Wainuiomata Community Board | Poari Hapori o Wainuiomata
Minutes of a meeting held in the Wainuiomata Library, Queen Street, Wainuiomata on
Wednesday 17 February 2021 commencing at 6.30pm
|
PRESENT: |
Cr K Brown |
Ms D McKinley (Chair) |
|
|
Mr T Stallworth |
Mr G Sue |
|
|
Mrs J Winterburn |
|
APOLOGIES: Mr G Tupou and Ms S Tuala-Le’afa
IN ATTENDANCE: Mayor Campbell Barry (part meeting)
Cr J Briggs
Ms H Oram, Director Environment and Sustainability
Mr K Puketapu-Dentice, Director Economy and Development
Mr D Simmons, Traffic Asset Manager
Ms K Stannard, Head of Democratic Services (part meeting)
Ms T Lealofi, Democracy Advisor
PUBLIC BUSINESS
1. APOLOGIES
|
Resolved: (Ms McKinley/Mr Sue) Minute No. WCB 21101 “That the apologies received from Mr Tupou and Ms Tuala-Le’afa be accepted and leave of absence be granted.” |
2. PUBLIC COMMENT
Comments are recorded under the item to which they relate.
Speaking under public comment, Mr M Shierlaw expressed concern at the noise test report conducted by an unqualified noise test controller at the Wainuiomata Cleanfill. He tabled a letter from The Acoustical Society of New Zealand, attached as pages 8 and 10 to the minutes and three recommendations for the Board to consider to Council, attached as page 11 to the minutes.
|
|
Resolved: (Ms McKinley/Cr Brown) Minute No. WCB 21102 “That Standing Order 15.2 be temporarily suspended to allow public comment to be extended beyond 30 minutes.” |
Speaking under public comment, Ms T Leota expressed concern at the proposed establishment of a vape shop to be established in the Wainuiomata community. She said this was not setting a good example for the youth.
Speaking under public comment, Ms S Moffat spoke to her statement, attached as page 12 to the minutes.
Mr Sue expressed support for updated progress information received by Council regarding the Wainuiomata Cleanfill.
Speaking under public comment, Ms J Wootton expressed concern regarding residents residing in rural areas not receiving updates on the rubbish collection.
In response to a question from a member of the public, the Director Environment and Sustainability advised Council officers had engaged with residents on Coast Road to advise of Council’s decision.
5. CONFLICT OF INTEREST DECLARATIONS
There were no conflict of interest declarations.
6. Minutes
|
Resolved: (Ms McKinley/Mr Stallworth) Minute No. WCB 21103 “That the minutes of the meeting of the
Wainuiomata Community Board held on Wednesday, |
|
7. |
Committee Advisor's report (21/14) Report No. WCB2021/1/6 by the Democracy Advisor |
|
|
Resolved: (Ms McKinley/Cr Brown) Minute No. WCB 21104 “That the report be noted and received.” |
|
8. |
Proposed New Public Street Name: Wainuiomata Mall Redevelopment at 18 The Strand, Wainuiomata (21/18) Report No. WCB2021/1/14 by the Traffic Engineer |
|
|
Speaking under public comment, Mr T Kells expressed support for naming the new public street Harry Martin Lane. He outlined the work Mr Martin had undertaken in the Wainuiomata community. Speaking under public comment, Ms N Coleman supported the comments made by Mr Kells. Speaking under public comment, Ms L Olsen and Ms A Puketapu elaborated on the meaning of Raukura. A video was played of Kaumatua Kara Puketapu. Mr Puketapu expressed the importance of the name Te Ara Raukura and why it was important to use a Te Reo Māori name for the street. Speaking under public comment, Ms J Sylvester expressed concern that Mr Reg Moore’s name was not shortlisted for consideration of the new street name. She spoke to the statement attached as page 13 to the minutes. Speaking under public comment, Mr H Taitui spoke to the statement attached as page 14 to the minutes. Speaking under public comment, Mr P Rangitaawa spoke to the statement attached as pages 15 to 16 of the minutes. Speaking under public comment, Ms D McIvor expressed support for naming the new street Harry Martin Lane. She outlined the work Mr Martin undertook for the Wainuiomata community. Speaking under public comment, Mr S Tanaki expressed support for naming the new street a Te Reo Māori name. He expressed the meaning of Hapori Lane which meant ‘We are the community of Wainuiomata’. Speaking under public comment, Mr J Tumou supported the comments made by Mr Tanaki. He elaborated on the meaning of the Hapori Lane name. He said the meaning had a community connection being connected as one. Speaking under public comment, Mr L Wananga expressed support for naming the new street Hapori Lane. He also expressed support for the comments made by Mr Tanaki. Speaking under public comment, Mrs T Samuels expressed support for naming the new public street Hapori Lane. She said Hapori celebrated ordinary people who served the community. Speaking under public comment, Ms S Luana expressed support for naming the new public Hapori Lane, Te Ara Ruakura or Te Ara Ngākau. She said Te Reo Māori name should be used for the new street name.
Speaking under public comment, Ms C Eddy expressed support for naming the new street Harry Martin Lane. She outlined the work Harry Martin had undertaken over the years for the Wainuiomata community. The Traffic Asset Manager elaborated on the report. Ms Winterburn expressed concern that the Board had insufficient time to consult with the community. She expressed support for naming the new street Harry Martin Lane. She outlined the work and commitment Mr Martin had contributed to the Wainuiomata community. She acknowledged the petition from Wainuiomata High School students proposing 50% street name be considered in Te Reo Māori. Mr Sue expressed support for Te Ara Raukura. He elaborated on the meaning of the name. He supported the comments made by Ms Winterburn. He noted the importance of acknowledging Mr Martin and the work he had undertaken in the community. In response to a question regarding process for an existing street name, the Traffic Asset Manager said there was a process that needed to be undertaken for an existing street name change. Mr Stallworth expressed support for the new public street Harry Martin Lane. He outlined the work Mr Martin contributed to the community. He acknowledged the petition from Wainuiomata High School students proposing 50% of street names be considered in Te Reo Māori. Ms McKinley expressed support for naming the new public street Harry Martin Lane and Te Ara Ngākau. She elaborated on the meaning of Ngākau which represented the heart of Wainuiomata. Cr Brown expressed support for the comments of previous speakers regarding naming the new street Harry Martin Lane. She noted the petition from the Wainuiomata High School students with regardto their aspiration to have 50% street names in Te Reo Māori. She outlined Council’s Naming Policy review. She noted the importance of working partnership with Mana Whenua. She expressed support for the Hapori Lane and Te Ara Raukura submissions. She said the meaning was significant and it stood with mana. In response to a question from a member regarding Council’sName Policy review, the Traffic Asset Manager said the review would be considered for future policy changes.
MOVED: (Ms McKinley/Mr Stallworth)
“That the Board approves a street name for the new Public Road (attached as Appendix 1 to the report) as Harry Martin Lane.”
AMENDMENT MOVED: (Cr Brown/Gary Sue)
“That the Board approves a street name for the new Public Road as Hapori Lane.
The amendment was declared LOST on the voices. |
|
|
moved: (Ms McKinley/Mr Stallworth) Minute No. WCB 21105 “”That the Board: (1) approves a street name for the new Public Road (attached as Appendix 1 to the report) as Harry Martin Lane; and
(2) approves the appropriate road type as shown in the list attached as Appendix 3 to the report.” |
The meeting adjourned at 8.31pm and resumed at 8.37pm.
|
9. |
2021 NZ Community Board Conference (21/111) Memorandum dated 29 January 2021 by the Senior Democracy Advisor |
|
|
|
Resolved: (Ms McKinley/Cr Brown) Minute No. WCB 21106 “That the Board: 1) notes the Community Board’s Conference will be held in Gore from 22-24 April 2021, attached as Appendix 1 to the memorandum; 2) notes the estimated cost of attending the conference per Board member is approximately $2,000.00; 3) notes that the Training Policy for Community Boards adopted by Council at its meeting held on 26 March 2019, attached as Appendix 2 to the memorandum; and 4) agrees that Ms Dawn McKinley attends the 2021 New Zealand Community Board Conference.” |
|
|
10. a) |
Report No. WCB2021/1/7 by the Chairperson |
|
|
|
Resolved: (Ms McKinley/Cr Brown) Minute No. WCB 21107 “That the report be noted and received.” |
|
11. QUESTIONS
There were no questions.
There being no further business the Chair declared the meeting closed at 8.40pm.
D McKinley
CHAIR
CONFIRMED as a true and correct record
Dated this 14th day of April 2021
MAYOR’S STATEMENT
Community Board Statement - February 2021
Kia ora koutou katoa. Firstly can I extend a bit of a late public Happy New Year to everyone.
As everyone knows, 2020 was a tough year on many fronts. Everyone thoroughly deserved a restful and relaxing break over summer.
COVID-19
In light of yesterday's news, there is potential that the tough times may continue in our city.
It is important that as community leaders we set a good example of public health behaviour and encourage others to do the same.
Please use your networks to encourage our residents to scan QR codes, wash and sanitise hands, and maintain social distancing.
And as always, check on your friends and family, and encourage ‘local’. These are stressful times, particularly for our small businesses, and it’s important that we all have each other’s back.
10 year plan
With the uncertainty we live in at the moment, this makes this year’s 10 year plan so important for our city.
The growth Lower Hutt is experiencing is exciting and creates enormous potential for our city, but we have to be honest and confront the significant challenges that come with that.
Growth is putting pressure on our transport infrastructure with more people sitting in traffic. More homes means more pressure on our already ageing water infrastructure, and increases the risks of pipes failing.
That’s why this 10 year plan is all about getting the basics right for all of our people -- we’re doubling our capital investment over the next ten years, with a major focus on our city’s infrastructure.
We simply cannot wind up investment in infrastructure and kick the can down the road. Having an infrastructure network under pressure, coupled with the effects COVID-19, could seriously put our city at risk.
Pre-engagement
I’m happy to say that the focus of investing in our infrastructure got the support in our 10 year plan pre-engagement phase, with the community agreeing that this is a major priority for Lower Hutt.
The community also provided feedback on our other priorities: housing, the environment, an innovative economy, connected communities, and financial sustainability.
Financial sustainability
The latter is vital to this plan. Affordability is front of mind, as we recognise that COVID-19 has been tough on our community, and made the economic outlook more uncertain.
To achieve this necessary investment, we are proposing an overall 5.9% increase in rates revenue for 2021/22 – this equates to $2.50 per week per residential household. Over half of this will be invested directly back into our critical three waters infrastructure.
Conclusion
This 10 year plan is for our people here in Lower Hutt, and we will be seeking their feedback. On March 22, Council will meet to check off the consultation document for the 10 year plan, and will then put that out to the public on March 29 till May 3.
As community board members, I encourage you to use your networks to get the consultation document out to as many people in our city.
The President The Acoustical Society of New Zealand
PO Box 1181
AUCKLAND 1140
Max Shierlaw
22 January 2021
Dear Max,
RE: Misconduct complaint- Wainuiomata Council Clean fill Assessment July 2020
I am the Chair of the Disciplinary Panel appointed to investigate your allegations of misconduct by Tonkin + Taylor in the Wainuiomata Clean fill noise assessment against the conditions of Resource Consent RM190050 (the July 2020 Report). The panel is comprised of three Council members of the Acoustical Society of New Zealand (ASNZ). This letter follows and is supplementary to the email correspondence between you, Mr Whitlock (ASNZ Secretary) and myself on this matter over the last few months.
I write to advise you of the decision of the Disciplinary Panel. This letter sets out the process for the investigation of the complaint, our determination and disciplinary measures and the rights of appeal.
The complaint
Your complaint alleges misconduct in respect to Rule 6 and Rule 9 of the ASNZ Rules of Conduct and Disciplinary Measures. Rule 6 and Rule 9 require that:
6. When called upon to give an opinion in a professional capacity members shall give an opinion that is objective and reliable to the best of their ability.
9. In respect of a professional relationship, whether with employer or client, a member shall disclose any financial or other interest they may have which constitutes a conflict of interest.
The complaint investigation process
Rule 12 of the ASNZ Rules of Conduct and Disciplinary Measures sets out the process for investigating any complaint of alleged improper conduct or breach of the Rules of Conduct. The ASNZ Council followed this process, including forming the Disciplinary Panel to study the evidence and request more facts as required to make a determination.
The details of the complaint were first communicated to Tonkin + Taylor on 29 October 2020 and they responded to the ASNZ dated 4 November 2020.
Following a detailed review of the available information, the Disciplinary Panel found substance to the complaint regarding Rule 6 (for the reasons set out in the following section). No substance to the complaint made in respect of Rule 9 was found.
The sub-committee then followed step F (i) of the Rules of Conduct which directs that:
(f) If the complaint is considered by the council to have substance then the Council shall:
(i) Advise the affected member and invite the member to make further submissions within 5 working days
The Disciplinary Panel emailed Tonkin + Taylor on 11 December 2020 inviting them to make further submissions within five working days. They responded on 18 December 2020. The Disciplinary Panel reconvened on 14 January 2020 to further discuss the alleged misconduct in light of the further submissions to determine whether the complaint was indeed justified and if so, the appropriate disciplinary measures.
Determination on Rule 9
Rule 9 of the ASNZ Rules of Conduct and Disciplinary measures require that:
9. In respect of a professional relationship, whether with employer or client, a member shall disclose any financial or other interest they may have which constitutes a conflict of interest.
The Disciplinary Panel’s investigation has found no substances to the complaint made in respect of Rule 9. This complaint has been dismissed by the Disciplinary Panel.
Determination on Rule 6
Rule 6 of the ASNZ Rules of Conduct and Disciplinary Measures require that:
6. When called upon to give an opinion in a professional capacity members shall give an opinion that is objective and reliable to the best of their ability.
Based on our thorough review of the information available, the Disciplinary Panel upholds the complaint relating to Rule 6.
The Disciplinary Panel’s issues with the July 2020 report include (but are not limited to):
• The regular incorrect use of specific terminology from NZS6802,
• A failure to demonstrate how some measurements had been adjusted in accordance with NZS6802 despite the conclusion that compliance with the consent conditions was achieved (for example measurement 2 at location 2)
• Generally, based on the information within the July 2020 report, it was not possible to conclude with any reasonable degree of confidence that compliance with the consent conditions was achieved
Disciplinary Measures
The authors of the July 2020 Report are not full Members of the ASNZ. The Member status in the ASNZ can be held by a person only, and not a company. In strict terms, the Disciplinary Panel are not able to apply the Rules of Conduct to the authors of the report or Tonkin & Taylor.
However, Mr Darran Humpheson of Tonkin + Taylor made it clear in his correspondence to us that he took ultimate responsibility for the report stating, “Darran Humpheson performed the final technical review of the report.” The Disciplinary Panel have therefore directed its response and findings to Mr Humpheson.
Rule 12(g) of the ASNZ Rules of Conduct and Disciplinary measures directs that:
g If the complaint is upheld the Council shall immediately advise the complainant and the affected member, and any or all of the following measures may be imposed by the Council:
• Suspension of membership for a notified period
• Expulsion from the Membership of the Society
• Reprimand
• The Council shall have the discretion to inform interested parties.
The Disciplinary Panel has determined that the breach of Rule 6 in this case does not warrant either a suspension or expulsion from the Acoustical Society of New Zealand.
However, the Disciplinary Panel considers that it is appropriate to reinforce the importance of complying with the Rules of Conduct, and in particular Rule 6. The Disciplinary Panel has written to Mr Humpheson and have provided a reprimand in accordance with Rule 12 of the Rules of Conduct.
Rights of appeal
Rule 12(h) outlines Mr Humpheson’s rights to appeal against our decision as follows:
(h) The affected member may appeal against the decision of the Disciplinary Panel and/or Council. The Council shall appoint an Appeals Panel of at least three long standing members with experience in the relevant field. The Appeals Panel shall reassess the evidence and request more evidence as necessary. The decision of the Appeals Panel shall be final and binding.
Please contact me if you have any further questions or require any clarification on the points made in this letter.
Yours sincerely
Jon Styles
President
The Acoustical Society of New Zealand
Questions submitted to Wainuiomata Community Board Feb 2021
Given the responsibility of the WCB to act as an advocate for the interests of their community can each member of the Board please let us know what they have done to advocate for the community regarding the ongoing non-compliance of the Wainuiomata Cleanfill (officially recognised through both audits, noise testing and industry review).
For transparency each Board member can answer each question, please respond in the minutes to the following questions:
1) Please describe how have you personally “proactively and constructively engaged with residents” on the Wainuiomata Cleanfill matters that affect the local community?
2) Please describe how you personally have raised these issues with Council?
3) Please describe how you have advocated for the community regarding the Cleanfill.
Background: The last three noise tests show exceedances of noise which is demonstrable of ongoing noise breaches of the conditions of the consent. This noise affects resident living near the cleanfill. HCC own the cleanfill and their inability to adhere to consent conditions or liaise with residents in a meaningful and timely manner is of concern to neighbours and affects our wider community. Ongoing non-compliance of consent conditions affects all residents.
We affected residents have been raising our concerns with the Wainuiomata Community Board repeatedly, we’d like to hear the specifics regarding how you have been advocating for us.
- The last audit showed both noise exceedances and non-compliance re: lack of community consultation/involvement of the CLG
- The first noise test was not conducted in an appropriate manner according to acoustics industry guidelines and has been found to be wrong.
- Peer reviews of noise testing have found that the noise testing has “not been determined correctly”, shows other condition breaches and show that the data has been potentially misrepresented to residents.
I was asked at the Board meeting to supply evidence of the breaches, wrong reporting and peer reviews. They are attached, please review them thoroughly and respond with the plan of how you plan to advocate for your community on these serious issues affecting us.
Kind regards,
Sally-ann,
Resident & Affected party
I am totally shocked that Reg Moore's name has not been short listed for a street name.
Reg entered politics as a Councillor for the Hutt County Council in 1966, and if my information is correct, he served on this local body until the reforms of 1989.
Reg Moore was the first ever Chairperson of this very board from 1989 to 2001, and deputy Chair from 2001 to 2004.
In total Reg served something like 44 years serving this community, on various local government boards and council.
As chairperson of this board in 2006 I was given the task of organising the celebration of Reg's 40 years in Local Government. This was not an easy task, there were a couple of obstacles I had to overcome. Reg being a very private person, and he didn't like council wasting money having social functions. With some gentle persuasion and heaps of negotiations I was able to achieve my goal.
In the early years of Reg’s political career he never got paid for attending meetings. He did tell me that he spent many evenings out at meetings leaving his wife at home to cope with the home front.
Reg was very giving of his knowledge and always helped newcomers to the board. If you wanted to know anything about the history of Wainuiomata or flooding just ask Reg. Also, Reg was an amazing researcher, give him a project to get his teeth into he was like a dog with a bone.
In 2002 Reg received the Member of New Zealand Order of Merit (MNZM) for services to the community.
What better way to acknowledge the contribution that Reg has made to this community and especially this board than name a street after him.
Julie Sylvester
17-2-2021
Wainuiomata Community Board meeting 17 February 2021
Item 9: Proposed New Public Street Name: Wainuiomata Mall Redevelopment at 18 The Strand and Proposed New Private Street Name: 80 Parkway, Wainuiomata
Statement from Poropiti Rangitaawa
Tēnā koutou Te Pori Hapori o Wainuiomata (the Community Board of Wainuiomata).
Tēnā koutou Te Hapori o Wainuiomata (The community of Wainuiomata).
Tēnā koutou ki ngā Hapori o tēnā o tēnā o tēnei whenua o Aotearoa me Tawāhi hoki (I greet you the communities here, over there, around New Zealand and also over the sea).
Tēnā koutou, Tēnā koutou, Tēnā koutou katoa.
Who am I? Poropiti Rangitaawa. I am the great great grandson of Te Kaeaea, the chief of Ngāti Tama from the Northern tribe of Taranaki. He is buried at Te Puni Street Peto-one. I am a shareholder of the Port Nicholson Block in Petone. He wanted the best for his people, for his Iwi, for his community to a pathway of survival, a pathway of hope for Ngāti Tama.
I am a shareholder of Parihaka in Taranaki. Tohu Kākahi rāua ko Te Whiti o Rongomai ngā manu e rua. They wanted the best for the iwi, for the community.
I was born in Whākahurangi (Stratford), the southern part of Taranaki so I am Taranaki katoa.
Suggested road name: Hapori Lane
This represents two languages – Māori and Pakeha. ‘Hapori’ means ‘community’ (Māori dictionary) and ‘Lane’ (English dictionary, called Google) means ‘a narrow road, pathway, byway, footpath or passage way.’
But if you break the word ‘Hapori’ down:
‘Hā’ means breath, essence, health, taste
‘Pori’ means supporter, people, tribe.
The breath that supports, the breath of the tribe, the breath of the people.
Hapori Lane – representing everyone (every race, tribe, language, nation, culture and religion, young, old and those that passed away and you).
Most names around Wainuiomata have street names of a certain person or family name or some history to it but we don’t have a community name. We have Wainui or Wainuiomata.
But Hapori Lane has the whole community of people and a perfect place and name.
A question: What brings people together? It is food. Titiro atu (look up) to the sign above my head that comes from this library: ‘Community Space’
Hapori Lane:
1.Play
2. Laugh
3. Eat
4. Create
5. Unite as one Hāpori Lane
Nō reira
Tēnā koutou, Tēnā koutou, Tēnā koutou katoa.