15                                            28 August 2020

HUTT CITY COUNCIL

 

Long Term Plan/Annual Plan Subcommittee

 

Minutes of a meeting held in the Council Chambers, 2nd Floor, 30 Laings Road,
Lower Hutt on

 Friday 28 August 2020 commencing at 12.30pm and
Monday 31 August 2020 commencing at 10.30am

 

 

PRESENT:

Mayor C Barry (Chair)

Deputy Mayor T Lewis

 

Cr D Bassett (until 4.54pm 28 August 2020)

Cr J Briggs

 

Cr K Brown

Cr B Dyer

 

Cr S Edwards

Cr A Mitchell

 

Cr C Milne

Cr N Shaw (until 12.44pm 31 August 2020)

 

Cr S Rasheed (until 3.00pm 28 August 2020)

Cr L Sutton

 

APOLOGY:                     Cr D Hislop

 

IN ATTENDANCE:       Ms J Miller, Chief Executive

                                          Ms H Oram, Director Environmental and Sustainability

Mr K Puketapu-Dentice, Director Economy and Development (part meeting) 

Mr B Cato, Chief Legal Officer

Ms W Moore, Head of Strategy and Planning (part meeting)

Mr B Hodgins, Strategic Advisor (part meeting)

Ms K Stannard, Head of Democratic Services (part meeting)

Ms S Beath-Croft, Advisor, Waste Minimisation and Sustainability (part meeting)

Ms C Taylor, Principal Research and Evaluation Advisor (part meeting)

Ms J Randall, Programme Lead – Planning and Reporting (part meeting)

Ms K Glanville, Senior Democracy Advisor (part meeting)

Ms T Lealofi, Democracy Advisor (part meeting)

Ms H Clegg, Minute Taker (part meeting)

 

 

PUBLIC BUSINESS

 

 

1.       APOLOGIES 

Resolved:   (Mayor Barry/Deputy Mayor Lewis)         Minute No. LTPAP 20501

“That the apologies received from Cr Hislop (28 and 31 August 2020) and Cr Rasheed for early departure (28 August 2020) be accepted and leave of absence be granted.”

 

 

 

 

 

2.       CONFLICT OF INTEREST DECLARATIONS        

          There were no conflict of interest declarations.

3.

Engagement and Submissions Analysis - Rubbish and Recycling (20/900)

Report No. LTPAP2020/5/185 by the Head of Strategy and Planning

 

The Head of Strategy and Planning elaborated on the report.

 

Resolved:   (Mayor Barry/Cr Dyer)                                    Minute No. LTPAP 20502

“That the Subcommittee:

(i)      notes the overall results of the engagement and consultation on proposed changes to the city’s recycling and rubbish system;

(ii)     notes the details of activity prior to and during the Recycling and Rubbish engagement and consultation 15 July to 16 August 2020;

(iii)    notes that a submission was received from Kāinga Ora after the closing date for submissions;

(iv)    agrees to accept the submission from Kāinga Ora; and

(v)     notes the summary analysis of feedback received.”

For the reasons outlined in the officer’s report.

 

4.

Schedule of Submitters (20/948)

Report No. LTPAP2020/5/93 by the Programme Lead - Planning and Reporting

 

Mr Richard Porter elaborated on submission 2635395.  He advised that rubbish bags was his preferred choice.

Ms Gail Rumble elaborated on submission 2612122.  She said residents should be able to choose their own rubbish bin supplier.

Mr Jason Staap elaborated on submission 2610439.  He expressed concern about the level of waste going into the landfill. He noted that residents living in the Eastern and Western Hills had steep driveways.

Members asked officers to investigate the following questions and report back:

·           A breakdown identifying the submitters preferred and second options;

·           What rubbish service delivery options were provided by Christchurch City Council, particularly for the Port Hills area and houses on hills;

·           What were the options for steep driveways/stairs/shared bins ie apartments?;

·           An attachment for cars to pull bins;

·           How the issues highlighted by submitters were/could be addressed under current proposed four options eg steep driveways, accessibility etc?;

·           How did Council set the differentials for the different bin sizes and were they set at market rates.

Mr Charles Wilmot elaborated on submission 2611554.  His tabled oral submission is attached as page 11 to the minutes.

 

Mr Brian Little elaborated on submission 2622683.

 

Mr Mark Hamer elaborated on submission 2624792.

 

Mr Simon Buckland elaborated on submission 2628398.

 

The meeting adjourned at 1.28pm and reconvened at 1.44pm.

 

Mr David Starshaw elaborated on submission 2629065.

 

Mr Peter North elaborated on submission 2613599.

 

Mr Andrew Ward elaborated on submission 2619098.  His tabled oral submission is attached as pages 12-14 to the minutes.

 

Ms Valarie Jenness elaborated on submission 2634224.  Her tabled oral submission is attached as pages 15-16 to the minutes.  She suggested that a disability service should be provided to support those who were unable to lift or wheel heavy bins.

 

Mr Paul Ngo elaborated on submission 2634436.

 

Mr Fletcher Tay from Kai Oranga elaborated on submission 2691045.

 

Mr Kevin Kiel provided a verbal submission.   Mr Kiel advised he would like to retain the weekly collection.

The meeting adjourned at 2.30pm and resumed at 3.16pm.

Mr Max Shierlaw elaborated on submission 2610761.  He reiterated that the status quo was tenable and that Council should not be giving the contract to a monopoly. 

In response to a question from a member, Mr Shierlaw explained there were many areas of the country which still used plastic bags including all of Northland.  He added that as 30% of Lower Hutt still used plastic bags, the demand was there and Council should not impose more costs on people by discontinuing their preferred service. 

Ms Segia Alapati elaborated on submission 2647506. 

In response to a question from a member, Ms Alapati advised she only put a rubbish bag out for collection once it was full and that she would prefer to have a bin.

Ms Patricia Davis elaborated on submission 2655583.  She tabled additional comments attached as pages 17-18 to the minutes.  She stated her opposition to the consultation process. 

Mr Tama Braithwaite-Westoby elaborated on submission 2643923.  He spoke to a presentation attached as 19-25 to the minutes.  He said he would like to see a change in the public’s behaviour towards rubbish and recycling and offered a number of solutions.  These solutions included street roamers, strategic, improved signage and greater public bin coverage throughout the city.  He also believed a shift in infrastructure to provide for zero waste, a circular economy and bylaws around rubbish should be introduced and enforced. 

Mr Steven Winyard elaborated on submission 2647223.  He asked how cross contamination of recyclables would be controlled.  He agreed that nets for bins would help prevent wind blown recyclables.

Members asked officers to investigate the following questions and report back:

·           Whether more public bins were going to be installed throughout the city; and

·           Clarification of the waste collection system at Rona House, which had 27 units but only currently required 5 bins; whether officers had asked current operators if they would/could collect plastic rubbish bags after June 2021; what Kaianga Ora’s plans were for waste collection at their 3000 homes and what private operators currently do regarding accessible options.

The meeting adjourned at 3.52 and resumed at 4.04pm.

Mayor Barry confirmed that the Council meeting to be held on 15 September 2020 would consider all submissions and then make a decision.

The meeting adjourned at 4.08pm and resumed at 4.16pm

Mr Cark Bakker elaborated on submission 2656976.  He believed Council had been let down by the presented business case and that Council should have been better informed about the issues that really mattered.  He considered the presented analysis did not provide information on how to minimise waste and that little work on alternatives had been undertaken.  He also believed a standardised, equitable, efficient and flexible system could be developed and tailored to individual needs.

Ms Fiona Millington elaborated on submission 2632241.   She believed the companies who supplied plastics should be paying for its collection and that a regional collection system should be developed.  She added that green waste should be a priority and that communication was vital, to educate the public about waste and recycling.

Mr Grant Birkinshaw elaborated on submission 2630159. He tabled additional comments attached as page 26 to the minutes.  He supported the status quo.

Cr Bassett left the meeting at 4.45pm.

Mr Glenn Fitzgerald elaborated on submission 2651762. He presented a YouTube video titled ‘Plastic bottle recycling machine in Germany’ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fMM_XtpzeYc  to explain the idea of stewardship.  

Cr Bassett rejoined the meeting at 4.52pm.

Cr Brown left the meeting at 4.53pm.

A member asked officers to investigate the following question and report back:

·           Further information (including officer recommendations) regarding product stewardship systems and how they might effect recycling.

Cr Bassett left the meeting at 4.54pm.

The meeting adjourned at 5.13pm and resumed at 5.17pm.

Mr John Mendzela elaborated on submission 2673989.  He strongly objected to his presentation being censured and not being able to be shown at the meeting.  He believed the consultation process was flawed and that good governance practices were not being followed.

Mayor Barry advised he had authorised officers to not show the presentation as it did not relate to the item on the agenda. 

Mr Frank Vickers, representing Eastbourne Community Board, elaborated on submission 2676608.  He advocated for a better green waste collection service and that removing green waste from the landfill should be a priority.  

Cr Briggs advised he would be happy to speak with the Eastbourne Community Board concerning the work of the Councillor Led Climate Change Working Group.

Mr Michael Ellis, representing Friends of Waiwhetu Stream (FWS),  elaborated on submission 2674167.  He advised that in 2019, they had collected 225 bags of rubbish from along the stream.  He stated FWS supported covered bins for recycling, to help reduce the amount of wind blown materials escaping into the environment.

Cr Brown left the meeting at 6.34pm.

In response to a question from a member, the Chief Executive advised that once the preferred option was agreed at the Council meeting to be held on 15 September 2020, details would be finalised for all aspects of the service.  She added extensive communications would be used to educate and inform the public.

Cr Brown rejoined the meeting at 6.37pm.

Members asked officers to investigate the following questions and report back:

·                Information on whether the contract could be altered through its lifetime and the ease of change if possible including regarding green waste collections.

·                Information concerning what the options were for the frequency of green waste collections and whether there were weekly, fortnightly or monthly options available.

The meeting adjourned at 6.39pm and resumed at 6.54pm.

Mr Jonathan Eweg elaborated on submission 2678629.  He believed the current collection system did not work well, and he would prefer Option 1 or a full user pays system.  He advocated for a levy on items when purchased, with this money being used to fund all collection services.  He requested information about what happened to recyclables that were currently collected. 

In response to a question from a member, Mr Eweg suggested those who could not pay for rubbish collections would need to think carefully about the items they purchased.

Mr Joseph Wyse elaborated on submission 2678516. 

Mr Bernard Gresham and Mr Phil Bond elaborated on submission 2679693.  Mr Gresham asked for the questions raised in the submission to be answered.  He believed current operators should have a share of future collection services, and that as recycling operators made a profit from their businesses, they should be paying Council to collect the recyclable materials.  He concluded that he would not pay $105 a year for a recycling bin additional to a general waste bin cost.

Mayor Barry advised it was proposed that no ratepayers’ monies would be used for future rubbish collections, as it would be a user-pays system. 

The meeting adjourned at 7.13pm and resumed at 7.30pm.

Mr Len Bryant and Ms June Spence elaborated on submission 2679262.  They explained it took them approximately three weeks to fill one rubbish bag.  They said the status quo should remain or at least a user-pays system installed so they only paid when they needed a bin collected. 

Mr Phil Pegler elaborated on submission 2674351.  He explained he lived on a shared drive with 12 houses, many with elderly residents.  He advised he no longer supported Option 1.  He asked that more effort should be directed towards reducing waste in the first place.  He expressed disappointment in the consultation process and that it appeared the tender process had already closed.

A Member asked officers to investigate the following question and report back:

·                Information on what the current rules/bylaws were for burning rubbish.

The meeting adjourned at 7.46 pm.

Monday 31 August 2020 at 10.30 am

APOLOGIES 

Resolved:   (Mayor Barry/Cr Briggs)                             Minute No. LTPAP 20503

“That the apologies received from Cr Bassett, Cr Hislop, Cr Rasheed and Cr Shaw for early departure  be accepted and leave of absence be granted.”

 

Mr Lachlan Dixon elaborated on submission 2613488.  He supported  Option 3, as it utilised recycling, green waste and the removal of plastic rubbish bags.  He asked for weekly collections.  He noted the impact on local rubbish collection businesses and asked how these businesses could be incorporated in the new system. 

 

Ms Nan Thompson elaborated on submission 2629653.  She explained she was on a fixed income and would prefer a smaller bin for a reasonable cost.  She agreed an 80l bin for $80/year and fortnightly collections would suit her. 

 

Ms Emma Gregory, Ms April Wilton, Mr Ray Lambert, representing KiwiWaste Consortium (the Consortium) elaborated on submission 2676571.  Ms Wilton also elaborated on their collaborative working relationship with Council.  She advised that the current waste collection system had high customer satisfaction rates.  She said the proposed changes were a complete surprise to the Consortium.  She stated the Consortium believed the consultation to be flawed and that the current system was an option.  The Consortium believed Option 4 was skewed and did not present all the information for informed decisions to be made.  She criticised the proposal for fortnightly collections as it would not suit all customers.  She maintained that competition in the market benefitted customers and that there was rapidly developing technological advances in the waste management field, especially relating to pay-only-for-the-waste-you-generate. 

 

Ms Wilton advised that if Council would no longer collect plastic rubbish bags, the Consortium would fill the gap left in the market and would also provide a pay-as-you-throw bin service.  She stated the companies in the Consortium already provided accessible services.  She urged Council to support local businesses and New Zealand owned companies.  She concluded by stating that the waste collection service in Lower Hutt did not require a drastic overhaul at this time.

 

In response to questions from members, Ms Wilton acknowledged some of the options would be cheaper than the current services.  She added that currently high waste users were subsidising lower waste users.  She added that the Consortium was angered by Council’s actions to not consult with the industry.

 

Mr Wayne Kearns provided a verbal submission.  He requested information concerning what the health and safety issues were with the current bag collection system.  He believed customers should be given choices and the status quo be retained.  He added that having already completed the tender process before a preferred option was selected was not good process.

 

The meeting adjourned at 11.02am and resumed at 11.12am.

 

Ms Karen Crawshaw elaborated on submission 2637124.  She supported a green waste bin, and suggested a Bokashi Bucket system also be introduced.  She suggested an upfront payment for rubbish collection services as she believed paying through the rates system hid the cost.  She urged Council to take care of local businesses and educate the community about waste reduction, reusing and recycling.

A member asked officers to investigate the following question and report back:

·           Information on insinkerators and how they fitted into the waste stream.

The meeting adjourned at 11.24am and resumed at 11.36am.

Ms Angela Angus elaborated on submission 2651813.  She explained she did not want to subsidise other people’s bin use through her rates. 

Ms Leaine Kirk elaborated on submission 2651807.  She explained she was a landlord and that if her tenants asked for bins under the new system she would increase the rent of her properties.  She asked that the status quo remain.

In response to questions from members, Ms Kirk understood a Council waste collection system might be cheaper than the current system but she would still increase rents to cover all costs of bins.

Ms Gloria Haapu elaborated on submission 2655154.  She said Council should be promoting waste minimisation by charging for waste to be collected.  She supported the status quo, and any changes to the recycling scheme that ensured material would not get blown from bins. 

Ms Emma Gregory and Mr Al Gregory, representing Al’s Litter Bins elaborated on submission 2676692.  Ms Gregory explained the future of the family business was now uncertain due to Council’s proposed changes.   She said a competitive market was good for all, including customers, and that the company understood individual requirements of customers.  She advised the company could not compete with large multi-national companies, and could not easily transfer the business into the commercial waste operations as that would require different plant and infrastructure.  She urged Council to consider local businesses. 

Cr Brown left the meeting at 11.56am.

In response to a question from a member, Ms Gregory confirmed support for the Consortium’s submission. She said that Options 2 and 4 were supported, along with 1 and 3 if there an opt out clause was made clear.  She added they would support a pay-as-you-throw option. 

Cr Brown rejoined the meeting at 11.58am.

In response to a question from a member, Ms Gregory suggested educating the public about waste minimisation.  She said the compnay could easily pick up plastic bag rubbish.  She advised that as the industry had not been consulted, options they could provide had not been investigated.

Mr Gregory advised he wanted to pass the business down to family members, and that Al’s Litter Bins provided great customer service. 

Mr Chris Parkin elaborated on submission 2613655.  He showed a presentation, attached as pages 27-31 to the minutes.  He suggested ways to deal with recycling contamination included education and the use of cameras and other technologies.  He believed the quantity of waste was only addressed under Option 3 and that no option dealt with disposal reduction. 

In response to questions from members, Mr Parkin agreed that Council should be providing additional services for those with accessibility issues and bin clips.  He  suggested that Council needed to ensure everyone had access to information about waste reduction solutions. 

Mr John O’Leary elaborated on submission 2668636.  He showed a presentation, attached as pages 32-52 to the minutes. 

Mr Ray Lambert elaborated on submission 2676707.  He advised he was a founding member of Northland Waste Limited which owned Low Cost Bins. He was concerned that Council had not provided any opportunity to talk with the industry to gain insight into services they offered, technologies and innovations used or how partnerships could be formed.  He criticised the consultation document, stating the status quo should have been an option.  He said the rubbish bag collections could be undertaken by a variety of operators.  He asked that Council consider all alternatives and options, and talk with the industry.

In response to a question from a member concerning the percentage of Northland Waste Limited’s waste that Lower Hutt residential kerbside collection represented, Mr Lambert offered to supply that information via email to members

In response to a question from a member, Mr Lambert confirmed his company ran a similar system to Option 4 in the Kapiti area with green waste collections, on demand collections.  He said the company had a partnership arrangement with the Kapiti Coast District Council. 

In response to a question from a member regarding pricing, Mr Lambert stated waste collection companies responded to the competitive market, and that one size did not fit all.  He added local companies were happy to step into niche markets.

Mrs Linda and Mr Oscar Davis provided a verbal submission.  They tabled their comments, attached as pages 53-54 to the minutes.

 

The meeting adjourned at 12.44pm.  Cr Shaw left the meeting.

 

The meeting resumed at 12.59pm.

 

Ms Demelza O’Brien and Ms Dina Awarau, representing Regional Public Health elaborated on submission 2679472.  They tabled a document, attached as pages 55-56 of the minutes.  They explained they had edited Council’s consultation document into one page for better clarity for their clients to understand the issue.  Ms O’Brien explained the community would be satisfied with a weekly rubbish collection at $3/week.  She said local jobs should not be lost.

 

In response to questions from members, Ms O’Brien confirmed their clientele tended to be from lower socio-economic backgrounds, and of Maori, Pacifika or refugee ethnicity. She said Kaianga Ora and the Ministry of Social Development (MSD) needed to be party to all conversations concerning waste collections. 

In response to a question from a member regarding green waste, Ms O’Brien confirmed communities were interested in learning how to compost and garden.

Ms Awarau confirmed that Option 3 was preferred, even if it resulted in job losses.  She added everything possible should be done to prevent local job losses.

 

Mayor Barry thanked all submitters for their time. 

Members asked officers to investigate the following questions and report back:

·                Information concerning options to change bin sizes throughout the year, and whether innovation technologies contained in tenders had been hidden from members until after a preferred option was chosen.

 

·                Data concerning the frequency of use of MSD provided skip bins.

 

·                Information concerning where all the recycling materials currently went, and predictions on what more recycling would mean for the landfill.   Suggested comparisons with similar sized Councils (eg Christchurch and Timaru) would be helpful.

 

·                Data regarding recycling contamination in the region, and that Regional Public Health be consulted with regarding a possible pay-as-you-throw system to provide an equitable solution for low income households.

 

·                Information concerning potential accessibility options as highlighted by submission 2613655.

 

·                Whether any weighting had been/was going to be given to any Facebook feedback as referred to by submitter 2651807. 

 

·                Additional information on how the elderly and less abled citizens would be catered for under each Option and whether Council would be linking with the Tenancy Tribunal to ensure landlords were not increasing rents to cover costs other than potential increases in bin costs.

 

Mayor Barry confirmed that all information requested would be available for the next Council meeting and that it would be a public document.

 

There being no further business the Chair declared the meeting closed at 1.18pm.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

C Barry

MAYOR

 

 

CONFIRMED as a true and correct record

Dated this 29th day of September 2020