30 october 2017 - buller districtbullerdc.govt.nz/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/30-october-2017.pdf ·...

AGENDA

MONDAY 30 OCTOBER 2017

VENUE

Clocktower Chambers

Palmerston Street Westport

3.00pm Buller Holdings Limited - AGM 4.30pm Refreshments 5.00pm Public Forum Council Meeting

The Council, in considering each matter, must be: (a) Satisfied that it has sufficient information about the practicable options

and their benefits, costs and impacts, bearing in mind the significance of the decisions;

(b) Satisfied that it knows enough about and will give adequate consideration to the views and preferences of affected and interested parties bearing in mind the significance of the decisions to be made.

Significance Consideration Evaluation : Council officers, in preparing these reports have had regard to Council’s policy on significance. Council, Committee and Community Board members will make the final assessment on whether the subject under consideration is to be regarded as being significant or not. Unless Council a Committee or the Community Board explicitly determines that the subject under consideration is to be deemed significant then the subject will be deemed as not being significant.

Public Forum Apologies Item Page Description Draft Recommendation

1 1 Members Interest That Councillors disclose any financial or non-financial interest in any of the agenda items

2 2 Confirmation of Minutes That the minutes of the meetings held on 4 October 2017 be confirmed. 3 12 Financial Performance – August 2017 That the report is received for information. 4 14 Annual Report 2017 - Buller District

Council and Group That the Annual Report for the Buller District Council be adopted for the year ending 30 June 2017.

5 17 Annual Report 2017 - Westport Airport Authority and Buller Health Trust

1. That the Annual Report for the Westport Airport Authority be received for the year ending 30 June 2017.

2. That the Annual Report for the Buller Health Trust for the year ending 30 June 2017 be received by Council for information purposes.

6 56 Westport water – extraordinary cost summary

That the report is received for information.

7 61 Acquisition of land under Public Works Act 1981 - Punakaiki water supply

1. That Council authorises the Chief Executive to issue a notice of desire to acquire land, namely 966m2 more or less, being that part of Lot 1 Deposited Plan 13980 described as Section 1 SO 504661 on the attached survey plan, and a right of way easement (on foot only) for the benefit of the Buller District Council in gross over that part of Lot 1 Deposited Plan 13980 shown as area A on the attached survey plan (together referred to as the Land), for the purposes of water supply and access to the water supply, under section 18 of the Public Works Act 1981;

2. That Council authorises the Group Manager Assets and Infrastructure to negotiate an agreement with the owners of the Land; and

3. That Council authorises the Chief Executive to take any and all subsequent steps and issue any required notices in accordance with the Public Works Act 1981 to acquire the Land, including by compulsory acquisition should this prove necessary.

8 66 BHL Share Issue The Council subscribes for 74,149 shares in Buller Holdings Limited, as recommended by the Finance and Audit Committee at their 18 October 2017 meeting.

9 71 Priority Buildings on Strategic Routes That there are no priority buildings located along strategic routes within the Buller District. 10 80 Development West Coast Economic

Stimulus Funding, Grants and Loans Administered by Buller District Council

1. That Council review all applications as received in 2016 and select from that group some alternate recipients to receive DWC EDSF; or

2. Review applications received in 2016 and subsequent expressions of interest (of

Item Page Description Draft Recommendation which there are 3) and select from that group some alternate recipients to receive DWC EDSF; or

3. Advertise that the remainder of the grant pool is available ( being $XX) and invite applicants to apply using the same criteria as when the pool was first opened in 2016; and

4. That any recommendation regarding the DWC EDSF resolved by Council at this meeting be delegated to the Economic Development Committee with recommendations direct to Development West Coast for their final 2017 meeting on 11 December.

11 84 Development West Coast – Economic Extraordinary Funding

That Council resolves to allocate a further $100,000 to the Reefton Power House Project from the DWC Extraordinary Funding.

12 88 Rates Review – Statement of Proposal 1. That Council adopt the Draft Rates Consultation Document for public consultation; and

2. That Council adopt the Summary Rates Consultation Document for public consultation.

13 91 Request Capital to Purchase Airport Mower

Resolution to approve unbudgeted capital expenditure of $17,775.00 for the Husqvana ZTR PZ34 mower for the airport.

14 101 Mayors Report That the report is received for information. 15 102 Mayors Correspondence That the report is received for information. 16 111 Chief Executive’s Report That the report is received for information. 17 130 Council Meeting Action List That the report is received for information.

BULLER DISTRICT COUNCIL

FOR THE MEETING OF 30 OCTOBER 2017

Report for Agenda Item No 1

Prepared by - Andy Gowland-Douglas - Chief Executive

Members Interest

Councillors are encouraged to consider the items on the agenda and disclose whether they believe they have a financial or non-financial interest in any of the items in terms of Council’s Code of Conduct. Councillors are encouraged to advise the Personal Assistant, Chief Executive of any changes required to their declared Members Interest Register. The flowchart may assist Councillors in making that determination (Appendix A from Code of Conduct).

Draft Recommendation That Councillors disclose any financial or non-financial interest in any of the agenda items.



Report for Agenda Item No 2 Prepared by - Andy Gowland-Douglas

- Chief Executive Confirmation of Minutes

______________________________________________________________ Minutes of the meetings held on 4 October 2017. Draft Recommendation That the minutes of the meetings held on 4 October 2017 be confirmed.

MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE BULLER DISTRICT COUNCIL HELD AT THE ST JOHN ROOMS, SMITH STREET, REEFTON ON WEDNESDAY 4 OCTOBER 2017 COMMENCING AT 5.00PM PRESENT His Worship the Mayor GC Howard (Chairperson), Crs SM Barry, JW Cleine, GW Hart, DJ Hawes, MJ Hill, EC Miazga, RM Nahr and GT Neylon IN ATTENDANCE Chief Executive (A Gowland-Douglas), Manager Community and Environment (CM Scanlon), Group Manager Assets and Infrastructure (M Duff), Manager Corporate Services (D Phibbs) and PA Chief Executive (LM Pablecheque). APOLOGIES Resolved: That an apology from Councillors Roche and Rutherford be accepted.

GW Hart/SM Barry Carried Unanimously PUBLIC FORUM Ken Leslie a resident of Butts Road was present to talk about the condition of the road. He said the road floods several times per year as the culvert was partially blocked, the hill section originally tarsealed at the residents cost had now deteriorated and was breaking up, residents had to mow the grass verge and the lack of emergency service property numbers. He asked that consideration be given in the next funding round for the gravel section to be sealed. The Group Manager Assets and Infrastructure to investigate the issues raised and respond to Mr Leslie. 1 MEMBERS INTEREST Resolved: That Cr Nahr declare her interest in the following items -

Item 5 - Buller Holdings Limited - Directors

GW Hart/JW Cleine

Carried Unanimously

2 CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES

Resolved: That the minutes of the meeting held on 23 August 2017 be confirmed.

JW Cleine/EC Miazga

Carried Unanimously 3 STANDING ORDERS Resolved: That Council adopt the Standing Orders.

RM Nahr/MJ Hill

Carried Unanimously 4 WESTPORT INTEGRATED FAMILY HEALTHCARE CENTRE - RESCIND

MOTION It was acknowledged that Council had totally under-estimated the public

opposition of the decision made in June but in doing so felt if in the future a privately owned scenario was an option it would be a mistake not to investigate the investment potential. Concern was expressed that Council ownership in the first five years may well be a good financial decision, but not necessarily after this time.

Resolved: That Council rescind the motion as passed on 28 June 2017.

SM Barry/GW Hart

Carried Unanimously

Moved: That Council advise the Ministry of Health, the Buller District Council suspends the offer to purchase the facility until a suitable community facility is constructed and other options for funding construction are exhausted.

DJ Hawes/EC Miazga The motion was lost

Resolved: That Council support the community through advocacy as required with their endeavors to ensure a fit for purpose health facility is provided for the Buller District.

GT Neylon/JW Cleine

Carried Cr Hawes voted against

5 BULLER HOLDINGS LIMITED - DIRECTORS

Cr Nahr declared her interest in this item and did not participate in the discussion. The issue of Brian Wood having a conflict of interest because of his involvement with the Port of Lyttelton was expressed. It was however pointed out the CCTO Committee had investigated these concerns and felt there was no conflict and that Brian Wood needed to be commended for his work as Chairman of Buller Holdings. It was felt that the remuneration paid to the board should be reduced to reflect the winding up of Westport Harbour Limited. However, it was noted the work load would be greater while the company was being wound up and the remuneration could be reviewed next year if necessary. Resolved: That Brian Wood and Rebecca Keoghan be appointed to the Board of Buller Holdings Limited for a period of one year, Jan Coll three years and Gareth Allen four years.

GT Neylon/JW Cleine

Carried Cr Nahr abstained from voting Cr Hill voted against Resolved: That the Director remuneration for 2017/2018 be set at $46,500 for the Chairman Brian Wood and $18,000 for Directors Jan Coll and Rebecca Keoghan, and $19,500 for Gareth Allen.

SM Barry/GT Neylon

Carried Cr Nahr abstained from voting

Resolved: That the Mayor and Deputy Mayor represent Council as sole shareholder at the Buller Holdings Limited Annual General Meeting and vote according to the above resolutions.

JW Cleine/GW Hart

Carried Cr Nahr abstained from voting

6 RESIDENTS SURVEY

The Chief Executive explained the need for benchmarks as this had done not been done since 2010 and which most councils did before a Long Term Plan. When asked the Chief Executive advised 70-80 responses had been received from the values survey. The meeting was also advised that the survey was a lot cheaper than other providers, when concerns were raised about the cost and would provide scientifically analysed results. An alternative suggestion was made to engage with the community via a questionnaire provided for each councillor to involve a set number of participants at no external cost. Concerns were also expressed about the timing of the proposed survey. Moved: That Council agrees to contract First Research to carry out a resident’s survey as an unbudgeted extraordinary item.

DJ Hawes/EC Miazga

The motion was lost Resolved: That Councillors Barry and Hart form a working group to develop a community engagement strategy.

GC Howard/SM Barry

Carried Unanimously 7 COALTOWN TRUST FUNDING AGREEMENT 2017/2018

The Chief Executive declared her interest in this item, as she is a member of the Coaltown Trust.

Concern was expressed about the trust sustaining the level of rent and now becoming normalised, rather than Council’s subsidy reducing, and the importance of Council retaining an oversight. It was noted that the trust could pay more but in doing so would not make any headway with other development opportunities for the museum.

Resolved: That Council approve the Funding Agreement between Council and the Coaltown Trust for the 2017/2018 year.

RM Nahr/GW Hart Carried Unanimously Resolved: That Council give the Grants Committee delegated authority to approve payments for rent to the Coaltown Trust.

EC Miazga/R Nahr Carried Cr Cleine voted against Resolved: That the Council approve all current and outstanding invoices for payment.

EC Miazga/R Nahr

Carried

8 PROPOSED BANNING OF ALCOOL IN PUBLIC PLACES BYLAW 2017 Resolved: That Council

1. Receive this report for information. 2. Make the determinations required under section 155 of the Local

Government Act 2002 in relation to the Buller District Council Banning of Alcohol in Public Places Bylaw 2017, as per the attached report titled “Report on Determinations Under Section 155 Local Government Act 2002, Proposed Buller District Council Banning of Alcohol in Public Places Bylaw 2017”.

3. Adopt the “Statement of Proposal, Revocation of Banning of Liquor

in Public Places Bylaw 2005 and Making of Banning of Alcohol in Public Places Bylaw 2017” as per Appendix B to this report.

4. Undertake the special consultative procedure for the proposal to

revoke the Buller District Council Banning of Liquor in Public Places Bylaw 2005 and to replace it with the Buller District Council Banning of Alcohol in Public Places Bylaw 2017.

JW Cleine/GW Hart

Carried

Cr Neylon abstained from voting

9 NEW DELEGTIONS AND FEES UNDER THE RESOURCE MANAGEMENT ACT 1991

Resolved: That Council

1. Pursuant to clause 32 of Schedule 7 of the Local Government Act 2002 and for the purpose of efficiency and effectiveness in the conduct of the Council’s business, and pursuant to section 34A of the Resource Management Act 1991, and any other applicable statutory authority,

a. Delegate to the persons set out in Appendix A the responsibilities, duties and powers as shown; and

b. Amend the delegations as set out in Appendix A, with these delegations to come into force on 18 October 2017.

2. Adopt the “Statement of Proposal, New Fees Under the Resource

Management Act 1991” as per Appendix B to this report. 3. Pursuant to sections 36 and 36AA of the Resource Management Act

1991, commence the special consultative procedure, on or after 18 October 2017, in relation to the proposed charges/fees as follows:

a. Permitted boundary activities - Sec 87BA

$450.00 deposit with full cost recovery b. Deemed permitted activities - Sec 87BB

$450.00 deposit with full cost recovery

RM Nahr/SM Barry Carried Unanimously

10 EASTER SUNDAY SHOP TRADING Resolved: That Council

1. Adopt the “Statement of Proposal, Buller District Council Easter

Sunday Shop Trading Policy” as per Appendix A to this report. 2. Undertake the special consultative procedure for the proposal to

adopt the Buller District Council Easter Sunday Shop Trading Policy as included in Appendix A to this report.

GC Howard/GT Neylon

Carried Unanimously

11 CAPITAL BUDGET CARRY OVERS Resolved: That Council approve the carry over budgets of $1,716,500 as

attached to this report to the 2017/2018 Financial Year.

SM Barry/GW Hart Carried Unanimously 12 ONE DISTRICT PLAN PROPOSAL

Concern was expressed that there was still a lot of work that needed to be done prior to making an informed decision ie cost benefit analysis Resolved: That Council having reviewed all the available information, does not agree to proceed with a One District Plan.

JW Cleine/RM Nahr

Carried Unanimously

13 ASSETS AND INFRASTRUCTURE MAJOR PROJECTS - QUARTERLY

STATUS REPORT SEPTEMBER 2017 Concern was expressed at the length of time it was taking for Opus to complete the selection study for Westport water. Reassurance was given that everything possible was being done to expedite the completion of the study. An explanation was given about the 7 day makeover after concerns were raised it was different to the original plans for the waterfront and cultural hub development, the cost of engaging a facilitator to complete the project and Council’s value of ‘One Team’ had not been met. It was stated the makeover would see the waterfront and cultural hub bundled together as one project, a control group formed, with community participation/ownership and was seen as an opportunity to try something new. Resolved: That the report be received for information.

EC Miazga/SM Barry

Carried Unanimously

14 BULLER DISTRICT WATER SUPPLIES - QUARTERLY STATUS REPORT SEPTEMBER 2017

A report on the extra operational costs for the Westport water supply will be forthcoming in due course. Resolved: That the report be received for information.

SM Barry/GW Hart

Carried Unanimously

15 FINANCIAL PERFORMANCE - JULY 2017

Resolved: That the report be received for information.

RM Nahr/JW Cleine

Carried Unanimously

16 SIGNIFICANT PROJECTS REPORT


JW Cleine/RM Nahr

Carried Unanimously

17 MAYOR’S REPORT


DJ Hawes/SM Barry Carried Unanimously

18 MAYOR’S CORRESPONDENCE


JW Cleine/DJ Hawes

Carried Unanimously

19 CHIEF EXECUTIVE’S REPORT

The successful funding application for the provision of toilets at North Beach ahead of Reefton was discussed. It was noted that the application for Reefton had been submitted three times and did not meet the necessary criteria and unless there is significant changes to the application Council will have to fund the toilets. It was also pointed out that North Beach was not on Council’s priority list.


GW Hart/RM Nahr

Carried Unanimously

20 COUNCIL MEETING ACTION LIST


JW Cleine/EC Miazga

Carried Unanimously

There being no further business the meeting concluded at 7.25pm Confirmed……………………………… Date ………………………………………




Prepared by - Wendy Thompson - Financial Accountant

Reviewed by - Dean Phibbs - Manager Corporate Services

Financial Performance - August 2017 ______________________________________________________________

Report Summary To provide the Council with an update on the operational performance to 31 August 2017.

Draft Recommendation

That the report be received for information. Operational Financial Performance 1. Operational Performance Report - Summary of Results August 2017

Actual

YTD Budget

YTD Projected Full Year

Budget Full year

Projected variance full year

Income $4,424,300 $4,565,100 $21,818,500 $21,818,500 0

Expenditure $3,697,400 $3,617,300 $22,561,000 $22,561,000 0

$0

2. Dashboard - Operational Financial Performance Indicators

Rev

enu

e

Exp

end

itu

re

Activity Comment

Democracy

Property Amenities & Reserves

Economic Development, Tourism & Museum Support

Community Services

Regulatory Timing variance - dog control and food premise licencing fees

Roading

Solid Waste

Support Northern Link Road business case $39,000

Wastewater

Water

Westport supply electricity and repairs & maintenance. Timing of water supply catchment risk analysis

Airport




Prepared by - Dean Phibbs - Manager Corporate Services

Reviewed by - Andy Gowland-Douglas - Chief Executive

Annual Report 2017 - Buller District Council and Group ______________________________________________________________

Report Summary To adopt the audited 2016/2017 Annual Report for the Buller District Council as required by section 98(3) of the Local Government Act 2002. Draft Recommendation That the Annual Report for the Buller District Council be adopted for the year ending 30 June 2017. Issues and Discussion Section 98 of the Local Government Act

Annual report (1) A local authority must prepare and adopt in respect of each financial year an

annual report containing in respect of that year the information required by Part 3 of Schedule 10.

(2) The purposes of an annual report are—

(a) to compare the actual activities and the actual performance of the

local authority in the year with the intended activities and the intended level of performance as set out in respect of the year in the long-term plan and the annual plan; and

(b) to promote the local authority's accountability to the community for the

decisions made throughout the year by the local authority.

(3) Each annual report must be completed and adopted, by resolution, within 4 months after the end of the financial year to which it relates.

(4) A local authority must, within 1 month after the adoption of its annual report,

make publicly available— (a) its annual report; and (b) summary of the information contained in its annual report.

(5) The summary must represent, fairly and consistently, the information

regarding the major matters dealt with in the annual report. (6) A local authority must, within 1 month after the adoption of its annual report,

send copies of that report and of the summary prepared under subsection (4)(b) to— (a) the Secretary; and (b) the Auditor-General; and (c) the Parliamentary Library

(3) Each annual report must be completed and adopted, by resolution, within 4 months after the end of the financial year to which it relates.


make publicly available— (a) its annual report; and (b) summary of the information contained in its annual report.

(5) The summary must represent, fairly and consistently, the information regarding the major matters dealt with in the annual report.


send copies of that report and of the summary prepared under subsection (4)(b) to— (a) the Secretary; and (b) the Auditor-General; and (c) the Parliamentary Library

The purpose of the Annual Report as stated in section 98 of the Local Government Act 2002 is to - compare the actual activities and the actual performance of the local authority in the year with the intended activities and the intended level of performance as set out in respect of the year in the long-term plan and the annual plan; and promote the local authority's accountability to the community for the decisions made throughout the year by the local authority.

Considerations 1. Strategic Impact

Appropriate reporting provides valuable information to enable decisions to be made on the future operations of the entities.

2. Significance Assessment

This matter is not deemed significant under the Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy.

3. Risk Analysis

If reports are not provided a number of legislative requirements would be breached. Analysis of financial reports enables adjustment to future operations to be made contributing to better efficiency and effectiveness.

4. Values

Reports provide accountability to Council and the community, and assurance that ratepayer funds are being utilised in an effective manner. The Buller District Values are: Integrity, Future Focussed, Community Driven, One Team and We Care.

5. Policy/Legal Considerations

Compliance is required under section 98 of the Local Government Act 2002. A local authority must adopt an Annual Report within the statutory timeframe.

6. Tangata Whenua Considerations

There is no requirement to consult with iwi. 7. Views of Those Affected

There is no requirement to consult or seek the views of other parties with respect to this report.

8. Costs

The cost of providing an Annual Report including audit costs is included in Annual Plan budgets.

9. Benefits Provision of an Annual Report provides accountability to Council, ratepayers, the community and stakeholders. It enables future decisions to be made on the provision of services.

10. Media / publicity

A media release highlighting key aspects of the report will be released once the report is adopted.





Reviewed by - Andy Gowland-Douglas - Chief Executive

Annual Report 2017 - Westport Airport Authority and Buller Health Trust ______________________________________________________________

Report Summary To receive the audited 2016/2017 Annual Report for the Westport Airport Authority as required by section 67 of the Local Government Act 2002 and to receive for information purposes the 2016/2017 Annual Report for the Buller Health Trust. Draft Recommendation 1. That the Annual Report for the Westport Airport Authority be received for

the year ending 30 June 2017; and 2. That the Annual Report for the Buller Health Trust for the year ending 30

June 2017 be received by Council for information purposes. Issues and Discussion In accordance with section 67 of the Local Government Act 2002 Council Controlled Organisations are required to deliver a yearly report to shareholders. Therefore Westport Airport Authority discharges its responsibility under the Act. The Buller Health Trust Annual Report 2016 is presented to Council for information purposes, as the Mayor and Chief Executive Officer are appointed as Trustees under the Trust Deed. The Trust is no longer designated a Council Controlled Organisation under the Local Government Act 2002. Consequently the Trust is no longer required to be audited. However the Buller Health Trust is a registered charitable trust under the Charities Act 2005 and due to its revenue threshold is required to have an audit review under this Act. The Trust’s accounts have been audit reviewed by FT Dooley Limited.


Appropriate reporting provides valuable information to enable decisions to be made on the future operations of the entities.


This matter is not deemed significant under the Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy.

3. Risk Analysis

If reports are not provided a number of legislative requirements would be breached. Analysis of financial reports enables adjustment to future operations to be made contributing to better efficiency and effectiveness.

4. Values

Reports provide accountability to the shareholders and the community and assurance that ratepayer funds are being utilised in an effective manner.

The Buller District Values are: Integrity, Future Focussed, Community Driven, One Team and We Care.


Compliance is required under various Acts with regard to provision of Annual Reports.


There is no requirement to consult with iwi. 7. Views of Those Affected

There is no requirement to consult or seek the views of other parties with respect to this report.

8. Costs

The cost of providing an Annual Report is included in budgets. 9. Benefits

Provision of an Annual Report provides accountability to the shareholders/ratepayers. This also enables future decisions to be made on the provision of services.

10. Media/Publicity

There are no media opportunities.





Reviewed by - Mike Duff - Group Manager Assets and Infrastructure

Westport Water Supply – Extraordinary Cost Summary

______________________________________________________________ Report Summary The purpose of this report is to provide an update on the Westport Water Supply extraordinary costs since the full collapse of the No.1 Tunnel in December 2016, and to inform Council of the predicted impact to ratepayers. Draft Recommendation That the report be received for information.

Issues and Discussion The reservoirs for the Westport & Carters Beach network are normally supplied through a gravity-flow tunnel system upstream of the treatment plant. Following the partial collapse of the No.1 Tunnel in 2014, a further collapse occurred in December 2016 resulting in no water flow passing through the tunnel system. Since then, water supply has been provided to the reservoir ponds via the Keoghans Pump Station, with operational costs estimated at $20,000 per month. In September, a new pump system from Ballarat Creek was implemented to keep sustain reservoir levels, with initial establishment costs of approximately $20,000, and ongoing operational costs of $12,000 per month. In early September, the reservoir dropped to dangerously low levels, requiring an emergency response to ensure continuity of water supply for Westport & Carters Beach. A range of risk reduction strategies were implemented, requiring extraordinary costs including purchases of plant, equipment and contractor’s costs for additional labour and materials. This includes temporary fixes to address supply, leakage and water treatment issues, as well as incident readiness measures such as bulk storage tanks and town bore water supply. Overall, these committed and forecast expenditures were not foreseen or budgeted for.

Costs to Date Operating and Capital costs to June 2017 for Westport water that relate to the tunnel collapse are laid out in the following table; Overall to June 2017 The Westport water account has $136,000 in additional operating cost and $170,000 in capital expenditure that can be directly attributed to the tunnel collapse for this period. Overall budget comparison for the relevant expense areas shows $151,000 in additional operating expense to June 2017. Capital items are over budget in the minor capital area due to expenditure required to bring the Ballarat Creek supply on line. The Tunnel Repair capital cost code only contained expenses as at June 2017 relating to the preliminary work at this stage. Overall to 30 June 2017, the closed account for Westport Water was overdrawn by $696,000. The 2016/2017 Annual Plan predicted that the account balance would be $803,000 overdrawn. This is a reasonable financial position to June 2017, even after taking into account the current situation. This is due to the operating expenses attributed to tunnel collapse being offset by some savings in other expense areas such as interest expenses and less capital renewals completed than were budgeted for. There will not need to be any additional costs for the year ending June 2017 to be recovered from ratepayers connected to the water supply.

Westport Tunnel Related

Other Westport

Total Expenditure

Total Budgeted

Actual 2016/2017

Actual 2016/2017

Actual 2016/2017

Budget 2016/2017

$ $ $ $

Power 96,696 20,845 117,542 41,520

Westreef R&M 22,972 399,709 422,681 450,000 Repairs & Maintenance & Outwork 16,054 233,841 249,895 150,000

PSBU Internal Costs 87,072 85,000

Total Operating Costs 135,723 654,395 877,189 726,520

Tunnel Repairs 130,537 0 130,537 650,000

Minor Capital 39,534 145,729 185,263 124,560

Total Capital Costs 170,071 145,729 315,800 774,560

Committed & Forecast Costs A summary of the extraordinary costs from July 2017 to September 2017 and forecast expenditure to June 2017 is summarised below. Operating expenses for the coming financial year to June 2017 are expected to be high while water is required to be pumped from the alternative supplies until the tunnel repair project is completed in November 2018 (estimated). Power costs and pump maintenance costs make up a significant portion of the total operating variance of $137,000 predicted over budget. However, operating costs attributable to Westreef are expected to ease as the system becomes more stable. The forecast in this area is dependent on repairs to the supply being more or less following the same trend as the last 18 months. If there are significantly more repairs than estimated, then this area of the budget has the potential to increase the variance accordingly. In the capital area up until June 2018 it is expected that there will be $1.3m out of a total of $2.0m spent to repair the tunnel (the balance of $700,000 will occur after June 2018). In addition, there is an unbudgeted spend of $300,000 for the reservoir to treatment plant raw water pipeline that is required to be replaced. The total budget for the tunnel refurbishment including $650,000 carryover from 2016/2017 is $3.0m. There are a number of extraordinary capital items related to the tunnel collapse that have increased the minor capital estimate. This is predicted to be $190,000 over budget for 2017/2018. The most significant item is replacement of the terrace section of trunk main (from the treatment plant) at an estimated cost of $100,000.

Westport Tunnel Related

Other Westport

Total Expenditure

Total Predicted

Total Budgeted

Actual 2017/2018

to Sept 2017

Actual 2017/2018

to Sept 2017

Actual 2017/2018

to Sept 2017 Predicted

2017/2018 Budget

2017/2018

$ $ $ $ $

Power 56,239 948 57,187 237,187 120,000

Westreef R&M 18,156 103,278 121,434 361,434 481,113 Repairs & Maintenance & Outwork 36,655 46,943 83,598 290,098 190,500

PSBU Internal Costs 59,172 125,000 85,000

Total Operating Costs 111,050 151,170 262,220 1,013,720 876,613

Tunnel Repairs 2,860 0 2,860 1,600,000 2,350,000

Minor Capital 69,110 86,428 155,539 317,739 128,297

Total Capital Costs 71,970 86,428 158,399 1,917,739 2,478,297

Impact to ratepayers As a result of the extraordinary costs, the predicted impact to ratepayers is not expected to be significant. This is because the estimated capital cost of the tunnel repair including the unbudgeted raw water pipeline (a total of $2.3m if loan financed) is likely to be less than the total amount of $3.0m budgeted for the original tunnel repair. Below is the expected cost per $1m capital project per ratepayer for a capital project of this nature. If the project costs $2.3m then the Westport water rate would increase by approximately $58 per annum as opposed to the $75 per annum estimated that was expected to occur in 2018/2019 based on the capital estimate of $3.0m. Westport Water Capital Expenditure

Tunnels and Pipelines Capital Expenditure $1,000,000 $3,000,000 $4,000,000 $6,000,000

Estimated cost per Targeted Ratepayer per annum (excl GST) $25 $75 $100 $150

* assumes 50 year depreciation life, 5% financing rates for loans up to 30 years maximum and does not include the effect of inflation on asset revaluations or estimates for R&M.

* Current westport Water Targeted Rate is $680 (excl GST).

The estimated overrun in operating expenses of $137,000 and the $190,000 in minor capital items could be offset by savings in other expenditure areas. It may be possible to manage the 2017/2018 renewal programme to accommodate any capital overruns in this area. In addition, the water rate was held at the current level in order to recover a budgeted amount of $82,000 of the overdrawn separate balance in 2017/2018 which also provides some margin. Considerations 1. Strategic impact

Reliable delivery of safe drinking water and upgrade of assets for Council water supplies are priority projects in our LTP and critical to the success of our district.


This is of high significance, given the need for safe drinking water and the critical risk to our health and welfare if we fail to address appropriately.

3. Risk Analysis

Under legislation, Council must apply a risk-based approach, (i.e. what could go wrong?) and ensure all practicable steps are being taken to manage risk. This requires knowledge of the legal framework, capacity to perform required duties, and capability to prepare and maintain key instruments including catchment risk assessments and water safety plans. There is some risk that the financial forecasts provided do not turn out as anticipated.

4. Policy/Legal Considerations Council must comply with the relevant policy and legal requirements including Health (Drinking Water) Amendment Act 2007 and Drinking Water Standards of New Zealand. 2005 (rev 2008).


None noted. 6. Views of Those Affected

Public consultation has been held previously in district communities regarding water supplies. The strategic direction for water supplies has been communicated to those affected.

7. Costs

In most instances, costs for water supply upgrades in our district have been budgeted in our Annual Plan. Extraordinary costs in order to maintain safe, adequate and reliable drinking water may not have been allowed for. Costs above have not included any feasibility studies for any long term solution to the Westport water supply.

8. Benefits

Provision of reliable and adequate safe drinking water for our water supplies is a core function of Council and benefits the health of our residents and visitors.

9. Media/Publicity

Publicity in some communities is expected, not all of which will be positive. However, this should not deter from the valid reasons of providing safe drinking water.




Prepared by - Rachel Townrow - Team Leader Planning and Policy Reviewed by - Mike Duff - Group Manager Assets and Infrastructure Acquisition of Land under the Public Works Act 1981 – Punakaiki Water Supply

_____________________________ Report Summary This report asks Council to authorise the Chief Executive to issue a notice of desire to acquire land for the Punakaiki water supply and access, under section 18 of the Public Works Act 1981 (PWA), and to proceed through the PWA process for acquiring the land, including by compulsory acquisition if required. Authorisation for the Group Manager Assets and Infrastructure to attempt to negotiate an agreement with the landowners is also sought. Draft Recommendation 4. That Council authorises the Chief Executive to issue a notice of desire to

acquire land, namely 966m2 more or less, being that part of Lot 1 Deposited Plan 13980 described as Section 1 SO 504661 on the attached survey plan, and a right of way easement (on foot only) for the benefit of the Buller District Council in gross over that part of Lot 1 Deposited Plan 13980 shown as area A on the attached survey plan (together referred to as the Land), for the purposes of water supply and access to the water supply, under section 18 of the Public Works Act 1981;

5. That Council authorises the Group Manager Assets and Infrastructure to negotiate an agreement with the owners of the Land; and

6. That Council authorises the Chief Executive to take any and all subsequent steps and issue any required notices in accordance with the Public Works Act 1981 to acquire the Land, including by compulsory acquisition should this prove necessary.

Issues and Discussion The Punakaiki water supply was constructed by the Buller County Council around 1986-87. At the time of construction the land the water supply is on belonged to the Crown, with a perpetual lease to an individual/s. In January 1988 the leaseholders acquired the fee simple of the land. They subsequently sold the land in August 1989 to one of the two current owners and another party. The former leaseholders/owners of the land have confirmed that they had an agreement with the Buller County Council for access to the water intake on their property. They advised that the agreement was made around 1985, prior to the sale of the land. The agreement was a verbal agreement. The current owners of the site had raised no issues with the location of the intake or use of their property for access to the supply until early 2015. Since then staff and the Mayor have spent considerable time on this matter and have put forward a number of possible solutions, including seeking an easement to cover the water supply. These have been rejected by the owners who have made counter offers. In January 2016 it was considered that all reasonable efforts had been made to reach a solution, without success. In order to secure the water supply for Punakaiki residents, it was recommended to Council at its 27 January 2016 meeting that it use the provisions of the PWA to acquire that part of the site required for the continued access to, use, and maintenance of, the water supply. The process was initiated by Council serving the landowners a notice of desire to acquire the land under section 18 of the PWA, on 3 February 2016, and negotiations commenced. Following much discussion and negotiation the proposal was amended, at the landowners’ request, so that instead of acquiring ownership of the full access route and site of the infrastructure Council would own the infrastructure site and part of the access, with a right of way easement (on foot only) over the start of the access route. A revised plan and agreement were provided on 19 January 2017. The PWA allows for Council to compulsorily acquire (i.e. ‘take’) the land if the owners refuse to negotiate, or an agreement has not been reached within three months, however the land must be taken within one year of issuing the notice of desire. Approaching the anniversary of issuing the original notice of desire an agreement with the landowners appeared likely, so steps were not taken to take the land under the PWA. The original notice is now legally deemed to have lapsed. It is considered that Council has made every effort to negotiate in good faith, however the negotiated agreement had still not been signed over five months after it was provided to the landowners. On 7 July 2017 Council’s lawyer wrote to the new lawyer for the landowners, advising that the offer was withdrawn and that Council would consider whether or not to start the PWA process again. Considerations 1. Strategic Impact

This relates to the site of the existing reticulated water supply for the town of Punakaiki. It is critical that Council is able to access and carry out works on this site in order to continue providing water to Punakaiki.


While “Water reticulation, storage and treatment systems” (including land) are listed as a strategic asset in Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy, the decision Council is being asked to make through this report is not deemed to be significant under the Policy.

3. Values

The Buller District Council values are: One Team, Community Driven, We Care, Integrity and Future Focussed. This process aligns with these values. Community Driven/ We Care: the proposed acquisition of this land is driven by the desire to ensure that the Punakaiki community has a continuing water supply. Future Focussed: ownership and legal access to this land will ensure that Council has continuing access to its infrastructure, to ensure that the existing infrastructure can continue to be used in future.

4. Risk Analysis If Council’s right of access to this site is not formally and legally protected, there is a risk that the ability to access this site will be lost. Issues with access to the site can also hinder Council’s ability to maintain, and address issues with, this infrastructure, creating a risk for the supply of water to Punakaiki. While there are wider issues with the Punakaiki water supply, resolving the land ownership and access to the current reticulated supply will enable its continued use, and the ability to carry out maintenance and repairs, while wider issues are considered. If negotiations are not successful and Council has to use the PWA provisions to take the land, the landowners do have a right of objection to the Environment Court. If the landowners take this option, additional time and cost will be incurred.


The PWA outlines the process to be followed in these situations. It is noted that once the decision is made to follow the PWA process, section 4(6)(b)(ii) of the PWA states that every notice given under the Act is to be signed by, “the chief executive of the local authority or his or her deputy”.


No specific considerations have been identified. 7. Views of Those Affected

There has been a lot of correspondence between Council and the affected landowners since early 2015. The PWA process requires Council to attempt to negotiate in good faith with the landowners for a period of at least three months. This will provide further opportunity for them to make their views known.

8. Costs

In order to acquire the land Council will either have to buy it as negotiated with the landowners, or pay compensation under the PWA. Legal, valuation and survey costs have already been incurred in relation to this matter. There are likely to be further legal costs, either for completing the sale of the land as negotiated and registering the right of way, or if the PWA process has to be used to take the land.

9. Benefits

Ownership of the land, and the benefit of the easement, will ensure Council has continuing access to this site.

10. Media/Publicity

There has been recent media and public interest in the Punakaiki water supply. Any matter related to this is also likely to receive interest and attention.





Buller Holdings Limited - Share Issue ______________________________________________________________

Report Summary Council proposes subscribing for shares in Buller Holdings Limited to fund capital expenditure on the Pulse Energy Recreation Centre. Draft Recommendation The Council subscribes for 74,149 shares in Buller Holdings Limited, as recommended by the Finance and Audit Committee at their 18 October 2017 meeting. Issues and Discussion There are a number of capital expenditure items required at the Pulse Energy Recreation Centre (PERC) that Council have been advised would be required to enable the centre to function effectively or to improve performance and save costs. As Council has chosen not to fund depreciation to enable any capital purchases to be undertaken in-house then the options are for the centre to pursue external funding where possible or for Council to fund the capital expenditure. The capital items in this report are above the capital asset replacement programme for PERC that forms part of the Annual Plan process. Council proposes to subscribe for 74,149 shares at a par value of $74,149 (share offer attached). Heating System This was discussed and agreed at a CCTO meeting with BHL directors in February 2017. Provision of a new heating system at a cost estimated at $118,000 to $120,000 would potentially save up to $25,000 per annum in costs. PERC has obtained $60,000 in funding from the Lotteries Commission leaving the balance of $60,000 to be funded by Council.

Basketball Timer Clocks The current timer clock for the basketball courts was unsuitable for tournament use. Basketball tournaments at the centre provide economic benefits to the centre and the town. The Buller Basketball Association has raised $12,000 and proposed that it would gift the purchase of the new clocks to PERC if Council contributed the balance of $5,517 to enable the project to be completed. This was discussed at the Annual Plan Council Meeting held on 30 and 31 May 2017. Hockey Net Extension Extensions to the hockey nets were required to enable an upcoming tournament to be held. Complaints about the noise and breaches of Council’s resource consent were alleged at the public forum of a Council meeting in 2016. Council decided to address this by recommending modifications to the hockey net and fence. The cost of the extension to the net was $8,632. Considerations 1. Strategic Impact

Council is committed in its Long Term Plan and Annual Plan process to enabling the PERC to provide an effective and efficient recreational facility to the community.


This is not deemed significant with reference to Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy.

3. Risk Analysis

There is a risk that if Council does not support the capital upgrades required at the centre then it will not be fit for purpose for community use of the facility. BHL do not have funds to enable the upgrades to be completed under their current funding structure which has been set up by Council.

4. Values

The Buller District Values are: Integrity, Future Focussed, Community Driven, One Team and We Care.

Provision of the upgrades contributes to the future focused and community driven aspects of our values.


There are no policy or legal considerations. 6. Tangata Whenua Considerations

There is no need to consult with iwi on this matter.

7. Views of those affected

There is no need to consult with the community however given the current utilisation and support of the facility by the community then the capital improvements are likely to be supported by them.

8. Costs

The cost to Council is $74,149. This has not been provided for by ratepayers in the Annual Plan process but would be provided out of Council surplus or cash reserves.

9. Benefits

Council contribution toward a fit for purpose recreation facility for the community.

10. Media/Publicity

There is a positive story around PERC and the Buller Basketball Association raising external funds to benefit the community recreation facility. This has been covered in the media.



Report for Agenda Item No 9 Prepared by - Joy Donaldson

- Environmental Team Leader - Richard Knudsen - Senior Building Control Officer

Reviewed by - Craig Scanlon - Manager Community and Environment

Priority Buildings on Strategic Routes ______________________________________________________________

Report Summary This report is provided to enable Council to decide if there are any priority buildings located on strategic routes within the Buller District as required by the Building (Earthquake-prone Buildings) Amendment Act 2016 (the Act) Draft Recommendation That there are no priority buildings located along strategic routes within the Buller District. Issues and Discussion A priority building in relation to a strategic route is a building that a territorial authority has identified under Section 133AF(2)(b) as having the potential to impede a transport route of strategic importance (in terms of an emergency response) if the building were to collapse in an earthquake. Strategic routes are identified under section 133AE of the Act as any part of a public road, footpath, or other thoroughfare in an area of medium or high seismic risk -

(i) onto which parts of an unreinforced masonry building could fall in an earthquake; and

(ii) that has sufficient vehicle or pedestrian traffic to warrant prioritising the identification and remediation of those parts of unreinforced masonry buildings; and

(iii) that could impede a strategic transport route

Territorial authorities are therefore required to identify any strategic routes in areas of medium or high seismic risk.

The Buller District includes areas of both medium and high seismic risk and therefore section 133AE of the Act applies and strategic routes need to be identified.

The Senior Building Control Officer has identified Karamea, Granity, Waimangaroa, Westport, Reefton and Punakaiki as areas within the district which have sufficient vehicle or pedestrian traffic to warrant consideration as having ‘strategic routes’. A priority building for this purpose is an unreinforced masonry building and is described as a ‘vulnerable’ building. Maps are attached with this report identifying the location of emergency response agencies and the strategic route. Karamea There is a separate Police Station on Wharf Road with the ambulance and fires service being located within a separate building on Waverley Street. There are two directions of travel and routes are well clear of any vulnerable buildings. Granity The Police and Fire Service are located in two separate buildings on Torea Street. There are two directions of travel and the route is well clear of any vulnerable buildings. Waimangaroa The Fire Service only is located on McGill Street. There are two directions of travel and routes are well clear of any vulnerable buildings. Westport There are separate buildings housing Police, Fire, ambulance, medical services (hospital), Council and civil defence HQ at various locations around the town. All buildings have more than two directions onto the main routes. Buildings on Palmerston Street are either 1 or 2 storey and predominantly timber framed. The majority of buildings have already had strengthening work carried out or are not vulnerable buildings and therefore not likely to cause collapse and blocking of strategic routes. Charleston and Punakaiki There are no emergency response services located in either of these townships. Reefton Police, Fire, medical services and Council buildings. All agencies have more than two directions of travel, Broadway has predominantly 1 or 2 storey timber framed buildings and are not vulnerable buildings and therefore not likely to cause collapse and blocking of strategic routes. Ikamatua Fire Service only, more than two directions of travel and no vulnerable buildings along this route. Therefore it is not considered that there are priority buildings located along strategic routes within the Buller District.


This is a requirement of the Building (Earthquake-prone Buildings) Amendment Act 2016 and although it also supports the vision, core purpose, and values of Council it is a legislative requirement.


This has a high degree of significance if Council decides that there are ‘priority’ buildings located along these strategic routes in that a report must be provided to Council by the building owner and any required remedial work completed in half the timeframe that would otherwise be applicable under the Act with obvious financial implications. In addition, failure to complete any required seismic strengthening work within this timeframe may result in an offence being committed with the owner liable on conviction to a fine not exceeding $200,000.

3. Values Assessment

This supports the Council values of being future focussed. 4. Risk Analysis

The territorial authority is required to identify priority buildings in high seismic areas within 2½ years, or in medium seismic areas within 5 years, of the commencement of the Act being 1/7/17 to comply with the Building (Earthquake-prone Buildings) Amendment Act 2016.


Building (Earthquake-prone Buildings) Amendment Act 2016 requirements. 6. Tangata Whenua Considerations

Not applicable 7. Views of Those Affected

Consultation may be carried out under section 83 of the Local Government Act 2002 if Council considers that there are any priority buildings located on a strategic route.

8. Costs

There is no cost unless public consultation is carried out. 9. Benefits

The key benefit is to ensure that strategic routes remain usable in the event of an earthquake.

10. Media/Publicity

When a decision has been made on whether there are any strategic routes this will be advised to the media as well as to the public by newsletter and the monitor located in the foyer of the Westport office.

If a decision is made that there are priority buildings this will require affected building owners to be notified.




Prepared by - Garry Howard - Mayor


Development West Coast Economic Stimulus Funding, Grants and Loans Administered by Buller District Council ___________________________________________________________________

Report Summary The purpose of this report is to provide Council with an update of the Development West Coast (DWC) Economic Development Stimulus Fund (EDSF) balances that have not been uplifted by Buller businesses.

The report is to provide options for redistribution of the funds that have not been uplifted.

Recommendation 1. That Council review all applications as received in 2016 and select from that

group some alternate recipients to receive DWC EDSF; or

2. Review applications received in 2016 and subsequent expressions of interest (of which there are 3) and select from that group some alternate recipients to receive DWC EDSF; or

3. Advertise that the remainder of the grant pool is available (being $90,000) and invite applicants to apply using the same criteria as when the pool was first opened in 2016; and

4. That any recommendation regarding the DWC EDSF resolved by Council at this meeting be delegated to the Economic Development Committee with recommendations direct to Development West Coast for their final 2017 meeting on 11 December.

(Note. For inclusion into the DWC Agenda any information/recommendation would need to be with DWC by 4 December 2017).

Issues & Discussion 1. Background Development West Coast provided $1m of funding to the Buller District for

Economic Stimulus Funding.

The purpose of this Fund was to stimulate business development and growth in the District in light of the current economic challenges. The Buller District Council was charged with administering the fund on behalf of the district, and the fund was to be applied in such a way so as to leverage additional funding from other funding sources.

The funding was initially made available from 1st October 2015. Applications for funding were to be received by DWC by 30 June 2016, however this timeline was later extended by DWC.

Criteria to apply to the fund were:

All projects and proposals must:

Comply with the Objects of the DWC Deed of Trust (“the Deed”); Provide a minimum of 10% equity pursuant to the Deed; Demonstrate how the project will promote employment opportunities

and/or generate sustainable economic benefit for the District; Demonstrate how the project will support business; Must demonstrate leverage of additional funding from other sources; And funding must flow via the respective District Council. Reasons that applications to the fund would not be accepted were:

Projects that have received other DWC funding; Feasibility studies; Compliance and regulatory costs (e.g. obtaining certification or resource

consent); and Public/community projects, such as:

‐ Sport and recreational facilities and buildings; ‐ Community halls; ‐ Theatres; ‐ Museums; ‐ Art Galleries; ‐ Memorials.

Priority was to be given to applications that:

Have employment opportunities as a direct effect of the distribution; and Leverage other funding.

The Economic Development Working Party reviewed the applications and put recommendations to all of council for the applicants selected, and DWC made the final decision if the applicant would be funded.

The Buller District Council was then charged with managing the approved projects and the responsibility for monitoring compliance with all KPIs,

conditions and benchmarks. If these things are not managed effectively by the Buller District Council, DWC reserved the right to stop funding all or any of the projects.

2. Current Situation All of the $1m fund had been allocated by 31 December 2016, with approval

of DWC Trustees. There is currently $90,000 that needs to be reallocated. 3. Reporting Requirements All recipients of grant funding must provide feedback to Council via KPIs. This

information is then fed through to DWC. All recipients have different timeframes for reporting KPIs dependent on when the funds were provided to them.

For some recipients, a portion of the funding was paid to them via Council by

way of a loan that will convert to a grant. This is contingent upon their reporting of KPIs being received to BDC in the timeframes agreed, and those KPIs being met. This funding mechanism is provided by way of an interest-free, suspensory loan.

There is a requirement for long term monitoring (some up to 5 years) for

these projects. This is because some of the suspensory loans convert to grants during this timeframe, and the KPI monitoring is required throughout this period. Some of the recipients are receiving their grants and loans in staged draw-downs which adds to the required administrative requirement.

4 Summary of Projects to date Of the projects which have received DWC EDS funding, 11 are meeting or

exceeding their KPIs. There is one project that is being monitored for progress which is not currently meeting their KPIs but work is ongoing to meet them.

There are three projects that were selected to be recipients of funding but due

to changes in their business plan, or by not meeting requirements set by DWC and the Economic Development Committee to allow the drawdown of funds, the Economic Development Committee now recommend reallocation of those funds which totals $90,000.

5. Development West Coast position on the projects which have not yet

drawn down Funds From recent discussion with Warren Gilbertson, Chief Operating Officer,

DWC it is anticipated that the DWC board would not have any intention to cut the remainder of the funding, should the recipients not require their funds.

It is hoped the DWC board would allow for a longer timeframe for a draw-

down of the DWC EDSF so that others can apply to the remainder of the fund.

BDC has received approaches from people with new business proposals who would like to apply for any remaining funds, should any be made available. (Three approaches recorded). A record of these interested parties has been kept awaiting instruction from Council.

6. Strategic Issues A key strategy of council set down in the 2015-2025 Long Term Plan is the

“consolidate and hold” position where it was agreed to minimise rates increases and limit new services or assets to those that could be used as a springboard for district economic growth. This strategy was agreed in recognition of the decline in the mining industries and the significant impact this has on our district.

Council being involved in the DWC Economic Stimulus Fund is in line with

this core strategy. 7. Values The Buller District Council Values are: Community Driven, One Team,

Integrity, Future Focused, and We Care. Buller District Council involvement with the DWC District Economic Stimulus

Fund reflects these values. This special grant funding emphasizes Buller District Councils’ desire to be community driven, care for the community and remain future focused. It is believed that long term benefits including employment, education and economic growth will be received by the community if Buller District Council assists with the scheme and therefore it is appropriate for Council to be involved in the project.

8. Significance Assessment The Buller District Council Significance and Engagement Policy sets out the

criteria and framework for a matter or transaction to be deemed significant. In a financial context the content included in this report is not considered

significant because the matters disclosed are of a routine nature, and not greater than 5% of the total assets and total annual operations of council, and are a staff operational matter.




Prepared by - Graeme Neylon - Deputy Mayor


Development West Coast Economic Extraordinary Funding ___________________________________________________________________

Report Summary This report presents the proposal to allocate further funding to the Reefton Power House Project from the remaining balance of the DWC Extraordinary Funding.

Recommendation That Council resolves to allocate a further $100,000 to the Reefton Power House Project from the DWC Extraordinary Funding.

Issues & Discussion In late 2013 early 2014 the Reefton Power House Project identified a funding shortfall that was a limiting factor in their ability to leverage a very large lottery grant to help fund the project. The council identified that the DWC Extraordinary Funding was to be boosted by the return of some of the funding that had been allocated to Coaltown following the sale of the Efenjay building (Westport I-Site building) and that eventually some of this funding could be reallocated to the Reefton Power house Project. However, to address the urgency of the funding request the Inangahua Community Board resolved to redirect $100k of the then unspent Vision 2010 project monies to the Power House Project with the object of applying to the DWC Extraordinary Funding to replenish the Vision 2010 project monies once the sale of the building had been completed. In any event the Power House Project stalled over land tenure issues and the $100k was never uplifted, the Vision 2010 project (Reefton Community Centre Upgrade) was completed and there was no requirement for the ICB to apply to the DWC funding.

The land tenure issues have now been resolved and the Reefton Power House Project is looking to uplift the remaining $136,700 of their original $400k grant from the DWC funding and the $100k that was also earmarked for the project. A report was presented to Council in September 2016 which confirmed that there was $130,849 remaining from the Development West Coast Extraordinary Fund that was available for distribution. It was resolved from that meeting that the Grants committee redistribute the balance to community groups based on the original selection criteria (as attached) of the fund. The project satisfies the original selection criteria proposed by Development West Coast for the distribution from this fund.


30 OCTOBER 2017

Agenda Item No 12

Prepared by - Dean Phibbs - Manager Corporate Services Reviewed by - Andy Gowland-Douglas - Chief Executive Rates Review – Draft Rates Consultation Document and Summary Rates Consultation Document

_____________________________ Report Summary This report presents a statement of proposal being a Draft Rates Consultation Document and Summary Rates Consultation Document for adoption by Council. Recommendation/draft resolution 1. That Council adopt the Draft Rates Consultation Document for public

consultation; and 2. That Council adopt the Summary Rates Consultation Document for

public consultation. Issues & Discussion Background Council began a rates review in 2013 and a tentative proposal was adopted in November 2014 to go out to the public for their input. As a result of feedback from the public from that consultation process Councillors revisited the review process and held a number of workshops and looked at a large number of rates models. The result of this process is the attached proposal documents for adoption.

Considerations 1. Strategic impact

The strategy of the rates overhaul project has been a top-down approach, based on a group of principles which are able to be described and discussed with our community, encouraging transparency about how rates are collected. This approach aligns to the core values of Council.

59% of the annual revenue required to operate Council is collected from both general and target rates, and it is important to recognise the majority of Council income is currently collected under a system which is historic and yield based, and not always able to be explained, it is “just how it has always been”. The current rates system is a bottom-up (as opposed to a strategic top down) approach where differentials are difficult for any ratepayer to assess and discuss with Council.

2. Significance assessment

The decision to conduct a rates review is, with reference to the criteria for determining significance in Council’s Significant and Engagement Policy. This is because the proposal affects a large portion of the community and it is likely to generate a high degree of controversy in terms of the number of people affected.

Council has decided to engage in separate consultation rather than concurrent consultation in tandem with the LTP in 2018. This is because of the significance of the review and the potential of the consultation process if concurrent consultation was conducted.

3. Risk analysis

A rates review does not change the amount of rates revenue received by Council, it simply reallocates the share that each ratepayer contributes. Rates are an emotive topic and there is some risk that ratepayer goodwill could be eroded if a ratepayer were to face an increase. Conversely if a ratepayer were to face a decrease that goodwill may be enhanced.

There is potential risk around computational and mathematical calculations within the structure of the model used to determine rates incidence. This is mitigated by peer review and using specifically designed software to create the rating models.

There is some legal risk around the structure of the model. This is mitigated by robust peer review and using the services of an external legal expert to review any final proposal which may be selected for future rates collection.

4. Values The Buller District Values are: Integrity, Future Focussed, Community Driven, One Team and We Care. Carefully considering how Council collects rates from our community aligns to all of these values. Consulting on the Rates Overhaul project allows for discrepancies in the application of the rating systems (both in place now, and proposed new system) to be examined and allows for greater transparency between Council and community.

5. Policy / legal considerations

Council is required to consult with the community and ratepayers using the special consultative process set out in section 83 of the Local Government Act 2002.

6. Tangata whenua considerations

Council does not specifically need to consult with iwi over this proposal. 7. Views of those affected

Given the significance of a change in the rating base and the redistribution of rates has on the community this is likely to be a great deal of interest in the proposal and the number views from ratepayers via the consultation process is likely to be significant.

8. Costs

Council budgeted $100,000 during 2014 for the Rates Overhaul project. To date $54,000 has been spent. There will be additional costs to complete the project and to engage in public consultation, including a mail out to ratepayers. In addition should Council adopt the proposed (or a variation of the proposed) rating model after consultation, Council may have the proposed rates resolution, which must be set by law, reviewed by an expert legal advisor which will have additional costs. The total costs are unlikely to exceed the amount originally budgeted for in 2014.

9. Benefits

If the final proposal is adopted and implemented Council will have a transparent, simple rates system that is easy to explain to ratepayers and easy for the ratepayer and the community to understand. It will distribute the burden of rates appropriately with reference to the values and principles of an effective rating system that councillors considered were suitable for our community.


A media release has been prepared to go out when the proposal is adopted.


30 OCTOBER 2017

Agenda Item No 13

Prepared by - Sonia Creswell - CEO Westport Airport Reviewed by - Andy Gowland-Douglas - Chief Executive Request for capital to purchase Airport Mower

_____________________________ Report Summary The airport seeks permission from council to make an unbudgeted capital purchase of a mower to fulfil the maintenance needs of the airport grounds (approximately 8 hectares of grass are required to be cut regularly by grounds staff). There are two alternatives to purchasing a new mower. The first is to continue with the current mower attachment which has had a significant maintenance cost history and is likely to have an escalating maintenance cost due to its three engines needing overhaul within the next six-nine months. Currently it has a significant repair that needs to be done which has a quoted cost of $1000.00. The second alternative is to employ contractors to cut the grass on an as needed basis at a cost of approximately $525-$745 +GST per cut which in addition to unbudgeted maintenance cost would not utilise current ground staff time effectively. Recommendation/draft resolution: Resolution to approve unbudgeted capital expenditure of $17,775.00 for the Husqvana ZTR PZ34 mower for the airport Issues & Discussion The tow and mow attachment which we currently use to cut the grass was purchased in April 2014 when we moved the maintenance of the grounds in house in a bid to reduce costs. Prior to that all grass mowing had been contracted out to Westreef and it was a significant and ongoing maintenance cost (Westreef cost for mowing was approx. $745 + GST per mow).

Over the last three years the tow and mow has completed the task but early on it became clear it was working to its capacity with the amount of mowing we are required to do (approx. 8 hectares) and struggled with the density of the grass unless kept very short and in some undulating areas was unable to effectively cut. On balance although it has easily paid for itself through use and served a purpose to this point it is not the best fit for the job. The maintenance costs have been on-going and with three engines to maintain, constant. Indications are that engine overalls will be required within the next 6-9 months on all three mowers. Also when the mower is in maintenance we have twice needed to contract out grass mowing to ensure we are keeping on top of the grass. The cost of outsourcing mowing is between $525+ gst (Golf Club) and $745 +gst (Westreef). The price varies with time taken to complete the work (variables such as grass thickness, type of mower used may influence final cost in addition to variable contractor rates). Consequently with the tow and mow attachment coming to the end of its life we have been considering alternative fit for purpose mowers and have had an opportunity to see a demonstration of the Husqvana PZ34. Originally the plan was to put a replacement mower in next year’s annual plan however one of the engines on the current attachment now requires a full replacement of the internal bearings which has a quoted repair cost in excess of $1000. I have also been offered an ex-display Husqvana PZ34 for a significantly reduced price of $17,775.00 (the mowers recommended retail is $23608.00). This unit is simplified in that it has one engine to maintain and yet has the ability to produce a faster cleaner cut with it being a single purpose unit (can cut 7 acres/hr). This unit would be well able to deal with the amount of grass we have to maintain (8 hectares – just under 20 acres) and comparatively much less maintenance costs (one mower as opposed to three on the current unit). It would also perform the task safer (has a roll safety device) and faster as the blade repetition on the unit is more efficient (this means less cost in terms of the time taken by maintenance staff to complete the task). In terms of affordability I think it is a wise choice to upgrade the mower – if the cost of outsourcing the mowing is considered against the cost of doing the work in house it very quickly pays for itself - if we took the lesser figure of $525 per mow it would take 34 contracted mows to pay for the mower in its entirety. If we estimate mowing requirements to be once every two weeks it would take 16 months for it to fully pay for itself. Making the purchase now means we can take the opportunity of the ex-display unit and we may be able to sell the tow and mow attachment for parts and recoup a small amount before the unit requires more substantial maintenance. See attached support documents: Appendix ONE: Repair costs of Tow and Mow since purchase in April 2014 – we have twice had to get contractors in to mow due to down time with Tow and Mow repair and grass needing to be cut while in for repair. Note: Cost of contractor mowing grass ranges from $525-$745 excluding GST.

Appendix TWO: Outlines normal wear and tear maintenance costs for the Tow and Mow attachment as compared to the Husqvana PZ34. Note: the Husqvarna has only one engine to maintain compared to the three of the Tow and Mow and the Husqvarna hydraulic transmission needs to be serviced every 200 hrs Appendix THREE and Four: Quote for replacement mower and spec sheet. We would go for the 72 inch cut model as this is the same reach as our current tow and mow attachment and the difference in price between the 60 inch and 72 inch is made up for in less time to mow by ground staff. Appendix FIVE: Alternate quote for a Kubota ZD1211. This option was dismissed due to the price difference (more expensive) between it and the Husqvarna which we believe will be adequate for the job. Considerations 1. Strategic impact

This is a future focused decision – on balance of the cost to maintain the current mowing solution and the cost of purchasing a safer model which is fit for purpose (will reduce mowing time due to being a more efficient mower) it is the best solution for our team in terms of being fiscally responsible and caring for the welfare of staff (new model has safety features the current attachment doesn’t have.

2. Significance assessment

This purchase is not significant with regard to our significance policy 3. Risk analysis

Risks if we go ahead: Short Term: This is an unbudgeted capital expense so an exception would have to be given by council in order to make the purchase and it would be recorded as an out of budget purchase on the year’s accounts

Long Term: None

Risks if we don’t go ahead: Short Term: On going significant maintenance bill on current equipment which is struggling to achieve the task of mowing the 8 hectares of grass we need to mow at the airport. We will need to have the engines overhauled likely before the end of the coming summer season which means additional costs of getting contractors in to mow while the engines are being repaired/overhauled.

Long Term: It is likely that the current tow and mow attachment will fail completely and we will either be forced to make a replacement purchase or use our maintenance budget to pay for a contractor to come and mow the grass at $525 +GST per time (see attached quote from golf club and Westreef).

4. Policy / legal considerations

No legal or policy implications.

5. Tangata whenua considerations

No Tangata whenua considerations required 6. Views of those affected

The key party that would be affected by this purchase would be out JV partner – Ministry of Transport. They effectively will pay half the cost of this capital purchase as per our agreement and an approach has been made to them to confirm their support of this purchase.

As this is an in-house maintenance matter I do not think that the public needs to be consulted with before making a decision however if they were consulted it is likely ratepayers would support the purchase of a mower if they had the opportunity to review the cost comparison between purchasing a mower and contracting out the work.

We already have the labour hire to enable this maintenance task to be done in house so it makes sense to provide an appropriate, safe tool to carry out the work. Cost comparison would see the mower pay for itself within 16 months.

The ratepayer expects ground maintenance to be maintained at the airport and it is important from a first impression perspective to new people arriving into our district through the air service.

7. Costs

The capital purchase of the mower is not in the current budget and the request is to make an exception for this purchase to be made. Importantly half the capital cost will be met by MOT as part of the joint venture agreement. The MOT have been contacted regarding the purchase and it is not anticipated that they will decline the request for support given the nature of the JV agreement though this has yet to be confirmed in writing.

The cost of the purchase may be off-set to a small degree by selling the tow and mow attachment as is where is.

8. Benefits

Cost saving by not contracting out the grass mowing or investing further maintenance dollars into a failing piece of equipment which ultimately is not fit for purpose.

Safer, fit for purpose mower that has a lighter maintenance load (a single engine as opposed to three on the current tow and mow attachment).

More efficient mower which is able to give a closer and tidier cut than the existing mower in a shorter time period.


No media or publicity required.

Appendix 1

‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ From: Lorraine and Brian Hateley <[email protected]> Date: 16/03/17 9:10 PM (GMT+12:00) To: [email protected] Cc: [email protected] Subject: Airport mowing Good Morning Mike Thank you for your inquiry regarding support mowing at the Westport Airport Today we have inspected, with Airport staff the area to be mown Option 1 ‐ Includes back up support in the event of your gear failure etc

@ $150.00 per hour + GST and we estimate approx 3 to 4 hours mowing time We are able to mow a 3.2 metre width with a very even cut, eg 40mm height of cut.

Available at short notice Option 2 ‐ Could include regular mowing of the area and a fair estimate of $500 + gst per time

We are available to provide a demonstration cut and this would also give a definite mowing time and cost

Points to ponder ‐ Given our turf background ‐ we also noticed a very heavy proportion of dandelion and other flat weeds that are present in your pasture Dandelion are very prolific, flowering multiple times but are easily controlled with the correct spray, with no damage to existing grasses This will most certainly reduce your mowing times and mowing frequency Westport Golf Club can also undertake this work if required Please contact me for any further info and/or discussion Kind regards Brian Hateley Westport Golf Grounds Chair 0274 316 318

Appendix 1

Appendix 2

Appendix 3

Appendix 4

Appendix 5



Report for Agenda Item No 14 Prepared by - Garry Howard

- Mayor Mayor’s Report

_____________________________

This report will be presented verbally at the meeting. Draft Recommendation That the report be received for information.



Report for Agenda Item No 15 Prepared by - Garry Howard

- Mayor Mayor’s Correspondence

_____________________________

Correspondence attached as follows: Dr Suzanne Doig, LG Commission Chris Roberts, CEO Tourism Industry Aotearoa

Draft Recommendation That the report be received for information.




- Chief Executive Chief Executive’s Report

_____________________________ Background This report is an overview of key activities since the September report, and an update on any key strategic issues. Draft Recommendation That the report be received for information.

Organisation development Health & Safety Jackie Mathers has joined the team on a part time basis – taking over the health & Safety administration role previously performed by Sonia Creswell. She is contracted to us via Westreef where she performs the same role.

We are currently in the process of implementing the new system that was developed in 2016, and selecting the online system we will use as part of this. We hope to have completed the evaluation of these and have made a decision by the end of November so it can be implemented early in the New Year. Strategic issues/updates Westport Revitalisation project It was great to have 60 people attend the promo night at the NBS as well as 1500 people view online. It was great to trial this technology and see how many people will engage with it. David and Geoff had a busy few days of meetings in preparation for both the 7 Day Makeover and the work Geoff is doing on our design framework. The key now is to get as many people as possible engaged in the process and build up the resources bank.

SOLGM Summit 2017 This year’s theme was: Today, Tomorrow: Transforming today's vision into tomorrow's reality and it provided many thought provoking and inspirational speakers. Some of the key themes and ideas are below

Changing demographics and the impact on the future Workforce make up, culture change from generations and different education

system from past will create different style of worker in future and we need to be mindful of how we attract and retain our workforce. Engagement in meaningful work critical as is flexibility in the workplace.

The need to communicate and deliver services differently, online and ‘realtime’ will become more and more critical.

Current economy, education system and social systems based on old pyramid population model this won't work in future.

In the future Maori population will grow while other ethnicities will shrink, need to think about how we engage Maori/iwi better in key policy and other decisions now

What will our community look like in 50 years?

Should more government be devolved to local level? NZ Initiative - Example of Switzerland, no centralised government, higher GDP

and wages. Localised taxes set by LG creating competitive cantons (districts). Would that work here? Will central government ever give up control to Local Government?

Boundaries between central and local will become increasingly blurred Need to have another look at returning taxes to LG otherwise communities will

become unaffordable and die.

Exponential Change We are in currently in a period of exponential change. Change is the only constant, if you are not being disruptive you are being

disrupted Average NZ home consumes as much internet as NZ as a whole used to in

1998 Technology can demonetise things that were once key commodities, e.g from

printed maps, to GPS devices – to Google Maps Information over infrastructure (Airbnb, Facebook, uber, alibaba) Netflix vs

blockbuster No longer in linear world Death of traditional retail to online 5 horseman of digital apocalypse- top 5 companies are information/technology

based Risk of business failure rapidly increasing due to technology changes Do nothing is not a strategy Rate of change on outside exceeds rate of change in the inside (Jack Welsh)

Worth looking at Gerd Leonhard video on change -http://www.futuristgerd.com/videos/

New models of community governance There is a need to rethink economic development- put focus on those most

disconnected with growth alongside traditional economic development if you want to create meaningful change.

Procurement as local ED tool - add outcomes focussed on wellbeing of your community - councils in other places in world no longer trying to get the best product for cheapest price, and instead use a social procurement model where highest priority is placed on providing benefits to local businesses and economy – which can involve need for capacity building and support to deliver.

Participatory budgeting - www.participatorybudgeting.org – this process devolves some aspects of budgetary decisions to the community.

Co-operative councils - community led development principles with Councils as community 'facilitators'.

Need to change from leading the council as an entity to leading the community - Is Council an instrument in the orchestra or the conductor?

Commissioning council - decide to provide a service, then decide who best to deliver. In this model all services are contracted out.

Growing trend towards crowd funding of local projects e.g.- spacehive.com Engagement and significance policy - this should be seen as an agreement

with our community on how we will involve them in decision making

Best practice community engagement Explain WHY first before the WHAT - do it earlier to get better engagement Waipa as an example of how to use social media for engagement - used

emojis to give community a vote over decisions to rebuild swimming pool, these then used as submissions alongside tradition method.

Helping people to help themselves project – Tiki tour – explaining what council does and what benefits ratepayers receive using an interactive video tour: http://www.waipatikitour.co.nz/

Importance of Internal before external - staff need to know why first - staff as biggest ambassadors

Move towards open days instead of old fashioned 'hearing' Approach – this attracts more people to engage.

Global design trends The global design Initiative - https://globaldesigningcities.org/ - a project

focused on designing cities and spaces for people – not cars People and place approach to design Importance of community placemaking in urban design

Key meetings /events attended: 28-29 September -SOLGM Annual Summit – see above for summary of key messages. 30 September – 1 October – Spring Challenge Event (Geraldine) 6 October – Meeting with Local Government Commission 12 October –ETNZ Spring Conference Dinner 13 October – Meeting with DOC and Nature Conservancy 16 October – Coaltown Trust Meeting 17 October – Exercise Southern Katipo Meeting 19 October – Til Boosters Breakfast 19 October – 7 Day Makeover Promo Night 20 October - Westport Revitalisation Workshop Coming up 26 October – West Coast CEs meeting 1-2 November – CQ meeting 16-17 November – Rural and Provincial Meeting 20-24 November – Leading for Strategic Change Programme – Melbourne Business School 25 November - 2 December – 7 Day Makeover




- Chief Executive Council Meeting Action List

_____________________________

Background To provide Council with an action list from the last meeting. Draft Recommendation That the report be received for information.

Council Meeting Action List

Item Previous Action Proposed Action Progress Assigned Completion Date

Disused Wharf Removal October 2016

That all current information available, including flood protection work, be collated by Council in consultation with Westport Harbour Limited, and report back to Council.

Provide progress update on Waterfront Development Strategy and Master Plan, incorporated in Major Projects Quarterly Status Report NB: Development Strategy widens riverside scope to consider overall business case, risk assessment, community needs, environmental impact, social/economic benefit, legislative and statutory compliance, LTP alignment, land ownership and flood protection.

Chief Executive, Group Manager Assets & Infrastructure

June 2017 Council Meeting


Item Previous Action Action Progress Assigned Completion Date

Punakaiki Freedom Camping Petition November 2016 April 2017

1. That the petition from the

Punakaiki residents be received and in recognising their concerns Council signals its willingness to work together to resolve the issues.

2. Defers making any decision on this issue until - a. The outcome of the

Department of Internal Affairs and Local Government New Zealand process is known;

b. And Council has consulted with affected parties, including Grey District Council and Department of Conservation to look for workable solutions to the issues raised.

Workshop held. Discussions to take place with Grey District Council and Department of Internal Affairs. Joint monitoring with Department of Conservation. Discuss issue with Grey District Council

Chief Executive


Item Action Progress Assigned Completion Date

Tender Process November 2016

Basic explanation of tender process including attributes. For awareness and education of councillors.

Provide update on Procurement Improvement Plan, incorporated in Major Projects Quarterly Status Report

Risk and Policy Committee

TBC

Road Closures November 2016

Can this be delegated responsibility?

To be reviewed by Risk and Policy Committee

Risk and Policy Committee

TBC

Punakaiki Community Liaison Meeting March 2017

Investigate ways to advocate for freeing up land for residential and/or commercial development

Act as conduit for input into the Dolomite Point re-development project

Consider increasing funding for compliance in regard to freedom camping (work with Grey District Council)

No further meetings held to date, due to time constraints and the need for additional information

On-going

30 october 2017 - buller districtbullerdc.govt.nz/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/30-october-2017.pdf ·...

Documents