Mayor C Barry (Chair)

Deputy Mayor T Lewis

Cr D Bassett

Cr J Briggs

Cr K Brown

Cr B Dyer

Cr S Edwards

Cr D Hislop

Cr C Milne

Cr A Mitchell

Cr S Rasheed

Cr N Shaw

Cr L Sutton

TE KAUNIHERA O TE AWA KAIRANGI | COUNCIL

Membership:

13

Meeting Cycle:

Council meets on an eight weekly basis (Extraordinary Meetings can be called following a resolution of Council; or on the requisition of the Chair or one third of the total membership of Council)

Quorum:

Half of the members

“That the recommendations contained in the minutes be endorsed.”

“That the recommendations contained in the minutes be endorsed.”

“That the recommendations contained in the minutes be endorsed.”

“That the recommendations contained in the minutes be endorsed.”

“That the recommendations contained in the minutes be endorsed.”

“That the recommendations contained in the minutes be endorsed.”

“That the recommendations contained in the minutes be endorsed.”

“That the recommendations contained in the minutes be endorsed.”

“That the recommendations contained in the minutes be endorsed.”

“That the recommendations contained in the minutes be endorsed.”

“That the recommendations contained in the minutes be endorsed.”

“That the recommendations contained in the minutes be endorsed.”

“That the recommendations contained in the report be endorsed.”

“That the recommendations contained in the report be endorsed.”

“That the recommendations contained in the report be endorsed.”

(A)

(B)

(C)

General subject of the matter to be considered.

Reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter.

Ground under section 48(1) for the passing of this resolution.

Minutes of the Hutt City Council | Te Kaunihera o Te Awa Kairangi held on 24 March 2021 – 2021 Civic Honours Awards

The withholding of the information is necessary to protect the privacy of natural persons. (s7(2)(a)).

That the public conduct of the relevant part of the proceedings of the meeting would be likely to result in the disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding exist.

Minutes of the Hutt City Council | Te Kaunihera o Te Awa Kairangi held on 21 April 2021 – Governance Matter

The withholding of the information is necessary to protect the privacy of natural persons. (s7(2)(a)).

The withholding of the information is necessary to maintain legal professional privilege (s7(2)(g)).

That the public conduct of the relevant part of the proceedings of the meeting would be likely to result in the disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding exist.

Resolved:  (Cr Dyer/Cr Briggs)                                           Minute No. TSC 21201

“That the apology received from Cr K Brown be accepted and leave of absence be granted.”

a)

Tama Street, Alicetown - Proposed P15 Parking Restrictions (21/385)

The Traffic Engineer elaborated on the report.

ReCOMMENDED:  (Cr Dyer/Cr Shaw)                 Minute No. TSC 21202

“That the Traffic Subcommittee recommends that Council:

(1)   receives and notes the information;

(2)   approves the application of P15, 7.30am-9.30am and 3.30pm-5.30pm, Monday-Friday (excluding public holidays) restriction over two current P10, 8.00am-6.00pm, Monday-Friday, (excluding public holidays) parking spaces at
54 Tama Street, Alicetown;

(3)   approves the application of P15, 8.00am-6.00pm, Monday-Friday (excluding public holidays) restriction over one current P10, 8.00am-6.00pm, Monday-Friday (excluding public holidays) parking space and one unrestricted parking space at 67 Tama Street, Alicetown;

(4)   rescinds any previous resolutions pertaining to traffic controls made pursuant to any bylaw to the extent that they are in conflict with the traffic controls described in this resolution; and

(5)   notes that these resolutions will take effect once the appropriate signage and/or road-markings have been installed.”

For the reasons that the proposed restrictions would improve accessibility and parking availability for parents and caregivers accessing the kindergarten during peak times and support Council’s Parking Policy (2017).

b)

Laery Street, Melling - Proposed P15 Parking Restrictions (21/386)

The Traffic Engineer elaborated on the report.

ReCOMMENDED:  (Cr Dyer/Cr Mitchell)                         Minute No. TSC 21203

“That the Traffic Subcommittee recommends that Council:

(1)     receives and notes the information;

(2)     approves the application of P15, 7.30am to 4.30pm, Monday-Friday (excluding Public Holidays), time limited parking restriction on Laery Street, Melling, as attached in Appendix 1 to the report;

(3)     rescinds any previous resolutions pertaining to traffic controls made pursuant to any bylaw to the extent that they conflict with the traffic controls described in this resolution; and

(4)     notes that these resolutions will take effect once the appropriate signage and/or road-markings have been installed.”

For the reasons that the proposed restrictions would improve accessibility and parking availability for parents and caregivers accessing the early childhood centre and support Council’s Parking Policy (2017).

c)

Dowse Drive, Maungaraki - Proposed No Stopping At All Times Restrictions (21/387)

Speaking under public comment, Mr Gordon Murray advised that it was very dangerous when exiting Walnut Way onto Dowse Drive because parked cars limited visibility.  He expressed support for the installation of yellow lines on Dowse Drive.

The Traffic Engineer elaborated on the report.

In response to a question from a member, the Traffic Engineer advised that the bus stop on Dowse Drive was the responsibility of Greater Wellington Regional Council (GWRC).  She agreed to contact the resident and let them know to contact GWRC. 

ReCOMMENDED:  (Cr Dyer/Cr Mitchell)                         Minute No. TSC 21204

“That the Traffic Subcommittee recommends that Council:

(1)   receives and notes the information;

(2)   approves the proposed No Stopping At All Times restrictions on Dowse Drive, Maungaraki as shown in Appendix 1 attached to the report; and

(3)   notes that this resolution will take effect once the appropriate signage and/or road-markings have been installed.”

For the reasons that the proposed restrictions would improve the safety within the street for the benefit of all road users; would promote compliance with the Land Transport (Road User) Rule 2004; support Council’s Parking Policy 2017 and are supported by majority of the local residents who responded to the consultation documents.

d)

Jutland Street, Waterloo - Proposed No Stopping At All Times Restrictions (21/388)

The Traffic Engineer elaborated on the report.

Recommended: (Cr Dyer/Cr Shaw)                  Minute No. TSC 21205

“That the Traffic Subcommittee recommends that Council:

(1)   receives and notes the information;

(2)   approves the proposed No Stopping At All Times restrictions on Jutland Street, Waterloo as shown in Appendix 1 attached to the report; and

(3)   notes that this resolution will take effect once the appropriate signage and/or road-markings have been installed.”

For the reasons that the proposed restrictions will improve accessibility, contribute to the improved parking behaviour in the street, and promote compliance with the Land Transport (Road User) Rule 2004.

e)

Knights Road, Hutt Central - Proposed Time Limited (P120 8am to 6pm, Monday to Sunday (excluding Public Holidays) and No Stopping (At All Times)) Parking Restrictions. (21/468)

The Acting Traffic Planning and Engineering Manager elaborated on the report.

ReCOMMENDED:  (Cr Dyer/Cr Shaw)                 Minute No. TSC 21206

“That the Traffic Subcommittee recommends that Council:

(1)   receives and notes the information;

(2)   approves the No Stopping – At All Times parking restrictions on Knights Road, Central Hutt – as shown in Appendix 1 attached to the report;

(3)   approves the time limited (P120, 8am-6pm, Monday to Sunday (excluding Public Holidays)) parking restrictions on Knights Road, Central Hutt – as shown in Appendix 1 attached to the report;

(4)   rescinds any previous resolutions pertaining to traffic controls made pursuant to any bylaw to the extent that they are in conflict with the traffic controls described in this resolution, and;

(5)   notes that these resolutions will take effect once the appropriate signage and/or road-markings have been installed.”

For the reason that the proposed restrictions will improve the driveway visibility for neighbouring properties while supporting the Council’s Parking Policy (2017).

f)

Roberts Street, Epuni - Proposed 'No Stopping' (At All Times) Parking Restriction (21/469)

The Acting Traffic Planning and Engineering Manager elaborated on the report.

RECOMMENDED:  (Cr Dyer/Cr Briggs)                Minute No. TSC 21207

“That the Traffic Subcommittee recommends that Council:

(1)   notes and receives the information;

(2)   approves the No Stopping – At All Times parking restrictions on Roberts Street, Epuni as shown in Appendix 1 attached to the report;

(3)   rescinds any previous resolutions pertaining to traffic controls made pursuant to any bylaw to the extent that they conflict with the traffic controls described in this resolution, and

(4)   notes that the resolution will take effect once the appropriate signage and/or road-markings have been installed.”

For the reason that the proposed will improve the safety for vehicles given the reduction in visibility caused by the installation of the brush fence while supporting the Council’s Traffic Bylaw (2017) and sections of the Land Transport (Road User) Rule 2004.

g)

Clendon and Fisk Streets, Naenae - Proposed 'No Stopping' (At All Times) Intersection Parking Restrictions (21/470)

The Acting Traffic Planning and Engineering Manager elaborated on the report.

ReCOMMENDED:  (Cr Dyer/Cr Mitchell)                         Minute No. TSC 21208

“That the Traffic Subcommittee recommends that Council:

(1)   receives and notes the information;

(2)   approves the No Stopping – At All Times parking restrictions on Clendon Street, Naenae as shown in Appendix 1 attached to the report;

(3)   approves the No Stopping – At All Times parking restrictions on Fisk Street, Naenae as shown in Appendix 1 attached to the report;

(4)   rescinds any previous resolutions pertaining to traffic controls made pursuant to any bylaw to the extent that they conflict with the traffic controls described in this resolution; and

(5)   notes that these resolutions will take effect once the appropriate signage and/or road-markings have been installed.”

For the reason that the proposed will improve the visibility of the Clendon and Fisk Streets intersection approaches while supporting the Council’s Traffic Bylaw (2017) and sections of the Land Transport (Road User) Rule 2004.

h)

Hutt Road, Alicetown - Proposed School Drop Off - Pick Up and P30 At Other Times Parking Restrictions (21/472)

Speaking under public comment, Mr Murray Reed from Music Warehouse advised his customers were confused and had difficulty finding his store because there were restrictions on parking outside the store in Hutt and Te Mome Roads.  He said the restrictions on parking during school times were not an issue.  However, in the school holidays, commuters parked all day without the problem of receiving parking tickets.

In response to a question from a member, Mr Reed advised that it was difficult to comment on the proposed modifications to the parking until they were in place.  He understood the process was that if he required any future changes to the parking, then he would need to come back to Council.

The Acting Traffic Planning and Engineering Manager elaborated on the report.

The Chair questioned whether the P5 rules  could apply across the eight car parks in order to lessen the signage, reduce confusion for people and retain consistency. The Acting Traffic Planning and Engineering Manager acknowledged that it was an option for members to consider.  He noted that it was difficult when there was dual parking. He advised that there was a requirement through the Land Transport User rules to have ‘Other Times’ on the signs. 

In response to a question from a member, the Acting Traffic Planning and Engineering Manager acknowledged the different parking signs may cause some confusion for people.  He suggested that some form of education, before the parking signs were installed, would be helpful.  He advised that it was important when parking that people took note of the parking signs in the areas where they were parking.  He highlighted that Council’s Parking Services could assist with an education campaign before the matter was considered by Council.  He noted that the school was supportive of the changes.

In response to questions from members, the Acting Traffic Planning and Engineering Manager advised that the school was keen to retain the P5 parking.  He further advised that education information from the Ministry of Education recommended moving to P2 (‘kiss and drop’).  He confirmed that the parking modifications for short term parking were to assist the Music Warehouse and Sports Emporium.  He said that parking was heavy on Hutt and Te Mome Roads for school pick ups.  He stated there were other P5 further away on the other side of Hutt Road.

The Chair moved to amend the officer’s recommendation to approving the P5 parking restrictions to apply to all eight carparks and a new recommendation to ask officers to consult with the businesses over the new parking modifications.  Cr Mitchell seconded the motion.

Cr Briggs spoke in support of the motion.  He advised that the two businesses nearby would only be impacted between 2.45pm and 3.15pm on school days because the Music Warehouse opened at 10am on week days and the Sports Emporium opened at 12 noon.  He believed it was a good solution and gave clarity for everyone.

Cr Mitchell spoke in support of the motion under the proviso that the businesses were consulted to ensure that the new parking modifications worked for them.

The Chair spoke in support of the motion.  He advised that the new parking modifications would be easier to understand.  He looked forward to hearing the results of the officer’s consultation with the businesses. 

ReCOMMENDED:  (Cr Dyer/Cr Mitchell)                         Minute No. TSC 21209

“That the Traffic Subcommittee recommends that Council:

(1)     receives and notes the information;

(2)     approves the P30 Loading Zone (Goods Vehicles Only – 8am to 6pm, Monday to Sunday, excluding Public Holidays) on Hutt Road, as shown in Appendix 1 attached to the report;

(3)     approves the P5 (8.30am – 9.30am, 2.45pm – 3.15pm, School Days Only), parking restrictions on Hutt Road to all eight marked parking spaces adjacent to the Hutt Road frontage of 6 Railway Avenue, being Hutt Central School;

(4)     approves the P30 (At Other Times), parking restrictions on Hutt Road to all eight all eight marked parking spaces adjacent to the Hutt Road frontage of
6 Railway Avenue, being Hutt Central School;

(5)     rescinds any previous resolutions pertaining to traffic controls made pursuant to any bylaw to the extent that they conflict with the traffic controls described in this resolution; and

(6)     notes that these resolutions will take effect once the appropriate signage and/or road-markings have been installed.”

For the reasons that the proposed changes will improve parking space turnover outside of the schools restrictions, increase the availability of short term parking in the area, while supporting the Council’s Traffic Bylaw (2017), Parking Policy and sections of the Land Transport (Road User) Rule 2004.

Resolved:  (Cr Dyer/Cr Mitchell)                                    Minute No. TSC 21210

“That the Traffic Subcommittee asks officers to consult the businesses in the area to make sure they are happy with the proposed new plan and report back to Council on
1 June 2021 where Council will be considering the matter.”

i)

Leighton Avenue / Awamutu Grove, Waiwhetu - Proposed No Stopping (At All Times) Parking Restrictions (21/473)

The Acting Traffic Planning and Engineering Manager elaborated on the report.

In response to a question from a member, the Acting Traffic Planning and Engineering Manager advised that the consequence of the hatching would be minimal on the intersection with the major set of traffic lights.  He highlighted that the intersection had a camera installed and was monitored by New Zealand Transport Agency.

ReCOMMENDED:  (Cr Dyer/Cr Shaw)                 Minute No. TSC 21211

“That the Traffic Subcommittee recommends that Council:

(1)   receives and notes the information;

(2)   approves the No Stopping At All Times parking restrictions on Leighton Avenue, Waiwhetu as shown in Appendix 1 attached to the report;

(3)   approves the No Stopping At All Times parking restrictions on Awamutu Grove, Waiwhetu as shown in Appendix 1 attached to the report;

(4)   rescinds any previous resolutions pertaining to traffic controls made pursuant to any bylaw to the extent that they conflict with the traffic controls described in this resolution; and

(5)   notes that these resolutions will take effect once the appropriate signage and/or road-markings have been installed.”

For the reasons that the proposed restrictions and additional road-markings and signage will improve the operation of both the Leighton / Awamutu and Leighton / Whites Line East intersections, while supporting the Council’s Traffic Bylaw (2017) and sections of the Land Transport (Road User) Rule 2004.

Attachment 1

Appendix 1 Tama Street P15 Restrictions - Plan

Attachment 1

Appendix 1 Laery Street P15 Restrictions - Plan

Attachment 1

Appendix 1 Dowse Drive, Maungaraki - No Stopping At All Times Restrictions

Attachment 1

Appendix 1 Jutland Street No Stopping At All Times Restrictions - Plan

Attachment 1

Appendix One - Proposed Time Limited & No Stopping Parking Restrictions

Attachment 1

Appendix One - Proposed No Stopping (At All Times) Parking Restrictions

Attachment 1

Appendix One - Proposed Intersection No Stopping Restrictions

Attachment 1

Appendix One - Proposed School Drop Off - Pick Up & P30 At Other Times Parking Restrictions

Attachment 1

Appendix One - Proposed NoStopoping (At All Times) Parking Restriction

Resolved: (Ms Tindal/Cr Mitchell)                                         Minute No. ARSC 21201

“That the apology received from Cr Bassett be accepted and leave of absence be granted.”

Risk management update, including the setting of risk appetite (21/371)

The Chair noted the title of the item on the agenda was incorrect. She advised of the report should be stated Risk Management Update and Recommendation to Council of the draft Risk Appetite Statement.

Ms Cecilia Tse, Independent Consultant was in attendance for the item. The Group Chief Financial Officer declared that she had previously worked with Ms Tse at Auckland Council.

Ms Tse elaborated on the report. She advised the setting of risk appetite was an important element of risk management and had not been undertaken until now. She elaborated on the six risk appetite statements outlined in Appendix 2 of the report.

In response to a question from a member regarding adequate resources required, the Chief Executive advised that due to the current organisational restructure, future changes to systems investment, programme management and various resources were required. She said the current resources in place were adequate.

The Chair advised members recommendation (3) stated on the Order Paper was no longer required as the Risk Appetite statement was received at the meeting.

The Chair foreshadowed an additional recommendation regarding consideration being given to the proposed RMA and Three Waters reforms.

Resolved: (Ms Tindal/Mayor Barry)                Minute No. ARSC 1202

“That the Subcommittee:

(1)  notes and receives the information in this report;

(2)  notes the risk management framework, attached as Appendix 1 to the report;

(3)  endorses the ‘Roles and Responsibilities for risk management at Hutt City Council’ updated in respect of Risk Appetite aspects attached as Appendix 3 to the report;

(4)  endorses the updated risk rating assessment criteria attached as Appendix 4 to the report;

(5)  notes the Risk Register as updated by the Corporate Leadership Team, attached as Appendix 5 to the report;

(6)  notes and receives the Covid-19 risks update. Officers will update members at the meeting if there are any changes to be reported during the meeting;

(7) notes that officers are encouraged to give consideration to, and be cognisant of, the potential impacts of the proposed RMA and Three Waters reforms on Council, stakeholders and the community.”

ReCOMMENDED: (Ms Tindal/Mayor Barry)       Minute No. ARSC 21203

“That the Subcommittee recommends that Council endorses for approval to the draft ‘Risk appetite statement’ as attached as Appendix 2 to the report.”

5.

Kerbside Rubbish and Recycling Implementation Project (21/574)

Report No. ARSC2021/2/80 by the Strategic Advisor

Speaking under public comment, Mr M Shierlaw expressed concern regarding the risk assessment of the Rubbish and Recycling project. He said there was misinformation in the consultation document that stated the recycling bins were manufactured in New Zealand. He believed the misinformation had been removed on Council’s website.

The Strategic Advisor confirmed the rubbish and recycling bins would be delivered to Wellington on 29 April 2021. He said the recycling bins would be distributed from 5 May 2021. He advised three additional staff would be recruited to assist with the high volume of queries expected during the distribution period.

In response to a question from a member regarding refusal of recycling bins by customers, the Strategic Advisor advised customers would still be charged for the bins through the targeted rate. He said further monitoring would be required and contact would be made with customers who had yet to respond.

In response to a question from a member regarding the manufacturing of the recycling bins, the Strategic Advisor advised the rubbish and recycling bins were manufactured in Adelaide, Australia. He said there were four different shipments scheduled for arrival into New Zealand. The first shipment was scheduled for arrival on 29 April 2021 and the last shipment was scheduled to arrive on 18 May 2021.

Resolved: (Ms Tindal/Cr Shaw)                                         Minute No. ARSC 21204

“That the Subcommittee notes and receives the report.”

6.

Petone Wharf Refurbishment Project (21/564)

Report No. ARSC2021/2/81 by the Reserves Asset Manager

The Head of Parks and Recreation advised the detailed assessment of the Petone Wharf had been delayed due to weather conditions. He said the detailed assessment was expected to be received on 28 April 2021. He advised the Quantitative Risk Analysis was scheduled to be undertaken on 30 April 2021.

The Mayor left the meeting at 2.35pm.

The Chair foreshadowed an additional recommendation asking for a further update on the Petone Wharf if Council approved the project.

Resolved: (Ms Tindal/Cr Briggs)                                              Minute No. ARSC 21205

“That the Subcommittee:

(1)   notes and receives the information contained in the report;

(2)   notes the draft Project Risk Register attached as Appendix 1 to the report;

(3)   notes that a Quantitative Risk Analysis process is being carried out for the project; and

(4)   notes that if the Petone Wharf Refurbishment project is approved by Council and the budget is brought forward, a further update will be provided to the Audit and Risk Subcommittee on project initiation and then six monthly updates thereafter until completion.”

For the reasons to understand the risks and implications of undertaking this project.

7.

RiverLink Project Update (21/587)

Report No. ARSC2021/2/82 by the Project Manager (RiverLink)

The Project Manager (RiverLink) elaborated on the report.

The Chair foreshadowed an additional recommendation noting the further increase in the RiverLink project budget has been included in the consultation document.

Resolved: (Ms Tindal/Cr Edwards)                                        Minute No. ARSC 21206

“That the Subcommittee:

(1)   receives and notes the information contained in the report;

(2)   notes the updated Project Risk Register attached as Appendix 1 to the report;

(3)   notes that initial cost estimates for the RiverLink project have been received and are currently being reviewed by the project office and project partner representatives; and

(4)   notes that the request for a further increase in the RiverLink Project Budget of $64.5 million has been included in the consultation document for the draft 2021 – 2031 Long Term Plan”.

8.

Naenae Projects Update April 2021 (21/565)

Memorandum dated 6 April 2021 by the Strategic Projects Manager

The Strategic Projects Manager elaborated on the report. He advised a risk workshop with AECOM was conducted on 15 April 2021 to identify any new significant risks. He noted the Design Team would be finalised by end of April 2021.

Resolved: (Ms Tindal/Cr Rasheed)                                          Minute No. ARSC 21207

“That the Subcommittee receives and notes the information.”

9.

External Audit Update - Hutt City Council (21/560)

Report No. ARSC2021/2/83 by the Financial Accounting Manager

Mr Andrew Clark from Audit New Zealand (Audit NZ) was in attendance for the item.

The Group Chief Financial Officer highlighted the closure of the audit recommendations from the last two years. She advised there were no further updates on the Long Term Plan.

Mr Clark advised the modified opinion for performance measures contained audit recommendations for both Council and Wellington Water Limited to review what the outstanding issues were and what improvements needed to be made. He said this issue may be a risk if not resolved by 30 June 2021 and could remain on the 2022 audit schedule.

The Mayor rejoined the meeting at 2.44pm.

The Chair foreshadowed an additional recommendation noting the Mayor’s expenditure was now subject to approval by her.

Resolved: (Ms Tindal/Cr Mitchell)                                     Minute No. ARSC 21208

“That the Subcommittee:

(1)   notes the Audit New Zealand management report on the audit of the Group Annual Report for the year ended 30 June 2020, attached as Appendix 1 to the report;

(2)   notes the Audit New Zealand management report on the audit of the Long Term Plan 2021-2031, attached as Appendix 3 to the report; and

(3)   notes that the Mayor’s expenditure is now subject to approval by the Independent Chair of the Audit and Risk Subcommittee.”

10.

Annual Tax Compliance Update (21/575)

Report No. ARSC2021/2/57 by the Financial Accounting Manager

The Financial Accounting Manager noted the ‘Hutt City Council – FBT and GST Compliance Report – 2021’, attached as Appendix 2 to the report; was the final version.

Resolved: (Ms Tindal/Cr Shaw)                                         Minute No. ARSC 21209

“That the Subcommittee notes and receives the report.”

11.

Sensitive Expenditure Policy Update and Disclosures (21/577)

Report No. ARSC2021/2/64 by the Financial Accounting Manager

The Financial Accounting Manager noted a review of the Sensitive Expenditure Policy had been undertaken. He said the Policy and Guidelines would be revised and reported back to members in due course.

Resolved: (Ms Tindal/Cr Edwards)                                    Minute No. ARSC 21210

“That the subcommittee:

(1)   notes and receives the report;

(2)   direct officers to action the findings of the review of the Sensitive Expenditure Policy to ensure compliance with the Office of the Auditor General guidance published in October 2020;

(3)   agrees that the revised Sensitive Expenditure Policy be reported to the Audit and Risk Subcommittee on 9 September 2021 for review and endorsement ahead of submission to Council for approval;

(4)   directs officers to ensure that the revised Sensitive Expenditure Policy be prepared for the Council Group and that the intent be that there is no deviation to this Policy by any of the Council Controlled Organisations, in particular Urban Plus Limited; and

(5)   notes the sensitive expenditure disclosure information attached as Appendix 5 to the report.”

12.

Holidays Act 2003 Compliance (21/556)

Report No. ARSC2021/2/84 by the Financial Transaction Services Manager

The Group Chief Financial Officer elaborated on the report.  She advised compliance with the Holidays Act 2003 was a historical issue that needed to be addressed. She noted Council had engaged with Ernst & Young (EY) to undertake further work on estimating the liability to Council. She highlighted that it was scheduled for completion by 30 June 2021.  She said a rough estimate of $1M was included in the third quarter forecast information prepared.  She noted a review of the project’s governance structure would be undertaken to manage the risk areas identified in the report by Ernst & Young.

The Chair commended the officers for their work.

In response to a question from a member regarding the rough estimate of $1M included in the budget, the Group Chief Financial Officer said there were two key payments for remediation work and for staff who had not been paid the correct amount.

In response to questions from a member, the Financial Transaction Services Manager advised staff who were no longer employed at Council would be contacted. She said information had been published on Council’s Ourspace and in the Chief Executive’s regular updates to staff.

In response to a question from a member, the Chair advised the issue had arisen due to the way the current legislation was written and that it was frequently interpreted inconsistently. She noted this had impacted many public and private sector entities in New Zealand and that Council had not intentionally done the wrong thing by their staff.

The Chair noted that the incorrect or incosistent interpretation of the legislation resulted in some payroll system configurations and records being incorrect. She said these also needed to be rectified as part of the remediation project. The current legislation had been reviewed and it would be important for Council to familiarise themselves with any forthcoming amendments.

The Chair foreshadowed an additional recommendation noting the remediation work required to ensure HRIS and Payroll systems were compliant with the Holidays Act legislation.

Resolved: (Ms Tindal/Cr Briggs)                                            Minute No. ARSC 21211

“That the Subcommittee:

(1)     notes and receives the report;

(2)     notes that officers are considering the project governance structure; and

(3)     notes that it is intended to provide regular reporting to the Corporate Leadership Team, the Major Projects Board and this Subcommittee, covering key milestones including the estimation of liability; business case development; procurement processes to assist the remediation calculations and the work that will be required to ensure that the Human Resource Information System (HRIS) and Payroll System are compliant with the Holidays Act legislation.”

13.

Internal Audit Charter and Internal Audit Plan 2021-2024 (21/467)

Report No. ARSC2021/2/85 by the Risk and Assurance Manager

The Risk and Assurance Manager elaborated on the report.

Resolved: (Ms Tindal/Cr Rasheed)                                     Minute No. ARSC 21212

“That the Subcommittee:

(1)   notes and receives the information contained in this report;

(2)   approves the Internal Audit Charter, attached as Appendix 1 to the report;

(3)   agrees with prioritisation of the internal audits; and

(4)   approves the Internal Audit Plan 2021–2024, attached as Appendix 2 to the report.”

14.

Legal Compliance and Litigation Risk Reporting (21/619)

Report No. ARSC2021/2/98 by the Chief Legal Officer

The Solicitor elaborated on the report.

Resolved: (Ms Tindal/Cr Mitchell)                                           Minute No. ARSC 21213

“That the Subcommittee:

(1)   notes the results outlined in the report; and

(2)   notes that Council is moving to a new legal compliance system called ComplyWith, which will produce more detailed reporting every six months.”

15.

Seismic Performance Register (21/573)

Report No. ARSC2021/2/86 by the Acting Facilities Manager

The Head of Chief Executive’s Office elaborated on the report.

In response to a question regarding the new earthquake rating for the War Memorial Library, the Head of Chief Executive’s Office advised that was the current rating since the Detailed Seismic Assessment was undertaken.

In response to a question from a member, the Head of Chief Executive’s Office confirmed the Wainuiomata Swimming Pool was not earthquake prone and was not included in the report.

Resolved: (Ms Tindal/Cr Mitchell)                                         Minute No. ARSC 21214

“That the Subcommittee notes the information contained in the report.”

16.

Audit and Risk Work Programme 2021 (21/581)

Report No. ARSC2021/2/58 by the Democracy Advisor

The Chair foreshadowed an additional recommendation stated as recommendation (2) in the resolution.

Resolved: (Ms Tindal/Cr Rasheed)                                          Minute No. ARSC 21215

That the Subcommittee:

(1)     notes and receives the work programme; and

(2)     notes the expectation of future reporting on the Petone Wharf Refurbishment Project on project initiation and then six monthly updates thereafter until completion of the project, subject to Council’s approval of the project.”

Attachment 2

DRAFT Risk Appetite Statement - 2021

Resolved: (Cr Edwards/Cr Briggs)                                     Minute No. PFSC 21201

“That the apology received from Mayor Barry be accepted and leave of absence granted  and the apologies for early departure received from Cr Shaw and Cr Dyer be accepted.”

a)

Taonga Tuku Iho - Heritage Policy (21/358)

Speaking under public comment, Mr Tim Makarios expressed support for voluntary heritage listings. He agreed heritage could do collective good but noted it imposed private costs. He said this was particularly difficult for those without the means to pay the extra costs. He added that voluntary listings would ensure there was no risk of owners pre-emptively demolishing buildings. He suggested imposing a targeted rate or selling heritage bonds for specific properties with interest benefitting the owners, provided properties were maintained appropriately.

Speaking under public comment, Mr Philip Barry representing the Voluntary Heritage Listing Group, expressed support for voluntary heritage listings.  He noted an Auckland study had found an average negative 10 percent impact on heritage listed homes. He added there were also additional compliance costs when residents wanted to change the exterior of their homes. He suggested Council looked more broadly at a package of measures to meet its statutory obligations such as listing all New Zealand heritage places, adding protection for mana whenua, protecting and recording stories, using signage and more use of technology.

Speaking under public comment Ms Sylvia Allan representing the Petone Historical Society (the Society), expressed support for the Heritage Policy.  She requested Appendix 1 to the Heritage Policy be temporarily excluded since the Society had concerns about incentives 3, 9 and 10. She advised the Society would support the Heritage Policy in its entirety if these incentives were removed.

Speaking under public comment, Mr Neil McGrath noted a Council decision in 2012 recorded that the District Plan would be listing only properties that had consent from owners but that the decision was never acted on. He considered it was the responsibility of the current Council to include this decision in the proposed District Plan. He added it was unreasonable to place the burden of extra costs, insurance premiums and loss of property values on affected residents, and property owners might litigate. He asked that all reports obtained by Council be provided to property owners.

Speaking under public comment, Mr Alan Smith expressed concern that the Heritage Policy was not a clear framework for decision and action. He said it was unfair for private owners to be burdened with the costs and believed the ‘public good’ benefits of heritage required public costs. He suggested Council provide an integrated grouping of all relevant digital information and market its accessibility to residents. His suggested amendments to the Heritage Policy are attached as page 11 to the minutes.

Under public comment, the Chair read a submission on behalf of
Ms Pam Hanna, Chair of the Petone Community Board.  See attached page 12 to the minutes.

Speaking under public comment, Ms Jo Wilkshire explained her issues with the Heritage Policy were similar to those raised by public speakers Mr Barry and Mr McGrath. In response to a question from a member, she advised she could not support compulsory heritage listings without understanding the costs and benefits.

The Head of Strategy and Planning elaborated on the report. She reminded members the Heritage Policy was high level and set out Council’s legislative responsibilities.  She advised if the definition of the Heritage Policy allowed voluntary heritage listings of identified properties it would not align with the Resource Management Act (RMA).

The Head of District Plan Policy advised the direction of the Heritage Policy would be implemented through the District Plan. He said members could debate the methodology and regulatory issues at that stage of the process.  This included the merits and disadvantages of various measures, thresholds, financial incentives and costs and benefits.  He noted criteria for identifying properties of significant heritage value would be assessed against the Regional Policy Statement. He expected a formal notified proposed plan would be available by the end of 2022. 

In response to a question from a member, the Head of District Plan Policy agreed to identify from Mr Barry which Councils had agreed to include only New Zealand Heritage listed properties on their Heritage Register.

In response to a question from a member, the Head of District Plan Policy agreed to find out if insurance companies would refuse to insure properties listed on a Heritage Register.

The Chair foreshadowed an additional recommendation.

Mayor Barry joined the meeting at 3.40pm.

Members discussed the following points:

·           Residents might experience difficulty insuring their homes or lose capital value as a result of a historical listing.

·           The RMA was changing and requirements could change before the process of listing individual properties was complete.

·           The District Plan process would allow further opportunities for residents to provide feedback before any identified properties were listed.

·           The word ‘significant’ should be included on page 25 of the Order Paper where ‘protection of the region’s historic heritage’ was mentioned.

MOVED:  (Cr Edwards/Cr Mitchell)          

“That the Committee recommends that Council:

(1)   notes the further comments from submitters and amendments to Taonga Tuku Iho – Heritage Policy;

(2)   agrees to refer Appendix 1 of the Policy to the District Plan review for consideration as part of the heritage chapter review. This will enable further submissions, evaluation and consideration to be undertaken before Council commits to the use of any particular incentive approach/tool;

(3)   notes officers will review the Rates Remission Policy once Council has made its final decisions regarding Taonga Tuku Iho – the Heritage Policy;

(4)   notes that the District Plan heritage chapter review is underway;

(5)   agrees that Appendix 1 does not form part of the Heritage Policy until or unless confirmed by the District Plan review process;

 (7)  agrees to officers making further minor editorial changes (including any changes to the mana whenua content) once feedback is received in consultation with the Chair and Deputy Chair of the Committee; and

(8)   adopts the Taonga Tuku Iho – Heritage Policy subject to those changes above.”

AMENDMENT MOVED: (Cr Bassett/Cr Milne) 

That the Committee recommends to the District Plan Subcommittee that listed heritage properties will need to have the express support of property owners in writing, with the exception of Heritage New Zealand buildings.

The Chair ruled the amendment was a direct negative to the motion.  He noted that under the RMA legislation, Council was obliged to assess properties that had been identified as having significant heritage value.

Members discussed whether the word ‘significant’ should be added to the Heritage Policy in places where it was deemed missing or whether the Heritage Policy should more closely reflect the Regional Policy Statement. 

The meeting adjourned at 4.02pm and reconvened at 4.12pm.

AMENDMENT MOVED: (Cr Rasheed/Cr Bassett)

That an additional recommendation be added to the motion:

“That Council’s Heritage Policy and its use of the word ‘significant’ mirrors what the Regional Policy Statement on heritage issues requires of us.”

Cr Rasheed spoke in support of the amendment.  She advised that the amendment would enable the Heritage Policy to more closely align to the Regional Policy Statement.

Cr Dyer requested that officers ensure Council’s RMA definition aligned with the Regional Policy Statement.  He asked that  an explanation of the meaning of ‘significant’ be included as per criteria in the Regional Policy Statement.

Cr Mitchell asked that Greater Wellington Regional Council be consulted if there was any doubt over the meaning of the word ‘significant.’

Cr Brown acknowledged the ability  of the Heritage Policy to provide protection of ancestral lands, water and cultural history for future generations.

With the agreement of the mover and seconder, members agreed to include the amendment into the substantive motion.

RECOMMENDED:    (Cr Edwards/Cr Mitchell)    Minute No. PFSC 21202

“That the Committee recommends that Council:

(1)   notes the further comments from submitters and amendments to Taonga Tuku Iho – Heritage Policy;

(2)   agrees to refer Appendix 1 of the Taonga Tuku Iho – Heritage Policy to the District Plan review for consideration as part of the heritage chapter review. This will enable further submissions, evaluation and consideration to be undertaken before Council commits to the use of any particular incentive approach/tool;

(3)   notes officers will review the Rates Remission Policy once Council has made its final decisions regarding Taonga Tuku Iho – the Heritage Policy;

(4)   notes that the District Plan heritage chapter review is underway;

(5)   agrees that Appendix 1 of the Taonga Tuku Iho – Heritage Policy does not form part of the Taonga Tuku Iho – the Heritage Policy until or unless confirmed by the District Plan review process;

(6)   agrees that Taonga Tuku Iho – the Heritage Policy and its use of the word ‘significant’ mirrors what the Regional Policy Statement on heritage issues requires of us;

(7)   agrees to officers making further minor editorial changes (including any changes to the mana whenua content) once feedback is received in consultation with the Chair and Deputy Chair of the Committee; and

(8)   adopts the Taonga Tuku Iho – Heritage Policy subject to the changes above.”

For the reason that Taonga Tuku Iho sets out Council’s intent and the direction it will take to meet both community aspirations and its legislative responsibilities for heritage in all its forms in the city.

b)

Land Sale Proposal - 2 Miromiro Road (21/429)

The Chair advised the item of business should lie on the table and not be further discussed until the Committee meeting to be held on 13 July 2021.  He confirmed the reason was due to the owners of the property requesting additional time to seek advice on the matter.

c)

Rating Sales Policy (21/566)

The Group Chief Financial Officer elaborated on the report.

In response to a question from a member, the Group Chief Financial Officer agreed to investigate best practice across the sector and acceptable actions under rating legislation with regard to prompt payment discounts.

RECOMMENDED: (Deputy Mayor Lewis/Cr Briggs) Minute No. PFSC 21203

“That the Committee recommends that Council:

(1)     notes and receives the report; and

(2)     approves the Rating Sale Policy, attached as Appendix 1 to the report.”

5.

Love Wainuiomata Update Report (21/585)

Report No. PFSC2021/2/92 by the Head of City Growth

Ms Esther King representing Love Wainuiomata was in attendance for the item.  She elaborated on the report. She advised the Wainuiomata welcome sign had been delayed  due to design modifications and was expected to be in place by the end of May 2021.

In response to a question from a member, Ms King advised the only physical work to be completed for the Heartland Ride was additional mapboard signage. She noted the official launch of the Heartland Ride would be held soon.

Resolved: (Cr Briggs/Cr Dyer)                                            Minute No. PFSC 21204

“That the Committee notes and receives the report.”

For the reason that Love Wainuiomata Incorporated is reporting on performance for the 12 months to 31 December 2020.

6.

Hutt Valley Chamber of Commerce Six Monthly Report to 31 December 2020 (21/486)

Report No. PFSC2021/2/93 by the Head of City Growth

Cr Sutton declared a conflict of interest and took no part in discussion or voting on the matter.

Ms Helen Down, Chief Executive of the Hutt Valley Chamber of Commerce (the Chamber) was in attendance for the item.  She elaborated on the report.  She highlighted the Chamber’s four key areas of focus: Youth work pathways, the Business Expo, COVID-19 support and advocacy between business and central government.

Ms Down explained the continued impact of COVID-19 with staff shortages and struggling businesses. She noted finding commercial space for manufacturers was an issue and spatial zoning for greenfield commercial development was needed.

In response to a question from a member, Ms Down suggested Council could support the current challenge of workforce shortages by looking at ways to acquire additional contracts with central government for employment.

Resolved:  (Cr Rasheed/Cr Hislop)                                    Minute No. PFSC 21205

“That the Committee notes and receives the report.”

For the reason the Hutt Valley Chamber of Commerce is required to report six monthly to the Committee on performance against agreed performance measures.

7.

Seaview Business Association 12 Monthly Report to 31 December 2020 (21/562)

Report No. PFSC2021/2/94 by the Head of City Growth

Mr Mike Henderson and Ms Jen Houdalakis representing Seaview Business Association (the Association) were in attendance for the item.  Mr Henderson highlighted the importance of transport infrastructure including public transport and cycling routes and the need for another route out of Wellington to reduce traffic congestion. He noted the proposed rates differential in Council’s Long Term Plan would add to the increasing compliance and operating costs. He advised Seaview was at capacity with no room for new business that required a large footprint.  He added the Association planned to engage with Kokiri Mārae to request their involvement in managing the precinct.

Resolved: (Deputy Mayor Lewis/Cr Dyer)                        Minute No. PFSC 21206

“That the Committee receives and notes the information.”

For the reason that the Seaview Business Association is required to report back on progress against agreed outcomes over the prior 12 month period.

8.

Technology Valley Six Monthly Update to 31 December 2020 (21/484)

Report No. PFSC2021/2/95 by the Head of City Growth

Ms Anthea Armstrong representing Technology Valley Forum was in attendance for the item.  She elaborated on the report.  She noted procurement and procurement processes were becoming increasingly problematic.  She referenced the requirement for the ethical disposal of all production materials and a  requirement from the United States for ethical sourcing of many components.

Cr Milne left the meeting at 4.37pm.

Resolved: (Cr Edwards/Cr Hislop)                                    Minute No. PFSC 21207

“That the Committee notes and receives the report.”

For the reason that Technology Valley Forum is required to report to Council on performance on a six monthly basis.

9.

Southend Business Group (21/555)

Report No. PFSC2021/2/60 by the CBD Development Manager

Cr Rasheed declared a conflict of interest and took no part in discussion or voting on the item.

Cr Dyer left meeting at 5.29pm

Mr Mike Gray representing the Southend Business Group (the Group) was in attendance for the item.  He elaborated on the memorandum.  He said the Group was preparing new signage, an installation in Andrews Avenue and was working on increasing foot traffic to the area. He noted challenges in the precinct included an increase in crime, congested traffic flows, lack of parking, increased costs  and  a shortage of skilled staff. He added the Group had several projects underway that would improve the look of the precinct and these were expected to be completed by the end of 2021.

Resolved: (Cr Edwards/Cr Briggs)                                     Minute No. PFSC 21208

“That the Committee receives the memorandum and notes the information.”

10.

Activity Report - Information Services (21/554)

Report No. PFSC2021/2/1 by the Chief Digital Officer

The Chief Digital Officer advised that the financial tables contained within the report had been updated.  See page 13 attached to the minutes.  He elaborated on the report.

Resolved: (Cr Edwards/Deputy Mayor Lewis)                 Minute No. PFSC 21209

“That the Committee:

(1)        notes the information contained in the report;

(2)        notes that this review also meets the intent of section 17A of the Local Government Act 2002; and

(3)        agrees that a full section 17A review should not be undertaken at present for the reasons outlined in the report.”

11.

Review of Draft 2021/22 Statement of Intent for the New Zealand Local Government Funding Agency (21/315)

Report No. PFSC2021/2/59 by the Treasury Officer

The Group Chief Financial Officer advised Council had recently issued new debt: five year stock at 1.5% and two year stock at 0.7%. She noted the rates were favourable and would be included in borrowing projections for Council’s Long Term Plan.

Resolved: (Cr Edwards/Cr Hislop)                                    Minute No. PFSC 21210

“That the Committee:

(1)          notes and receives the contents of the Local Government Funding Agency (LGFA) draft 2021-2022 Statement of Intent, covering the period up to 30 June 2024, attached as Appendix 1 to the report, in accordance with the Local Government Act 2002;

(2)     receives the LGFA Half Year Report to 31 December 2020 attached as Appendix 2 to the report; and

(3)     notes that officers have not asked the LGFA Board to consider any changes to the draft LGFA 2021/22 Statement of Intent.”

12.

Strategic Property Portfolio - Update (21/485)

Report No. PFSC2021/2/96 by the Head of City Growth

The Head of City Growth elaborated on the report.

Resolved: (Cr Edwards/Deputy Mayor Lewis)                 Minute No. PFSC 21211

“That the Committee receives and notes the report.”

For the reason that the Property Working Group for Advancing Strategic Projects is required to report six monthly to this Committee on the portfolio of properties for advancing strategic projects.  This is for monitoring purposes.

13.

Health and Safety Update (21/578)

Report No. PFSC2021/2/61 by the Health & Safety Manager

The Health and Safety Manager elaborated on the report.

Cr Briggs asked that the Health and Safety Update for September include the Long Term Plan consultation period, particularly with regard to aggression related incidents. He asked that any learnings from the current Long Term Plan process be applied to future consultations.

Resolved: (Cr Edwards/Mayor Barry)                               Minute No. PFSC 21212

“That the Committee notes and receives the report.”

14.

Policy, Finance and Strategy Committee Work Programme 2021 (21/406)

Report No. PFSC2021/2/62 by the Democracy Advisor

Cr Mitchell requested a briefing on the Naming Policy Review before the item was brought to the Policy, Finance and Strategy Committee for consideration. He asked officers to advise when the Animal Control Bylaw for Cat Management would be added to the work programme.

The Chief Executive agreed to follow up both requests and provide an update for Councillors.

Resolved:  (Cr Edwards/Cr Mitchell)                                 Minute No. PFSC 21213

“That the Work Programme be received and noted.”

17/18

18/19

19/20

20/21

20/21

21/22

22/23

23/24

24/25

25/26

26/27

27/28

28/29

29/30

30/31

Actual

$000

Actual

$000

Actual

$000

Actual

$000

Revised Budget

$000

Budget

$000

Budget

Budget

$000

Budget

$000

Budget

$000

Budget

$000

Budget

$000

Budget

$000

Budget

$000

Budget

$000

Net Opex

6,744

8,160

9,180

7,083

9,339

10,870

11,162

10,917

11,473

11,784

12,253

11,112

10,789

10,950

10,423

Net Capex

839

698

783

787

4,940

2,920

2,491

1,674

1,525

1,725

1,425

1,425

1,425

1,525

1,425

Cost Centres

Operating Expenditure

$000

Revenue

$000

Depreciation

$000

Net Operating Expenditure

$000

8050 - Information Services Administration

629

-80

153

702

8051 - Information Technology Infrastructure

2,028

362

2,390

8052 - Corporate Information

700

4

704

8054 - Land Information Management

783

-8

65

840

8057 - Information Services Applications

1,428

30

1,458

8058 - Business Transformation

937

52

989

Totals

6,505

-88

666

7,083

Division

Finance

Date created

April 2021

Publication date

April 2021

Review period

August 2025

Owner

Group Chief Financial Officer

Approved by

Council

Version

Author

Date

Description

V 1.0

Financial Transaction Services Manager

8/4/2021

Initial draft policy for review

Recommendations

That Council:

(1)     notes Council resolved (12 June 2017) to acquire the properties at 6, 7, 10 and 12 Daly Street using the Public Works Act 1981 to enable and secure the objectives of the RiverLink Project; and that these properties have now been acquired;

(2)     notes the Daly Street Laneway runs between the properties at 7 and 10 Daly Street.  The Laneway was taken by the Crown for railway purposes in 1964 and is owned by the New Zealand Railways Corporation (NZRC) and leased to KiwiRail;

(3)     notes that with the RiverLink Project now progressing towards consent and implementation officers recommended that Council now proceed to purchase the Daly Street Laneway;

(4)     notes NZRC/KiwiRail have been approached about selling the subject property and have internal approvals to proceed;

(5)     notes that the parties legal advice is that the sale should be via section 50 of the Public Works Act – which allows the transfer of an existing public work to a local authority.  This requires Council to agree to take the land for a public work;

(6)     notes Council authorisation is required for the purchase of property;

(7)     agrees to take the land for a public work; and

(8)     authorises officers to conclude the purchase of the Daly Street Laneway with NZRC/KiwiRail on the basis of valuations received and reimbursement of NZRC/KiwiRail costs of disposal as outlined in Financial Considerations (see paragraphs 20-23 contained within the report).

For the reasons full ownership of the Daly Street Laneway, while involving upfront purchasing costs, provides significant benefits of control for Council in ensuring the integration, delivery, timing, and high quality, of the RiverLink Project, thereby achieving its objectives.

This will enable Council to deal with the entire redevelopment area unfettered by not having to take into account the separate requirements of the small parcel of land taken up by the Daly Street Laneway.  The site will be amalgamated into the larger redevelopment area incorporating the properties already acquired in Daly Street.  This will create a continuous site for future redevelopment.

No.

Title

Page

1⇩

Policy - Purchase and Sale of Property for Advancing Strategic - December 2019

63

Attachment 1

Policy - Purchase and Sale of Property for Advancing Strategic - December 2019

The property to be purchased fits within Council’s strategic framework

The property or properties is required to achieve specific outcomes outlined in the Councils adopted strategies, plans and policies e.g. Urban Growth Strategy, RiverLink, Central City Transformation Plan, Petone 2040; Vision Seaview/Gracefield 2030.

The property to be purchased is located in an area that is a priority for the Council

The property or properties are located in an area that is a specific priority area for development within a defined time frame (note this could be a medium or long term time horizon).

The property to be purchased will enable Council to act as a catalyst to the further economic and urban development of the city

The purchase of property or properties will enable Council to unlock the development potential of specific areas or zones of the city through the stimulation of further private investment in the area.

The property to be purchased has the potential, once developed, to contribute a substantial increase in value to the city

This should be demonstrated through an economic assessment of the added value of future development of the property or properties to be purchased.

Criteria

Specifics

The property to be purchased has the potential, once developed to contribute additional rates income to the Council

This should be demonstrated through an assessment of the increased rateable value to be created from the development of the property or properties.

The property to be held should continue to meet the criteria that determined that it should be acquired in the first place.

This should be demonstrated through a regular review of the property portfolio.

The property to be sold no longer meets the criteria that determined it should be acquired and held or is being sold to realise the advancement of the project it was acquired for in the first place.

This should be demonstrated through a regular review of the property portfolio or through an assessment of the added value to the project of the property to be sold.

Step

Action

1.

Identify and prioritise strategic purpose, project and geographic areas for consideration under the Purchase and Sale of Property for Advancing Strategic Projects Policy

2.

Identify possible target property for purchase under the Purchase and Sale of Property for Advancing Strategic Projects Policy

3.

Undertake assessment and determine whether the proposed target property meets the criteria outlined in Section 3 of the Purchase and Sale of Property for Advancing Strategic Projects Policy including determining the certainty of the purpose for purchasing, added value of future development of the property to be purchased and the increased rateable value to be created from the future development of the property. This will involve consideration of all relevant matters listed in sections 76 to 82 of the Local Government Act 2002, including the significance of proposed decisions.

Step

Action

4.

Take necessary advice, internally and externally for the consideration of the purchase, holding or sale of the property.

5.

Undertake assessment of risks (as relevant in each case) including legal, construction, financial (including not being able to exit the property at an acceptable price), reputational and delay risks. This assessment should also include an assessment of the risks/consequences if the planned development and/or purpose for purchase does not occur.

6.

Decide on the appropriate course of action: including purchase of the property or sale of the property or no further action provided the funding for purchase or income from sale is identified within the Council’s Long Term Plan.

7.

Consider and approve, or not recommendations made to the Working Group for the purchase of the property or sale of the property, where the funding for purchase or income from sale is identified within the Council’s Long Term Plan or make recommendations to Council where the funding for purchase or income from sale is NOT identified within the Council’s Long Term Plan.

8

Instruct relevant parties to execute the decision made  and allocate funding for that purpose, provided it is identified within the Council’s Long Term Plan

9

Monitor progress and receive reports on the status of all projects that are underway, property in inventory, proposed purchases and sales and highlight any properties or projects that are not meeting expectations or are at risk of not meeting expectations along with steps being taken to resolve project or property issues.

Recommendations

That Council:

(i)    receives and notes the letter and proposed remit from Mayor Baker, Porirua City Council attached as Appendix 1 to the report; and

(ii)   retrospectively endorses its support to Porirua City Council for its proposed remit to Local Government New Zealand requesting government to introduce ‘puppy farming’ legislation.

No.

Title

Page

1⇩

Porirua City Council's Remit Regarding Puppy Farming

75

4.

Mayoral Statement

Mayor Barry spoke to his Mayoral Statement, attached as pages 31-32 to the minutes.

5.

Chief Executive's Statement

The Chief Executive spoke to her Chief Executive’s Statement, attached as pages 33-36 to the minutes.

23 February 2021

Resolved:    (Cr Edwards/Cr Dyer)                          Minute No. C 21102(2)

“That the minutes of the meeting held on 23 February 2021 be adopted, excluding Items 4a-4d.”

Item 4a)

Seaview Marina Limited Draft Statement of Intent 2021/22 to 2023/24 (21/68)

Cr Hislop declared a conflict of interest and took no part in discussion or voting on the matter.

In response to a question from a member, the Chief Financial Officer advised approval of the final Statement of Intent was required by 30 June 2021.

Resolved:      (Mayor Barry/Cr Edwards)        Minute No. C 21103(2)

“That Council:

(1)   notes the Seaview Marina Board has submitted a draft Statement of Intent for the three years 2021/22 to 2023/24, attached as Appendix 1 to Report No. PFSC2021/1/18, in accordance with the Local Government Act 2002;

(2)   notes that officers have reviewed the draft Statement of Intent for compliance with the Local Government Act 2002 and provided their analysis;

(3)   receives the draft Statement of Intent;

(4)   reviews the draft Statement of Intent and considers if any modifications should be made; and

(5)   provides comment for the Seaview Marina Board to consider in finalising its Statement of Intent (including any modifications suggested by the Policy, Finance and Strategy Committee arising under recommendation (4) above).”

Item 4b)

Urban Plus Group Draft Statement of Intent 2021/22 to 2023/24 (21/64)

Cr Brown declared a conflict of interest and took no part in discussion or voting on the matter.

In response to a question from a member regarding the implications of the recent government announcement on the non-deductibility of interest, Mayor Barry asked officers to report back to the appropriate Committee about this matter.  He noted in particular, the possible impacts on the financial outlook for the Urban Plus Group.

Resolved:    (Mayor Barry/Deputy Mayor Lewis)
                                                                               Minute No. C 21104(2)

“That Council:

(1)   notes that the Urban Plus Group Board has submitted a draft Statement of Intent 2021/22 - 2023/24, attached as Appendix 1 to Report No. PFSC2021/1/20, in accordance with the Local Government Act 2002;

(2)   notes that officers have reviewed the draft Statement of Intent for compliance with the Local Government Act 2002 and provided their analysis;

(3)   receives the draft Statement of Intent;

(4)   reviews the draft Statement of Intent and considers if any modifications should be made; and

(5)   provides comment for the Urban Plus Group Board to consider in finalising its Statement of Intent (including any modifications suggested by the Policy, Finance and Strategy Committee arising under recommendation (4) above).”

Item 4c)

Hutt City Community Facilities Trust Statement of Intent 2021/22 to 2023/24 (21/69)

Resolved:    (Mayor Barry/Cr Dyer)               Minute No. C 21105(2)

“That Council:

(1)   notes the Hutt City Community Facilities Trust (CFT)Board has submitted a draft Statement of Intent (Statement of Intent) for the three years 2021/22 to 2023/24, attached as Appendix 1 to Report No. PFSC2021/1/24, in accordance with the Local Government Act 2002;

(2)   notes that officers have reviewed the draft Statement of Intent for compliance with the Local Government Act 2002 and provided their analysis;

(3)   receives the draft Statement of Intent;

(4)   reviews the draft Statement of Intent and considers if any modifications should be made;

(5)   notes the Long Term Plan process currently underway, pending a decision by Council, for CFT to be retained as a ‘non-active’ trust with the transfer of its assets to Council by 30 June 2021; and

(6)   provides comment for the CFT Board to consider in finalising its Statement of Intent (including any modifications suggested by the Policy, Finance and Strategy Committee arising under recommendation (4) above).”

Item 4d)

Wellington Regional Leadership Committee - a new Joint Committee (21/42)

Mayor Barry advised that the generic title of “Deputy Mayor” would be used rather than the name of the current Deputy Mayor.

Resolved:    (Mayor Barry/Cr Edwards)          Minute No. C 21106(2)

“That Council:

(1)    receives and notes the report;

(2)    approves the Wellington Regional Leadership Committee Joint Committee Agreement (attached at Appendix 1 to Report No. PFSC2021/1/19) and the Council’s entry into it;

(3)    authorises the Mayor to sign, on behalf of the Council, the Joint Committee Agreement;

(4)    note that the Joint Committee will adopt a memorandum of understanding which will set out the principles that guide the Joint Committee’s work and the approach that the Joint Committee will take;

(5)    appoints and establishes the Wellington Regional Leadership Committee as a joint committee under clause 30(1)(b) of Schedule 7 of the Local Government Act 2002 on the terms set out in the Joint Committee Agreement and with effect from the date that the Joint Committee Agreement is signed by all local authority parties;

(6)    appoints the Mayor to the Joint Committee, with effect from the date that the Joint Committee is established;

(7)    appoints the Deputy Mayor as an alternate to be a member of the Joint Committee and attend meetings in exceptional circumstances where the Mayor is unable to attend;

(8)    note that the Joint Committee is a joint committee of all of the local authorities that are parties to the Wellington Regional Leadership Committee Joint Committee Agreement and includes members representing iwi and the Crown;

(9)    makes the following delegations to the Joint Committee:

(a)   approval of all plans and implementation programmes necessary to fulfil the specific responsibilities of the Joint Committee, including:

1)    Wellington Regional Growth Framework and the Wellington Regional Growth Framework Implementation Plan

2)    Regional Economic Development Plan

3)    Regional Economic Recovery Implementation Plan

(b)   approval of all submissions and advocacy statements necessary to fulfil the specific responsibilities of the Joint Committee; and

(10)  notes that the Wellington Regional Strategy Committee is likely to be disestablished in the future, with the disestablishment process to be confirmed.”

For the reasons:

1.   To provide a formal governance forum so that the members can work together with central government on matters that are of regional importance, cross-boundary and inter-regional

2.   To address regional matters across three responsibility spheres, as programme areas.  They are:

·      the Wellington Regional Growth Framework,

·      regional economic development, and

·      regional economic recovery

2 March 2021

Cr Dyer acknowledged the resignation of Council’s Traffic Asset Manager.  He wished him well for his future endeavours and noted his dedication to the role.

Resolved:     (Cr Dyer/Cr Brown)                             Minute No. C 21107(2)

“That the minutes of the meeting held on 2 March 2021 be adopted, excluding Items 4b-4d.”

Item 4b)

Elizabeth Street, Petone - Proposed P15 Parking Restrictions (21/16)

Resolved:    (Cr Dyer/Cr Brown)                    Minute No. C 21108(2)

“That Council:

(1)     receives and notes the information;

(2)     approves the application of P15, 7.30 am to 5.30 pm, Monday-Friday (excluding Public Holidays), time limited parking restriction on Elizabeth Street, Petone, as attached in Appendix 1 to Report No. TSC2021/1/33; and

(3)     notes that these resolutions will take effect once the appropriate signage and/or road-markings have been installed.”

For the reasons that the proposed restrictions would improve accessibility and parking availability for parents and caregivers accessing the kindergarten and the proposed changes would support Council’s Parking Policy (2017).

Item 4c)

Queen Street, Petone - Proposed P60 Parking Restrictions (21/17)

Resolved:    (Cr Dyer/Cr Brown)                    Minute No. C 21109(2)

“That Council:

(1)     receives and notes the information;

(2)     approves the application of P60 (8 am to 6 pm, Monday to Sunday other than public holidays) time limited parking restriction over four parking spaces on Queen Street, outside no.284 Jackson Street, Petone, as attached as Appendix 1 to Report No. TSC2021/1/34;

(3)     rescinds any previous resolutions pertaining to traffic controls made pursuant to any bylaw to the extent that they are in conflict with the traffic controls described in this resolution; and

(4)     notes that these resolutions will take effect once the appropriate signage and/or road-markings have been installed.”

For the reasons that the proposed restrictions would improve the level of service for nearby businesses and support Council’s Parking Policy (2017).

Item 4d)

Greater Wellington Regional Council - High Street Bus Stop Modifications - Phase 1 (21/171)

Resolved:    (Cr Dyer/Cr Brown)                    Minute No. C 21110(2)

“That Council:

(1)   receives and notes the information;

(2)   approves the installation of the following bus stop modifications and/or associated parking restrictions;

(a)        High Street, Boulcott (773) - Stop #9225, as attached as  Appendix 1, to Report No. TSC2021/1/35:

1)         15 metre ‘Bus Stop – At All Times’ class restriction; 

2)         18 metres of ‘No Stopping At All Times’ (entry taper) parking restriction; and

3)         9 metres of ‘No Stopping At All Times’ (exit taper) parking restriction;

(b)        High Street, Boulcott (803-805) - Stop #9226, as attached as  Appendix 2, to Report No. TSC2021/1/35:

1)         15 metre ‘Bus Stop – At All Times’ class restriction; 

2)         8 metres of ‘No Stopping At All Times’ (entry taper) parking restriction; and

3)         3 metres of ‘No Stopping At All Times’ (exit taper) parking restriction;

(c)        High Street, Avalon (939-943) - Stop #9245, as attached as  Appendix 3, to Report No. TSC2021/1/35:

1)         15 metre ‘Bus Stop – At All Times’ class restriction; and 

2)         10 metres of ‘No Stopping At All Times’ (exit taper) parking restriction;

(d)        High Street, Taita (1139-1145) - Stop #9250, as attached as  Appendix 4, to Report No. TSC2021/1/35:

1)         15 metre ‘Bus Stop – At All Times’ class restriction; 

2)         9 metres of ‘No Stopping At All Times’ (entry taper) parking restriction; and

3)         9 metres of ‘No Stopping At All Times’ (exit taper) parking restriction;

(e)        High Street, Taita (opp 1381-1383) - Stop #9256, as attached as  Appendix 5, to Report No. TSC2021/1/35:

1)         15 metre ‘Bus Stop – At All Times’ class restriction; 

2)         9 metres of ‘No Stopping At All Times’ (entry taper) parking restriction; and

3)         9 metres of ‘No Stopping At All Times’ (exit taper) parking restriction;

(f)         High Street, Taita (opp 1399-1402) - Stop #9257, as attached as  Appendix 6, to Report No. TSC2021/1/35:

1)         15 metre ‘Bus Stop – At All Times’ class restriction; 

2)         9 metres of ‘No Stopping At All Times’ (entry taper) parking restriction; and

3)         9 metres of ‘No Stopping At All Times’ (exit taper) parking restriction;

(g)        High Street, Taita (1394-1396) - Stop #8256, as attached as  Appendix 7, to Report No. TSC2021/1/35:

1)         15 metre ‘Bus Stop – At All Times’ class restriction; 

2)         9 metres of ‘No Stopping At All Times’ (entry taper) parking restriction; and

3)         16 metres of ‘No Stopping At All Times’ (exit taper) parking restriction;

(h)        High Street, Taita (opp 1141-1145) - Stop #8250, as attached as  Appendix 8, to Report No. TSC2021/1/35:

1)         15 metre ‘Bus Stop – At All Times’ class restriction; 

2)         9 metres of ‘No Stopping At All Times’ (entry taper) parking restriction; and

3)         9 metres of ‘No Stopping At All Times’ (exit taper) parking restriction;

(i)         High Street, Avalon (1058-1062) - Stop #8247, as attached as  Appendix 9, to Report No. TSC2021/1/35:

1)         15 metre ‘Bus Stop – At All Times’ class restriction; 

2)         13 metres of ‘No Stopping At All Times’ (entry taper) parking restriction; and

3)         10 metres of ‘No Stopping At All Times’ (exit taper) parking restriction;

(j)         High Street, Avalon (1006) - Stop #8246, as attached as  Appendix 10, to Report No. TSC2021/1/35:

1)         11 metre ‘Bus Stop – At All Times’ class restriction; 

2)         4 metres of ‘No Stopping At All Times’ (entry taper) parking restriction; and

3)         9 metres of ‘No Stopping At All Times’ (exit taper) parking restriction;

(k)        High Street, Boulcott (814) - Stop #8227, as attached as  Appendix 11, to Report No. TSC2021/1/35:

1)         15 metre ‘Bus Stop – At All Times’ class restriction; and 

2)         10 metres of ‘No Stopping At All Times’ (entry taper) parking restriction;

(l)         High Street, Boulcott (776) - Stop #8226, as attached as  Appendix 12, to Report No. TSC2021/1/35:

1)         15 metre ‘Bus Stop – At All Times’ class restriction; 

2)         9 metres of ‘No Stopping At All Times’ (entry taper) parking restriction; and

3)         12 metres of P180 (Monday to Friday 8am to 6pm excludes Public Holidays) parking restriction;

(m)       High Street, Boulcott (736-740) -  Stop #8225, as attached as  Appendix 13, to Report No. TSC2021/1/35:

1)         15 metre ‘Bus Stop – At All Times’ class restriction; and 

2)         9 metres of ‘No Stopping At All Times’ (entry taper) parking restriction;

(3)   rescinds any previous resolutions pertaining to traffic controls made pursuant to any bylaw to the extent that they are in conflict with the traffic controls described in this resolution; and

(4)   notes that these resolutions will take effect once the appropriate signage and/or road-markings have been installed.”

For the reason that the proposed restrictions will reduce the risk of vehicle conflict at the listed on-road bus stop locations; improve visibility and safety for the benefit of all road users; promote compliance with the NZTA’s draft Guidelines for Public Transport Infrastructure and Facilities; reduce the instances of ‘pole strikes’; and meet the requirements as set out in Council’s Traffic Bylaw 2017.

4 March 2021

Resolved:   (Deputy Mayor Lewis/Cr Mitchell)               Minute No. C 21111(2)

“That the minutes of the meeting held on 4 March 2021 be adopted, excluding Item 4a.”

Item 4a)

Land Exchange Proposal - 31 Kotari Road (21/197)

Resolved:    (Mayor Barry/Cr Mitchell)           Minute No. C 21112(2)

“That Council agrees to the exchange of approximately 107m2 of encroached reserve land known as Lot 2 DP 549866 on CT 946488 (attached in red as Appendix 1 to the report) for approximately 140m2 of native bush land on Lot 16 DP 308 CT 40C/717 (attached in blue as Appendix 1 to Report No. CCCCC2021/1/42).”

For the reason to resolve a long established encroachment and to protect native vegetation adjacent to a significant natural resource area.

9 March 2021

Cr Hislop also acknowledged the work of Council’s Traffic Asset Manager.  She wished him well for his future endeavours.

Resolved:     (Cr Hislop/Cr Brown)                                  Minute No. C 21113(2)

“That the minutes of the meeting held on 9 March 2021 be adopted.”

Item 4)

Wellington Water Half Year Performance (21/162)

Resolved:    (Mayor Barry/Cr Edwards)           Minute No. C 21114(2)

“That Council:

(1)     receives the half year report of Wellington Water Limited attached as Appendix 1 to Report No. IARCC2021/1/53; and

(2)     notes that the Infrastructure and Strategy Committee has performed the responsibilities of the Policy, Finance and Strategy Committee in accordance with its Terms of Reference so that the matter can be considered in a timely manner.”

a)

Rates postponement policy  - proposed changes to be included in the LTP public consultation process (21/380)

Report No. HCC2021/1/64 (3) by the Manager Financial Strategy & Planning

The Manager Financial Strategy and Planning elaborated on the report.  He advised the proposed changes to the Rates Postponement Policy (the Policy) would align Council with the joint regional approach to resolving wastewater inflow and infiltration issues. 

The Strategic Advisor explained that Wellington Water Limited’s (WWL) “Knowing Your Pipes” programme would commence shortly, beginning in Wainuiomata.  He advised that a briefing explaining the programme would be held on 7 April 2021. He added that the proposed changes to the Policy were required to enable a rates postponement option to be available to ratepayers if needed.  He said the maintenance of laterals on private property was the responsibility of the landowner and some repairs might be costly to the landowner.  He explained that Council would pay for the cost of any repairs, if required, to the small portion of the lateral pipe lying within public land.  He added this would not extend to the portion of pipe held in private ownership.  He noted local authorities within the Wellington region dealt with these small portions of pipe in different ways.

In response to a question from a member regarding the repayment timeframe, the Manager Financial Strategy and Planning advised there was no maximum time limit.  He added that a minimum annual payment requirement would be in place.  He said the Policy could only be invoked where Council had incurred the costs of any repairs.

In response to a question from a member, the Strategic Advisor advised powers under the Local Government Act 2002 could be invoked if a landowner refused to carry out required repairs to pipes on their property. 

Resolved:     (Mayor Barry/Cr Edwards)                         Minute No. C 21115(2)

“That Council:

(1)   notes the programme underway to improve our waterways by investigating  contamination sources such as faulty residential cross-connections between wastewater and stormwater systems, breaks in pipes and infiltration inflow and infiltration issues;

(2)   agrees to a new proposed voluntary targeted rate “Wastewater and Stormwater Financial Assistance Targeted Rate” to be included in the draft Rates Funding Impact Statement and the draft Revenue and Financing Policy included in the draft Long Term Plan 2021-2031;

(3)   agrees to the amendment to the Rates Postponement Policy to incorporate relief for ratepayers who elect to utilise this new proposed voluntary targeted rate, as detailed in Appendix 1 to the report; and

(4)   agrees that the proposed changes be included in the draft Long Term Plan 2021-2031 public consultation process.”

b)

Code of Conduct for Elected Members (21/285)

Report No. HCC2021/1/65 (3) by the Contractor

Speaking under public comment, Mr Max Shierlaw expressed opposition to the proposed amendments to the Code of Conduct for Elected Members (the Code).  He believed the Local Government New Zealand  (LGNZ) Code of Conduct template was being misused.  He requested that the amendments be rejected and Council’s Code of Conduct revert back to the pre-2020 document.

The Chief Legal Officer elaborated on the report.  He tabled a copy of an email he had sent to members (attached as pages 37-38 to the minutes).  He spoke to the tabled email.

In response to a question regarding point 6 of the tabled document, the Chief Legal Officer advised the intent of the Code was for clear and reasonable processes to be in place, with no opportunity for abuse of the process.  He added there was wide discretion regarding the settlement process.

In response to a question from a member regarding the use of an elected member’s Facebook page for electioneering purposes, the Electoral Officer advised that Council resources could not be utilised for electioneering purposes.  He said an elected member could establish and fund their own Facebook page for campaign purposes.  The Chief Legal Officer advised elected members should check with officers prior to establishing Twitter and Instagram pages, especially with campaigning.

In response to a question from a member suggesting the Deputy Mayor should lead an investigation into a complaint regarding the Mayor rather than the Chief Executive, the Chief Legal Officer explained the proposed Code followed guidelines set out by LGNZ.  He added that if the Mayor was party to a complaint, they could not be party to any ruling concerning dismissing that complaint before the formal process commenced.  He said that decision would fall to the Chief Executive and the Chairs of the Standing Committees.  He noted this was the current process. 

The Chief Legal Officer agreed to develop a flow chart for the complaint process.

Cr Briggs reminded members the Code’s process was only enacted if certain behaviour warranted it.  He supported the proposed amendments.

Cr Sutton supported the proposed amendments except for the reintroduction of the ability for the Chief Executive to lay a complaint under the Code.  She believed the Code was for elected members only.

Cr Mitchell supported the proposed amendments. He stated the amendments encouraged early resolution.  He commended officers for their work to clarify the Code.

Cr Milne questioned the proposal to allow the Chief Executive to make a complaint under the Code when there was no ability for elected members to make a complaint concerning the Chief Executive.  He also questioned the lack of a process to challenge a decision other than through a judicial review.

Cr Rasheed supported the proposed amendments except for the consequence of the amendments that the Chief Executive would effectively manage the conduct of the elected members.  She believed the amendments in totality provided for the Chief Executive to make a complaint, to be able to decide to dismiss or proceed with any complaint, to forward a complaint to an independent investigator and to decide on the process to follow upon receipt of the investigator’s report.  She maintained that the role of management of elected members rested with the Mayor.  She opposed fusing the powers of the political and executive areas of the organisation.  She added that the timing of the circulated proposed amendments to the Code was poor.

Cr Brown supported the proposed amendments. She said that all organisations required a Code to be able to function effectively.  She believed all Councillors needed to be held to the same level of accountability and that a mechanism was required for when things did not operate correctly.

Cr Edwards supported the proposed amendments.  He said an independent investigator would ensure an unbiased and impartial investigation would occur.  He believed the Chief Executive needed to have the ability to investigate poor behaviour of an elected member towards a staff member.

Cr Dyer supported the proposed amendments.

Cr Bassett expressed concern with the proposed amendments.  He expressed concern that the Deputy Mayor was not the lead when a complaint concerning the Mayor was received.  He also expressed concern that there were no provisions for a review of a decision.  He said an individual subject of a complaint had no avenue for redress if the final decision went against them. 

Mayor Barry advised that ultimately a process would be carried out by an independent investigator who would present their findings to Council.  He added the proposed Code followed best practice throughout New Zealand.   He foreshadowed the motion to lie the matter on the table.  He confirmed that Councillors would be given the opportunity to work through all the ramifications of all the proposed amendments to enable a fully informed decision to be made. 

Resolved:    (Mayor Barry/Cr Briggs)(by division)   Minute No. C 21116(2)

“That Item 8b) Code of Conduct for Elected Members lies on the table and officers present an updated report to a future Council meeting.”

The amendment was declared carried by division with the voting as follows:

c)

Elected Member Remuneration (21/120)

Report No. HCC2021/1/11 (3) by the Contractor

The Head of Democratic Services elaborated on the report. 

In response to questions from members, the Head of Democratic Services confirmed the Remuneration Authority set the base salary for all Councillors.  She was unable to confirm whether the chairs of Standing Committees received an additional $8,000 for their additional responsibilities in the previous triennium.

In response to a question from a member regarding the evaluation system, the Head of Democratic Services explained officers examined the additional responsibilities that chairs and deputy chairs were required to undertake with the revised committee structure.  She said all Councillors were treated equally regardless of whether they were a city-wide or a ward Councillor.

In response to a question from a member, the Contractor explained the starting point for the process had been Council’s December 2019 decision to approve the distribution of the remuneration pool.  She added that due to the revised committee structure, the distribution needed to be revisited to take account of an additional standing committee.

Cr Sutton expressed concern with Option 2.  She believed it to be ‘constructive dismissal’.

Mayor Barry asked Cr Sutton to withdraw her comment as it was disrespectful.  Cr Sutton refused to withdraw the comment.  Mayor Barry asked Cr Sutton to leave the meeting. 

Cr Sutton left the meeting at 3.44pm.

Cr Rasheed expresed support for Option 1.  She believed Option 2 disadvantaged three Councillors who undertook a large amount of work. 

Crs Brown, Dyer, and Briggs and Deputy Mayor Lewis  expressed support for Option 2.  They believed it reflected the workloads of Deputy Chairs and would assist in succession planning.  They agreed Option 2 was a simple system and was based on the Councillor’s additional responsibilities.

Cr Hislop expressed support for Option 2.  She noted her awkwardness in supporting this option.

Cr Mitchell expressed his awkwardness with the matter and stated his intention to abstain from voting. 

Mayor Barry acknowledged the awkwardness of the matter.  He reminded members that a Council decision was required and the options were based on roles and Councillor’s additional responsibilities.  He apologised to officers for the earlier comment made by a member. 

Resolved:   (Mayor Barry/Cr Briggs)(by division)    Minute No. C 21117(2)

“That Council approves the distribution of the remuneration pool from 1 July 2021 as attached in Appendix 2 to the report, for submission to the Remuneration Authority as follows:

a.    Councillor salary - $54,000 per annum;

b.    Deputy Mayor/Chair of Standing Committee – additional $46,519 per annum;

c.    Chair of Standing Committee – additional $26,519 per annum;

d.   Deputy Chair of Standing Committee – additional $9,908 per annum; and

e.    Chair of Traffic Subcommittee – additional $13,520 per annum.”

The motion was declared carried by division with the voting as follows:

Crs Bassett, Milne and Mitchell abstained from voting on this matter.

d)

Appointment of Directors - Urban Plus Limited and Seaview Marina Limited (21/389)

Report No. HCC2021/1/12 (3) by the Contractor

Resolved:    (Mayor Barry/Deputy Mayor Lewis)          Minute No. C 21118(2)

“That Council:

(1)   approves the appointment of Peter Fa’afiu and Cameron Madgwick to the Board of Urban Plus Limited (UPL) for a term of three years until 30 June 2024, on the grounds that they have the necessary skills and experience to assist the Board to guide UPL and achieve the company’s objectives; and

(2)   approves the appointment of Pamela Bell and Rick Wells to the Board of Seaview Marina Limited (SML) for a term of three years until 30 June 2024, on the grounds that they have the necessary skills and experience to assist the Board to guide SML and achieve the company’s objectives.”

For the reasons that appropriately skilled and experienced independent directors will assist UPL and SML to achieve their strategic objectives.

e)

Appointment of Members to Fill Vacancies (21/316)

Report No. HCC2021/1/4 (3) by the Contractor

Mayor Barry elaborated on the report.

Cr Edwards asked for an amendment to the Wellington Regional Waste Minimisation and Management Joint Committee membership.  He said he was the member of the Committee and Cr Mitchell was the alternate member.

Cr Dyer acknowledged Cr Sutton’s work as Chair of the Traffic Subcommittee.  He requested the spelling of Ms Karen Yung’s name be corrected under the membership of the Petone Community Board.

Resolved:     (Mayor Barry/Cr Mitchell)                          Minute No. C 21119(2)

“That Council:

(1)   appoints Mayor Barry as a member of Council to the Wellington Water Committee;

(2)   appoints Cr Dyer as a member of Council to Hutt Minoh House Friendship Trust; and

(3)   appoints Cr Briggs as Deputy Chair of the Traffic Subcommittee for the remainder of the triennium.”

f)

Private Plan Change Request 54 - Boulcott's Farm Heritage Golf Club, Inc. (21/286)

Report No. HCC2021/1/63 (3) by the Policy Planner

The Divisional Manager, District Plan Policy elaborated on the report.

In response to a question from a member, the Divisional Manager, District Plan Policy explained the plan change process could take between six to 12 months or longer.  This was dependent on the number of submissions and whether a decision was appealed.  He said the plan change could be undertaken at the same time as the current District Plan review.  He added a decision on the zoning of the subject parcel of land would be available prior to the District Plan Review being advertised.  He noted if a decision was delayed, the current zoning would remain in place and another process would be required to change the zoning.

In response to questions from a member regarding the level of public consultation being undertaken, the Divisional Manager, District Plan Policy explained that Boulcott’s Farm Heritage Golf Club had already consulted with the adjoining property owners.  He said officers were intending to write to residents in the area however the extent of that notification was yet to be determined.  He acknowledged possible traffic effects might result in a wider area being notified. 

Cr Bassett stressed the importance of widespread and transparent consultation.

Cr Dyer requested the residents be informed that this consultation was specific to the application and that further consultation on the wider District Plan review was also occurring. 

Resolved:     (Mayor Barry/Cr Dyer)                             Minute No. C 21120(2)

“That Council:

(1)   notes that Urban Perspectives Ltd. has requested a change to the operative district plan on behalf of Boulcott’s Farm Heritage Golf Club, Inc., to alter the zoning of a part of their site of approximately 1.6 hectares near Kingston and Allen Streets, from General Recreation to General Residential; and

(2)   accepts the private plan change request in whole, and proceeds with the private plan change notification and hearing process under the Resource Management Act at the requester’s expense.”

For the reasons that Council is obliged to act on the request; there is no reason to reject the request, deal with the request in parts, or convert it to a resource consent; adopting the request would incur a cost to the Council, does not substantially advance any existing Council strategy and would imply endorsement of the plan change and its supporting material; and accepting the request allows the merits of the plan change to be consulted on and assessed using the statutory due process.

g)

Plan Change 47: Major Drive, Kelson - Final approval to make Plan Change 47 operative (21/207)

Report No. HCC2021/1/62 (3) by the Senior Environmental Policy Analyst

Resolved:     (Mayor Barry/Cr Dyer)                                Minute No. C 21121(2)

“That Council:

(1)   resolves, in accordance with clause 17 of the First Schedule of the Resource Management Act 1991, to approve Plan Change 47 to the City of Lower Hutt District Plan;

(2)   approves the affixing of the Common Seal to Plan Change 47 in accordance with Standing Order 8.2; and

(3)   notes that a public notice will be included in the Hutt News on 30 March 2021 advising the operative date of Plan Change 47, in accordance with clause 20 of the First Schedule of the Resource Management Act 1991.”

h)

Submission to Climate Change Commission (21/310)

Memorandum dated 11 March 2021 by the Manager, Sustainability and Resilience

The Manager, Sustainability and Resilience elaborated on the report. 

Cr Mitchell asked that a copy of the submission be provided to Councillors at Greater Wellington Regional Council.

Resolved:    (Mayor Barry/Cr Briggs)                       Minute No. C 21122(2)

“That Council:

(1)   approves the submission to the Climate Change Commission as shown in Appendix 1 attached to the report; and

(2)   asks officers to distribute Council’s submission to the Climate Change Commission to the local members of Parliament and to Councillors at Greater Wellington Regional Council.”

i)

2021 Local Government New Zealand Conference (21/274)

Memorandum dated 26 February 2021 by the Elected Members Support Advisor

Mayor Barry elaborated on the report.

Resolved:    (Mayor Barry/Cr Rasheed)                            Minute No. C 21123(2)

“That Council:

(1)   notes the 2021 Local Government Conference programme attached as Appendix 1 to the memorandum; and

(2)   nominates the Mayor, Deputy Mayor Lewis and Councillor Keri Brown to represent Hutt City Council at the 2021 Local Government New Zealand Conference to be held in Blenheim from 15-17 July 2021.”

Resolved:   (Mayor Barry/Deputy Mayor Lewis)                   Minute No. C 21124(2)

“That the minutes of the meeting of the Hutt City Council held on Tuesday 8 December 2020, be confirmed as a true and correct record.”

Resolved:    (Mayor Barry/Cr Brown)                                     Minute No. C 21125(2)

“That the minutes of the meeting of the Hutt City Council held on Monday 21 December 2020, be confirmed as a true and correct record.”

Resolved:    (Mayor Barry/Cr Brown)                                      Minute No. C 21126(2)

“That the minutes of the meeting of the Hutt City Council held on Wednesday 10 February 2021, be confirmed as a true and correct record.”

21 December 2020

Resolved:    (Mayor Barry/Deputy Mayor Lewis)           Minute No. C 21127(2)

“That the minutes of the meeting held on 21 December 2020 be adopted.”

10 February 2021

Resolved:    (Mayor Barry/Cr Briggs)                              Minute No. C 21128(2)

“That the minutes of the meeting held on 10 February 2021 be adopted.”

25 February 2021

Resolved:     (Mayor Barry/Cr Rasheed)                          Minute No. C 21129(2)

“That the minutes of the meeting held on 25 February 2021 be adopted.”

1 March 2021

Resolved:    (Cr Briggs/Cr Rasheed)                                Minute No. C 21130(2)

“That the minutes of the meeting held on 1 March 2021 be adopted.”

5 March 2021

Resolved:    (Cr Briggs/Cr Brown)                            Minute No. C 21131

“That the minutes of the meeting held on 5 March 2021 be adopted.”

11.

Sealing Authority (21/82)

Report No. HCC2021/1/13 (3) by the Legal Assistant

Resolved:    (Mayor Barry/Deputy Mayor Lewis)                  Minute No. C 21132(2)

“That Council:

(1)   approves the affixing of the Common Seal to all relevant documents in connection with the items set out in Schedule 1 contained in the report; and

(2)   approves the deeds executed under Power of Attorney set out in Schedule 2, contained in the report; and

(3)   approves the warrants set out in Schedule 3 of the report.

SCHEDULE 1 - General Sealing Authority

Subdivision related documents – including Easements to Council

Standard easements and related requirements granting rights to Council as part of the subdivision process:

a)         Hutt City Council and RV2 Limited 38 Tyndall Street, Waiwhetu, Lower Hutt, L20/183

b)         Hutt City Council and RLAC Residential Limited 68 Copeland Street, Epuni, Lower Hutt, L20/181

c)         Hutt City Council and Upenyu Dzapasi and Faith Dzapasi 20 Fraser Street, Wainuiomata, Lower Hutt, L20/186

d)         Hutt City Council and Mills Street Developments Limited 48 & 50 Mills Street, Boulcott, Lower Hutt, L20/189

e)         Hutt City Council and Kamahi Ventures Limited 1-11 Kamahi Street, Stokes Valley, Lower Hutt, L20/198

f)          Hutt City Council and Kelly Lesley Nicholls 15 Langford Street, Naenae, Lower Hutt, L21/21

g)         Hut City Council and Colin Graham and Suzanne Margaret Willis 23A Korau Grove, Stokes Valley, Lower Hutt, L20/165

h)         Hutt City Council and Mircon Limited 209 Wise Street, Wainuiomata, Lower Hutt, L20/197

i)          Hutt City Council and Malcolm Elder Alexander 164-166 Normandale Road, Lower Hutt, L21/2

j)          Hutt City Council and Kevin Maurice Cottle and Sandra Knight 26 Petherick Street, Taita, Lower Hutt, L21/4

k)         Hutt City Council and Dylan Trevor Alan Thomas 181 Wainuiomata Road, Wainuiomata, Lower Hutt, L21/5

l)          Hutt City Council and Genesis 76 Limited 76 Antrim Crescent, Wainuiomata, Lower Hutt, L21/11

m)        Hutt City Council and Mega Investments Limited 931 High Street, Avalon, Lower Hutt, L21/13

n)         Hutt City Council and Julie Ann Beck 37 Main Road, Wainuiomata, Lower Hutt, L21/12

o)         Hutt City Council and Roscoe Robert Price Moore and Charlotte Elsie Moffat 392 Cambridge Terrace, Naenae, Lower Hutt, L21/17

Surrender of easement

p)         Hutt City Council and RV2 Limited 38 Tyndall Street, Waiwhetu, Lower Hutt, L20/187

Land Transfer Tax Statement

q)         Hutt City Council and Lisa Michelle Evans and Matthew Bryan Evans 171 Tirohanga Road, Tirohanga, Lower Hutt, L20/127