land space. An internal policy was then developed to support the guidelines. A series of FAQs are being developed for the community to ensure that applicants provide the appropriate information required by staff and will be shared on the Council website.

Community and Social Development • The Make it Happen Te Hiku (MIHTH) Continuous Improvement Assessment and

Recommendations (for the future of MIHTH) has been completed. The following recommendations will be made to the Minister, the Hon. Anne Tolley:

1. That the current Make It Happen Te Hiku Taskforce should be disbanded and a new group comprised of local community representatives should be formed.

2. That in its revised form the new group should:

Focus on being a mechanism through which communities (versus agencies and organisations) can have more direct input into investment decisions relating to them.


Support / complement opportunities for community development and engagement which are aligned with the MiHTH priority areas including One Voice One Vision.

Become the Community Investment Advisory Group for Kainga Ora

• The development of the Rawene Community Development Plan (CDP) has been completed and will be launched for community feedback through an open day on 29 July 2017.

• The Russell CDP community consultation and feedback is complete and changes are being made.

• The Broadwood Community has had two workshops to develop their CDP and the next one is being held on 22 August 2017. NRC has been invited to attend the workshop.

• Discussions are underway with Te Rarawa regarding the small communities that surround the Warawara Forest, and how we might do a collective development process for these settlements and how we would align with the work being undertaken by Te Rarawa.

• Local Community Economic or Social Enterprise Development: we are working with Matihetihe Marae at Mitimiti to develop an independent travellers' stop.

• The Far North Youth Council gained $10,000 from the Ministry of Youth Development (MYD) towards wider Youth Council participation in the Inspiring Stories Leadership Programme. We have reported to MYD that the total number of unique individual young people involved in this Leadership Programme was 28. Updates, images and stories can be found on the Far North Youth Council page on

Facebook https://www.facebook.com/FarNorthYouthCouncil or the Google Drive where images from the Whangarei Future Leaders participants are stored https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/0B1ex1jueUxgpLWdpdUxOMHVFwXM?usp=sharing

District Plan Review • The making of the new District Plan is taking place against a backdrop of change within

the regulatory environment.

• Amendments to the Resource Management Act from the Resource Legislation Amendment Bill, have introduced a range of new tools for making plans. The amendments include ‘streamlined’ and ‘collaborative’ plan making processes that generally allow for more flexible arrangements between stakeholders, Council and the community when considering a plan change proposal.

• Of particular relevance to the making of the new District Plan is the creation of National Planning Standards. The amendments to the Act require that new standards are to be gazetted by March 2019. Their intent is to standardise key elements of plans, including definitions, plan structure and even the title of zones. The amendments to the Act specify timeframes for the making of the standards and timeframes for integration into District Plans. Far North District Council is the only Northland Council to participate in a pilot program for the development of the new planning standards. This means that Council can advise the Ministry on the workability of their new approach whilst we align our new Plan to the new format and content.

• The Ministry for the Environment conducted a workshop for Council planners and Northland practitioners on 26 June 2017 where the main components of the new planning standard were explored and tested. The District Plan Department will continue to participate in this programme and will update our elected members on the implications for the making of the new District Plan.

https://www.facebook.com/FarNorthYouthCouncil

https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/0B1ex1jueUxgpLWdpdUxOMHVFwXM?usp=sharing


Current Plan Change Processes • A number of plan changes are being progressed through the completion of the rolling

review program. These are:

Plan Change 15 Rural Provisions – all appeals have now been resolved and Council’s final consideration of the plan change is scheduled for the August Council meeting.

Plan Change 20 Traffic Parking and Access – decisions on the plan change were approved at the June Council meeting. The decisions were publicly notified on 28 June. Appeals can be lodged within 20 working days of public notification

Proposed Plan Change 18 Genetically Modified Organisms – awaiting appeals to be resolved on higher order planning instruments before progressing to appeals on Council’s GMO Plan Change

Iwi, Hapu and Iwi Local Government Chief Executive Forum

• Contracts have been signed to develop Iwi Management Plans with NgaiTakato and Ngāti Kuri. NgaiTakato has been funded to complete the last stage of their Plan and Ngāti Kuri will begin July 2017, both Plans have been co-funded with NRC.

• The Iwi Local Government Agencies Chief Executive Forum (ILGACE) has not met over the June / July period, however Iwi and Council CEOs provided support at a meeting between Te Kahu o Taonui (Taitokerau Iwi Chairs Forum) and Mayors / Chairs. The outcome of the meeting was that Iwi and Council CEOs have been tasked with drafting an agreement for further consideration. It is expected that a draft agreement will be tabled at the 18 August 2017 Mayoral Forum where a representative group of Iwi Chairs will be in attendance to discuss.

Treaty Settlements / Legislation • The Te Oneroa-a-Tōhē Board met to consider and progress data and information

collection that would support the development of a Beach Management Plan.

• Week 24 of the Waitangi Tribunal Hearings was hosted by the Whangarei Taiwhenua from 20-23 June 2017 to hear the closing submissions for the Whangarei, Mahurangi, Mangakahia and Hokianga Taiwhenua as well as some kaupapa claims.

• The Ngatikahu ki Whangaroa Settlement Bill is still within the Committee of the Whole House and at this stage it is unclear when its Third Reading will occur.

• The applications that Council has received for the recognition of customary interests under the Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Act 2011, is being managed via our Legal Services Team.

Economic Development RBI2 and Mobile Blackspot • Vodafone, Spark and 2Degrees have formed a joint venture company, the Rural

Connectivity Group (RCG). Vodafone and Spark representatives presented at NRC then in the Far North to FNDC Elected Members on behalf of the group. The RCG have clearly stated that if they do not get all of the $150 million for rural broadband and cellular blackspots, they will withdraw from the Crown Fibre procurement process.

• Council, through Mayor Carter, wrote to the Hon Minister Simon Bridges about the need for greater investment and retiming of the UFB rollout. We were referred back to Crown Fibre and the Providers, who we were already engaging with. While it is understandable, it is disappointing that Minister Bridges announced $120 Million of funding for Canterbury for digital initiatives, when we have already identified digital as an enabler in our TTEAP and had feedback from both providers and Crown Fibre Holdings that our region has been the most proactive and engaged region in the ongoing RBI process.


Tai Tokerau Northland Economic Action Plan • The findings of the review and refresh of the Action Plan were presented to the Working

Group at their June 2017 meeting. A workshop is to be held in July 2017 to develop a draft framework for the refreshed Action Plan.

Northland Strategic Collaboration and Shared Activities • The major projects are:

RBI2 and Mobile Blackspot initiative Three Waters regional work programme GIS Iwi Relationships ICT regional work programme

Collaboration and Shared Activities Matrix

Collaboration Projects Shared Services Projects

FNDC Regional Advocacy – to address Northland “One Voice” issues

FNDC Contact centre operations

FNDC Iwi Relationships – single conduit and enhance Councils support for Māori development opportunities

FNDC ICT Architecture work programmer

NRC FNDC

Northland strategy for economic development Regional connectivity Community Broadband

FNDC Libraries (Lower priority)

WDC Roads and Transport FNDC I-sites (Lower priority) WDC Three Waters regional work

programme WDC Joint procurement

WDC Solid Waste FNDC (Originally KDC, then WDC)

Common building compliance accreditation

NRC Commercial property NRC GIS WDC Policy development, bylaws and

engineering standards NRC/WDC Shared rating system

NRC Recreation, sport and cultural facilities

NRC Human resources – payroll, health and safety, terms and conditions, systems

Regional Advocacy Projects assigned to FNDC Iwi Relationships Whanaketia te whenua, kia ora ai te tangata – Developing the land to benefit the people.

Rating Policy work stream • A Rates Remission Policy to Incentivise Economic Development on Māori Freehold Land

has been developed and is awaiting feedback from WDC and KDC.

GIS work stream • Feedback from the Tai Tokerau Iwi Chief Executives Consortium has outlined that there

is no firm position in synergising this GIS activity with the consortium’s Mauri Whenua Ora project. Therefore the briefing paper has been drafted on this basis and is yet to be confirmed by the work stream.


Papakainga Guideline work stream • The contract to develop a Tai Tokerau Papakainga Toolkit has been awarded to Barker

and Associates with David Badham as the lead. The design concepts have been confirmed and work is progressing towards delivery of the final product at the end of July 2017.

Community Broadband Initiatives • This is being progressed by Northland Inc. broadband providers and the communities of

Waima, Awanui, Te Hapua and Nukuwhiti

Contact Centre

• FNDC and Kaipara District Council have entered into the joint procurement of a contact centre solution from the All of Government Telecommunications as a Service offering.

• Both Councils have now confirmed the necessary telecommunications networking requirements that are needed to allow the procured solution to operate in each Councils IT Environments.

• The next phase is the joint implementation of the contact centre solution based on business use scenarios. The end state for this project will be advanced capabilities available to contact centre staff, front line staff and improved tools for the management of the contact centre for team leaders

ICT Architecture Review

• A regional ICT Architecture review was completed in the last half of 2016. The Local Government Commission engaged Equinox IT for the review. The Four Northland Councils regrouped on 12 May 2017 and identified eight of the foundation opportunities within the review to progress further into a work programme.

• From the most recent CEO’s forum the following priorities for regional ICT have been confirmed: Common Processes Supporting technology for regional initiatives Common processes and technology to support future business models

• The regional ICT team plan to meet on 26 July 2017 to plan out the programme of work based on the eight foundation opportunities and the direction provided by the CEO Forum.


Governance Separation of Organisation and Governance responsibilities • A project around procedural and cultural change in the way the governance and

operational levels of the FNDC relate and conduct business has been initiated. This includes, but is not limited to, all Elected Members conducting future business with staff through the CEO’s office.

• The General Business Rules can be summarised as:

Communications with individuals in the organisation being passed to the CEO Office for management or GM delegation with effect from 26 Jun 2017;

Where issues are passed to the CEO, a ‘Date & Promise’ (D&P) will be issued within 5 working days (for purposes of communication back to complainants that the matter is now in the hands of the CEO and staff, as this first D&P is set, HWTM or EM can extract themselves from the issue);

With effect from 26 June 2017 the need to chase up lagging issues will be handled by the CEO Office;

The only need to re-raise an issue with the CEO is if it is re-raised by the public etc. (the CEO undertakes to have staff manage issues well enough to minimise this happening);

• Where operational issues are raised with HWTM and EMs by the public / complainants / appellants, HWTM and EMs should simply be able to refer these to the CEO and, if necessary, communicate a D&P back to the constituent directly.

• Phase one of empowering the FNDC staff is to achieve these business rules in reality, so that the CEO’s office controls the management of all operational issues. Phase two of the process will be to pass the management of the majority of such issues to GM level to monitor with real authority and accountability at that level;

• Also the CEO has a number of major lines of improvement underway for Council Staff in general, including: improving the RFS system, D&P-driven case management, and improving Customer Service Culture.

• The future vision is for FNDC and Elected Members, and for the Mayor’s Office in particular, to be on the ‘front foot’ with the District rather than on the defensive – proactive and leaderful rather than simply responsive and working the staff.

Support to Council, Committees and Community Boards

• Support continues to be provided to all Council, Committees and Community Boards through meeting administration and legislative and procedural advice.

• Jo Brosnahan has been engaged by the Governance Committee to establish performance criteria for the Governance arm of Council. A workshop is planned for 6 September 2017 with all elected members.

LGNZ Excellence Programme • Draft report submitted to Mayor, Chairs of Committees and the Strategic Leadership

Team in July for feedback. Anticipated release of final report and ratings is 9 October 2017.

Terms of Reference • Terms of Reference will be undertaken with the newly appointed independent advisor to

the Corporate Committee.


CEO Participation in Regional and National Forums • CEO Forum

• Member of Northland Transportation Alliance Leadership Group

• Member of Northland Intersectoral Forum

• Convenor – proposed tertiary centre for Ngapuhi

• Liaison with Iwi Local Government Agencies Chief Executive Forum (ILGACE)

• Liaison with Forward Together Shared Services.

• Liaison with Northland Inc.

• Networking with government agencies at national level as required.


Corporate Year End Council Financial Reporting • The end of year Financial Report will not be available until after Audit NZ have

completed their review, this is so we do not present inaccurate figures for the final position of FY16/17.

• We will present the full financial report in this year's Annual Report in October.

Risk and Improvement • The Risk and Improvement Team are working through the piloting of the risk

management framework through two teams, being the Civil Defence and Emergency Management Team and the Governance Support team.

• From this work recommendations will be identified to support the teams more effectively managing their respective risks. Once these pilots are completed the Team will work with the Strategic Leadership team to confirm which teams will be prioritised to complete a risk assessment process, which again will include recommendations.

• The team is also finalising with the Strategic Leadership Team, the first six month audit program which will commence in mid July 2017. This will focus on, but is not limited to, covering areas such as contract management, financial controls, and health and safety.

People and Capability - Summary of Activity

Leaders’ Forum • The re-energised Leaders’ Forum continues to gain momentum with the second event

having taken place on 29 June 2017. Members of the Strategic Leadership Team shared their vision with the Forum, emphasising the focus across the organisation in the three key areas of people, communication and culture.

• An important driver for the Tier 3 leadership team is one of collaboration across the organisation, principally in the areas of digitisation, customer service and high performance. Developments in these three areas will bring about change across the organisation and successful leadership though these changes is an area of focus and development in the coming month for the entire group.

• Increased operational support for the SLT is enabled by the inclusion of interactive learning, collaborative problem solving and informed decision making into the capability development of the Forum members

• Tier 3 and Tier 4 Leaders continue to participate in the Local Government SOLGM Leadership Programme sharing experiences and knowledge with the other Northland Councils.

Leading Change • A series of in house change readiness workshops will be run across the organisation

commencing in July 2017. This training will allow all staff to freely discuss the effects of change that they are experiencing and acquire tools and techniques to capitalise on the change.

Report Writing and Reviewing • Preparing reports that providing high quality and accurate information to Council, which

enable well informed decision making is a high priority for FNDC staff. Learning and development currently scheduled for August, will continue to drive the necessarily high


standards of report writing and reviewing. Input from Governance to the content of this training ensures alignment with FNDC templates and report writing preferences.

People Culture and Performance • The CEO is committed to the development of a strong working relationship with all staff,

as a key success factor in delivering organisational vision as well as providing opportunities for reward and recognition and staff development.

• 21 July 2017 is the deadline for the completion of end of year reviews across all staff. High emphasis is placed on the quality of the conversations regarding both performance and behaviours. These conversations provide valuable insight into employee motivation and engagement, providing a firm platform for goal setting and development planning in the coming year.

Collective Union Negotiations • PSA met with its members during June 2017 in anticipation of final discussions in July

2017 with regards to the FY18 Collective Agreement. Negotiation meetings have commenced with anticipated signing expected in July 2017.

Health, Safety & Wellbeing • Defibrillators – These are now installed at Kaikohe HQ and JBC Level 2; a training video

has been made available to all staff.

• A back injury sustained by a staff member at Paihia resulted in a review of the manual handling procedures at i-sites; this identified a change in procedure for receiving and storing brochures which eliminated the requirement for lifting.

• Contractor Management Process Review – This is due to commence in July 2017.

• Asbestos Management – A desk top review of buildings/structures has commenced by IAM. This will assist with the development of Asbestos Management Plans.

• First Aid Training – A level 2 first aid course is booked for 7 August 2017 in Kaikohe.

• Wellness Program:

Resilience Workshops – a total of eight one day workshops entitled ‘Learning Resilience’ were held in Kaitaia, Kerikeri and Kaikohe. Over eighty staff completed an initial resilience diagnostic assessment which was used as reference for their individual learning in the workshops. Detailed feedback reports are available reflecting the effectiveness of the learning across all of the groups.

Healthy Minds Toolbox – Due to commence 10 July 2017.

Current Staffing Levels and Budget Actual Head Count

at 30 June Actual FTE at 30 June

2016-17 Establishment FTE Annual Plan

369 335.53 345.96

Salaries Budget at 30 June

Actual Salaries Spend at 30 June Actual vs Budget Total FY17

Salaries Budget $24,288,300 $24,484,517 $196,217 overspend $24,288,300


Vacancies • As at 30 June there were:

Department Number of Open Vacancies

CEO/Communications/People & Capabilities 1

Corporate Services 5

District Services 4

Infrastructure & Asset Management 3

Strategic Planning & Policy 0 FNDC TOTAL *note: 5 vacancies on hold not included in numbers 13*

Training Financial Performance

Financial Performance Current Year to 30 June 2017

2016 - 2017 Budget

Previous Financial Year (FY16)

Actual $555,050 N/A $431,525

Budget $772,461 $861,210 $593,981

Training Costs as % of Budgeted Salary Costs 2.26% 3.54%

NZ Local Government Average Training Budget (% of salary costs) 4.00%


Operations Customer Service Improvement Initiatives • The Customer Experience Programme Manager has been appointed in accordance with

previous recommendations from report commissioned during 2016 on Customer Experience improvement. This role will be active in promoting improvements to customer experiences when dealing with council.

• Customer experience measurements are continuing using RFS surveys. This started from February 2017 and is now giving good information and indicators on specific areas that require improvement. This and continuing measurement will be part of the ongoing work championed by the Customer Experience Programme Manager across the organisation. The benefit of having a consistent measurement programme in place will assist in showing where changes have initiated a tangible improvement in our delivery of service and customer experience

• Improvement programme scope and other documents being prepared for senior team endorsement in July, including the identification and use of applicable KPI’s on customer satisfaction.

Community and Customer Services Management • Library staff worked in the background to have all changes to fees and charges set up for

the 1 July 2017 changes. In the call centre for the month of June 2017 the typical types of calls offered included rates penalties from 4th instalment, queries regarding the new rate rebate applications and dog registrations for the coming year.

• The Libraries Services strategy development and service delivery has started with project team meetings, library visits and talking to key council staff members. The Council and Community board workshop I date is set and a questionnaire is being prepared.

Te Ahu Transition • The Te Ahu transition programme is on track. Cinema and Bookings Administration

(including casual) staff affected are being consulted and a smooth transition to Te Ahu Charitable Trust on 1 July 2017 is anticipated.

Annual $15 Library Borrowers’ Fee Scrapped • Library staff worked in the background to make the transition from borrower fee to free to

all a ratepayers a process that was seamless. Borrowers who have not used the library for some time also were rolled over to cover existent expiry library card dates.

• There have been no further negative queries into this and genuine feedback by library user is indicating it a great move by council to scrap the borrowing fee.

Letter of Thanks • District Facilities Building Technical Officer was commended by a Rawene Community

Leader for the exceptional work he undertook to coordinate the various contractors to have the old Rawene and Gaol (Jail) exterior remedied, this included painting and the signage upgraded to match the heritage colours of the building.

Resource Consent Management • Statistics are reported separately to the Operations Committee of the Council.


Building Consent Management • Statistics are reported separately to the Operations Committee of the Council.

• May recorded the highest number of applications since the year 2008 with building inspection numbers rising from 600 to 900.

• The trend of building larger more complex residential buildings continues when comparing previous years. Commercial buildings make up 10% of the total number of building consent issued for this year.

• Building field officers are now using tablets for their field work the advantages are clear recording, less paper used in the inspection process, quick access for building related information, records and photos of building work sent electronically.

Compliance and Contract Management • The Compliance Department provides operational capability across animal management,

environmental health services, monitoring, building compliance, building warrant of fitness, swimming pools and parking. Currently 93% of Compliance related RFS’s are being responded to within agreed timeframes

• Site investigation into the suitability of the new site for the Kaitaia dog pound on Pukepoto Road (Kaitaia) is continuing with the land owner to meet Council’s requirements.

• A new site for the Southern dog pound near Ngawha has been identified and an agreement to purchase land from Top Energy is about to be signed.

• Environmental Health Services are now fully operational, with the immediate focus on the transition of all food premises to the new food control plans over a 3 year period, ending 2019.

• Currently working with Kaipara District Council in assisting them build and implement an inspection framework for their recently introduced On-Site Disposal Bylaw.

• Continuing with Councils building warrant of fitness monitoring of more than 800 buildings with specified systems. The new monitoring program is working well with 300 premises inspected in the last 12 months in line with the Ministry for Business, Innovation and Employment (MBIE) audit process.

Nga Kuri Auau o Kaikohe Dog Day • Nga Kuri Auau o Kaikohe was a pilot that aimed to help reduce the high number of dog

incidents recorded in the town.

• Nga Kuri Auau o Kaikohe offered a one-off opportunity for dog-owners to microchip their pets and sign them up for neutering – both at no charge. Spot prizes and demonstrations by a police dog handler were also a feature of the event. Nearly 100 Kaikohe dogs were microchipped for free and 80 signed-up for neutering at hugely successful ‘chip and snip’ Dog Day on Friday 9 June 2017.The neutering of 80 dogs will have a long-term, positive impact on Kaikohe stopping potentially hundreds of unwanted puppies from being born.

• The Nga Kuri Auau o Kaikohe pilot was made possible through $15,000 in funding from the Department of Internal Affairs. Due to its success a further day is planned in Kaitaia for Friday 28 July 2017.

Kerikeri Wastewater Scheme • Work on the Kerikeri Wastewater Scheme has now commenced. A full report will be

presented to this Council under separate cover.


Kawakawa Pool • Working with the Kawakawa Business Association, Mayoral fund and Council budgets

we were able to fund the full replacement of failed heat exchanger for the pool. It will necessitate the pool being closed for a two week period for the exchanger to be installed and the pool brought back up to temperature.

• Council staff are still working with Sport Northland to achieve the hand over of the pool by the new proposed date of 1 September 2017.

Allen Bell Drive, Kaitaia • An inspection has been made of the stream from which the silt is being collected and

then transferred/ flushed down to Allen Bell Drive.

• Previous to this latest rainfall event, settlement dams have successfully been trialled further along Allen Bell Drive (next to num. 60). By using the same type of dams we will be able to stop most, if not nearly all of the silt deposits that are currently flowing down to Allen Bell Drive.

• The immediate problems are weather and cost, which are related to some extent. The difficulty of working in the winter impacts upon the cost, the cost is also increased as a larger amount of rock will be required, with additional distance and handling.

• The contractor, who did the previous dam installation next to number 60, has been contacted to supply a quote, also to assess what is practical to do immediately and what should be delayed until after winter. Once these works are complete, the risk of flooding along Allen Bell Drive will be substantially reduced.

Dust issue on Pipiwai Road • Dust monitoring on Pipiwai road has commenced, the first results are expected to be

available at the beginning of August 2017.

Resurfacing of Waipapakauri Netball Courts • The Waipapkauri Domain Netball Courts were resurfaced, line markings renewed and

new goal posts added. These courts now include permanent Fast 5 lines which allow another version of the game to be played. This is one of only two permanently marked Fast 5 courts in the District, also added to this project were a tennis court, posts and net, offering the Community an enhanced facility.


Communications FNDC website content • There has been an improvement in the relevance and accuracy of our website content,

there is also a marked increase in our online engagement. In some areas this is directly influenced by our own activity (social media), however, it is likely that we are observing a general trend towards increased public expectation to source information and services online.

• Quality Assurance reports show that since May 2016 we have vastly improved the standard of information we’re providing. As a result of the Website Content Review project we have:

Reduced spelling errors from over 40 to zero and are continually eliminating other grammatical and style issues as content is added.

Reduced broken links on the site from over 200 to approximately 40, with the goal to eliminate all by end of July.

• Comparison of website traffic to www.fndc.govt.nz between 2015/16 and 2016/17 shows:

An increase of 7.7% overall page views (difference of 63,150 page views from 820,570 to 883,720).

An increase of 10.23% unique page views and increase in the average time spent on any one page by 8.16%.

• The most visited areas, not including the home page, remain consistent. They are listed below, with most visited shown first. Percentage in brackets (%) shows magnitude of increase in visits between 15/16 and 16/17; only those with marked changes indicated.

Rating information database Contact us District plan (electronic version) (60+%) Far North Maps (115%) Careers Cemetery records Hokianga ferry timetable (35%) Transfer station information (Rubbish and recycling) (24%) Libraries Building consents and information (410%)

• Online engagement via social media has shown steady growth in the past two years.

Facebook “likes” have increased by 41.2% in the past two years: 1173 in July 2015; 2,111 in July 2016; and 2,845 in July 2017.

Our greatest Facebook audience reach has been around 13,400 people (and hot topics do achieve a reach in excess of 10,000) but generally our reach per post is in the arena of 2000-3000.

Our LinkedIn following has increased by 56.2% from 264 in July 2016 to 470 in July 2017.

Annual resident survey • The draft survey was received on 30 June 2017. Officers will be studying the survey and

liaising with the Research First, who conducted the survey. Results will be shared in the Annual Report and then to the Corporate Committee.

http://www.fndc.govt.nz/


General • The Weekly Great News email from CEO to elected members and staff is now three

issues down. The GMs and other managers are contributing content regularly and emails seem well received.

• The second edition of two-monthly full-page adverts has been published in newspapers. Different content is created for each ward. Creating Great Places now has been broadened to include services as well as infrastructure developments.

• Content on Kerikeri Wastewater Project web pages have been updated to reflect construction phase of the scheme.

• Work on the Far North District Council’s new sewerage network has begun. As of two weeks ago, 3km of pipe have been laid at 32 properties and adjoining streets, which equates to 11 per cent of the new 27km sewerage network.


LGOIMA Monthly Statistics 2017 The latest statistics for official information requests processed by the organisation appear below. Statistics reflect end June 2017.

Month #

Requests / Month

# Requests responded to

<20 days

# Requests responded to

within permitted time extension

# Requests not

responded to within time

Ombudsman Investigations

(if any)

Jan 14 13 0 1 0

Feb 13 11 2 0 0

Mar 15 15 0 0 1

Apr 31 30 1 0 0

May 12 10 1 1 0

June 21 12 (9 remain open) 0 0 0

Total 106 91 (9 remain open) 4 2 1


Community Wellbeing

Infometrics produces quarterly updates of various economic growth indicators for 66 territorial authorities in New Zealand. Of these, house sales and vehicle registration activities can be used to help gauge the level of economic activity in an area.

Increasing house sales and car registration may indicate population growth and consumer confidence, while increasing commercial vehicle registration may indicate business activity and growth. The Far North District showed positive annual growth and was ranked above the New Zealand median for each of these categories.

Source link: https://ecoprofile.infometrics.co.nz/Far%20North%20District/QuarterlyEconomicMonitor/Comparator

Table settings:

• Geography Type- Territorial Authority • Display Mode- Annual Value • Display growth over (years)- 1

https://ecoprofile.infometrics.co.nz/Far%20North%20District/QuarterlyEconomicMonitor/Comparator

https://ecoprofile.infometrics.co.nz/Far%20North%20District/QuarterlyEconomicMonitor/Comparator

agenda council ordinary meeting · document number a1873888 far north district council ordinary...

Documents