Nga Take. Western Bay of Plenty

Transcription

1 Nga Take Western Bay of Plenty

2 Notice of Meeting No LTAPl Te Karere Long Term and Annual Plan Committee Komiti Kaupapa Tiro Whakamua Tuesday, 6 June 2017 Council Chambers Barkes Corner 9.30am His Worship the Mayor Councillors: G J Webber J Scrimgeour (Chairperson) P Mackay (Deputy Chairperson) G Dally M Dean M Lally K Marsh D Marshall M Murray-Benge J Palmer D Thwaites G Webber M Williams Media Staff Miriam Taris Chief Executive Officer Western Bay of Plenty District Council Western Bay of Plenty

3 Long Term and Annual Plan Committee Delegations Mangai o Te Kaunihera Quorum: The quorum for this meeting is six members. Role Subject to compliance with legislation to develop the Long Term and Annual Plans and associated strategies for the future direction of Council and its communities. Delegations To undertake on behalf of Council all processes and actions precedent to the final adoption of Long Term and Annual Plans including the development of consultation documents, community engagement and associated special consultative processes, policies, and strategies required to be adopted and consulted on under the Local Government Act Subject to compliance with legislation and the Long Term Plan to resolve all matters of strategic policy which does not require, under the Local Government Act 2002, a resolution of Council. Strategic policy is defined as any matter relating but not limited to, the following: Overall Infrastructure Strategies and financial Planning/Action Plans Policy direction for asset management planning To set service standards including levels of service. Utilities services/ infrastructure policy and planning Road I Transport policy and planning Other Pursuant to clause 32(1) of Schedule 7 of the Local Government Act 2002, each of the Mayor and Councillors, whether individually or collectively, the power to listen to and receive the presentation of views by people and to engage in spoken interaction with people pursuant to section 83(1)(d) of the Local Government Act 2002 in relation to any processes Council undertakes to consult on under the Special Consultative Procedure as required by the Local Government Act 2002 or any other Act. The Committee may without confirmation by Council exercise or perform any function, power or duty relating to those matters delegated by Council in like manner, and with the same effect, as the Council could itself have exercised or performed them.

4 The Committee may delegate any of its functions, duties or powers to a subcommittee subject to the restrictions on its delegations and provided that any sub-delegation to subcommittees includes a statement of purpose and specification of task. The Committee may make recommendations to Council or its Committees on any matters to achieve the outcomes required in the role of the Committee but outside its delegated authorities.

5 Agenda for Meeting No. L TAPl Present In Attendance Apologies Pages Public Forum A period of up to 30 minutes is set aside for a public foru m. Members of the public may attend to address the Committee for up to 3 minutes on items that fall within the delegations of the Committee provided the matters are not subject to legal proceedings, or to a process providing for the hearing of subm issions. Speakers may be questioned through the Chairperson by members, but questions must be confined to obtaining information or cla rification on matters raised by the speaker. The Chairperson has discretion in regard to time extensions. Such presentations do not form part of the formal business of the meeting, a brief record will be kept of matters raised during any public forum section of the meeting with matters for action to be referred through the customer contact centre request system, while those requiring further investigation will be referred to the Chief Executive. LTAP1.1 Recommendatory Report from Waihi Beach Community Board- Draft Annual Budget Attached is a report from the Democracy Advisor dated 28 November LTAP1.2 Recommendatory Report from Omokoroa Community Board - Draft Annual Budget Attached is a report from the Democracy Advisor dated 28 November LTAP1.3 Recommendatory Report from Katikati Community Board - Draft Annual Budget Attached is a report from the Democracy Advisor dated 28 November

6 LTAP1.4 Recommendatory Report from Maketu Community Board - Draft Annual Budget Attached is a report from the Democracy Advisor dated 28 November LTAP1. 5 Recommendatory Report from Te Puke Community Board - Draft Annual Budget Attached is a report from the Democracy Advisor dated 28 November LTAP1.6 Recommendatory Report from the Katikati Community Board- Service Delivery Contract for Katch Katikati Attached is a report from the Democracy Advisor dated 22 March LTAP1.7 Recommendatory Report from Council - Bay of Plenty Film Trust - Funding Request Attached is a report from the Democracy Management Advisor dated 23 May LTAP1.8 Recommendatory Report from the Community Committee Surf Lifesaving- Service Delivery Contract Attached is a report from the Democracy Advisor dated 12 May LTAP1.9 Draft Annual Plan 2017/ Deliberations and Decisions - Issues and Options Papers Attached are the issues and options papers for the Annual Plan. The Committee to recommend to Council at its meeting scheduled for 29 June 2017 final decisions on the issues and options papers, including any subsequent amendments to the Annual Plan.

7 Date Subject 7 28 November 2016 Open Session Recommendatory Report from Waihi Beach Community Board - Draft Annual Budget Western Bay of Plenty District Council Long Term and Annual Plan Committee Recommendatory Report from Waihi Beach Community Board - Draft Annual Budget Summary The Long Term and Annual Plan Committee is required to consider the recommendations and resolve accordingly. The following options are available to the Long Term and Annual Plan Committee and where appropriate the preferred option has been recommended. Please note the following is a recommendation only. The Long Term and Annual Plan Committee to resolve to: (a) (b) (c) (d) adopt as recommended to modify refer to another Committee to decline (giving reasons) and refer back to the Waihi Beach Community Board. Recommendation from the Waihi Beach Community Board - 28 November 2016 WB1.12 Draft Annual Budget 2017/ THAT the report from the Democracy Advisor dated 8 November 2016 and titled Draft Annual Budget be received. 2. THAT it be recommended to the Long Term and Annual Plan Committee that the Waihi Beach Community Board Draft Annual Budget be: A Page 1

8 Date Subject 8 28 November 2016 Open Session Recommendatory Report from Waihi Beach Community Board - Draft Annual Budget Rerating ' Costs By Law 1,000 Enforcement Contingency Grants 6,000 Mileage 5,000 Allowance Salaries Determined by Remuneration Authority Inter Departmental Charges Determined by Overhead Cost Allocation TOTAL OPERATING COSTS 3. THAT this report relates to issues which are considered of low significance in terms of Council's Policy on Significance. Staff Comments - Chief Financial Officer Staff support the recommendation in accordance with the report titled Draft Annual Budget as considered by the Waihi Beach Community Board on 28 November Significance and Engagement The Local Government Act 2002 requires a formal assessment of the significance of matters and decisions in this report against Council's Significance and Engagement Policy. In making this formal assessment there is no intention to assess the importance of this item to individuals, groups, or agencies within the community and it is acknowledged that all reports have a high degree of importance to those affected by Council decisions. The Policy requires Council and its communities to identify the degree of significance attached to particular issues, proposals, assets, decisions, and activities. In terms of the Significance and Engagement Policy this decision is considered to be of low because A Page 2

9 Date Subj ect 9 28 November 2016 Open Session Recommendatory Report from Waihi Beach Community Board - Draft Annual Budget Recommendation 1. THAT the Long Term and Annual Plan Committee approves the following Annual Budget for the Waihi Beach Community Board: Ooeratina Costs By Law 1,000 Enforcement Contingency 7,500 Grants 6,000 Mileage 5,000 Allowance Salaries Inter Departmental Charges TOTAL OPERATING COSTS Determined by Remuneration Authority Determined by Overhead Cost Allocation 2. THAT the report relates to an issue that is considered to be of low significance in terms of Council's Significance and Engagement Policy ~ ~ - A i l~~~ AI Democr y Advisor A Page 3

10 Date Subject November 2016 Open Session Recommendatory Report from Omokoroa Community Board - Draft Annual Budget Western Bay of Plenty District Council Long Term and Annual Plan Committee Recommendatory Report from Omokoroa Community Board - Draft Annual Budget Summary The Long Term and Annual Plan Committee is required to consider the recommendations and resolve accordingly. The following options are available to the Long Term and Annual Plan Committee and where appropriate the preferred option has been recommended. Please note the following is a recommendation only. The Long Term and Annual Plan Committee to resolve to: (a) (b) (c) (d) adopt as recommended to modify refer to another Committee to decline (giving reasons) and refer back to the Omokoroa Community Board. Recommendation from the Omokoroa Community Board - 29 November 2016 OM1.12 Draft Annual Budget 2017/ THAT the report from the Democracy Advisor dated 8 November 2016 and titled Draft Annual Budget be received. 2. THAT it be recommended to the Long Term and Annual Plan Committee that the Omokoroa Community Board Draft Annual Budget be: A Page 1

11 Date Subject November 2016 Open Session Recommendatory Report from Omokoroa Community Board - Draft Annual Budget Rerating Q;.. :;:~!?O~~;,,i; 2Q~2 202~.f Costs Conference 0 Expenses Contin_g_ency 5,000 Grants 5,000 Mileage 2,000 Allowance Salaries Inter Department Charges TOTAL OPERATING COSTS :.w Determined by Remuneration Authority Determined by Overhead Cost Allocation li'i!i'.,n.,zi.' ~F 202s fi,,; ' ii~; )! "' ~s 3. THAT this report relates to issues which are considered of low significance in terms of Council's Policy on Significance. Staff Comments - Chief Financial Officer Staff support the recommendation in accordance with the report titled Draft Annual Budget as considered by the Omokoroa Community Board on 29 November Significance and Engagement The Local Government Act 2002 requires a formal assessment of the significance of matters and decisions in this report against Council's Significance and Engagement Policy. In making this formal assessment there is no intention to assess the importance of this item to individuals, groups, or agencies within the community and it is acknowledged that all reports have a high degree of importance to those affected by Council decisions. The Policy requires Council and its communities to identify the degree of significance attached to particular issues, proposals, assets, decisions, and activities. In terms of the Significance and Engagement Policy this decision is considered to be of low because A Page 2

12 Date Subject November 2016 Open Session Recommendatory Report from Omokoroa Community Board - Draft Annual Budget Recommendation 1. THAT the Long Term and Annual Plan Committee approves the following Annual Budget for the Omokoroa Community Board: 0Rerating >1392~ jy 2024 l x 202~1j[l Costs Conference 0 Expenses Contingency 5,000 Grants 5,000 Mileage 2,000 Allowance Salaries Inter Department Charges TOTAL OPERATING COSTS <> ~- ;; ' ',p Determined by Remuneration Authority Determined by Overhead Cost Allocation 2. THAT the report relates to an issue that is considered to be of low significance in terms of Council's Significance and Engagement Policy. A Page 3

13 Date Subject November Open Session Recommendatory Report from Kat ikati Community Board - Draft Annual Budget Western Bay of Plenty District Council Long Term and Annual Plan Committee Recommendatory Report from Katikati Community Board - Draft Annual Budget Summary The Long Term and Annual Plan Committee is req uired to consider the recommendations and resolve accordingly. The following options are available to the Long Term and Annual Plan Committee and where appropriate the preferred option has been recommended. Please note the following is a recommendation only. The Long Term and Annual Plan Committee to resolve to: (a) (b) (c) (d) adopt as recommended to modify refer to another Committee to decline (giving reasons) and refer back to the Katikati Community Board. Recommendation from the Katikati Community Board - 30 November 2016 K1.12 Draft Annual Budget 2017/ THAT the report from the Democracy Advisor dated 8 November 2016 and titled Draft Annual Budget be received. 2. THAT it be recommended to the Long Term and Annual Plan Committee that the Katikati Community Board Draft Annual Budget be: A Page 1

14 Date Subject November 2016 Open Session Recommendatory Report from Katikati Community Board - Draft Annual Budget (2erating Costs Conference Expenses Contingency 14,000 Grants 8,000 Mileage 2,000 Allowance Security 2,000 Street 4,700 Decoration Salaries Determined by Remuneration Authority Inter Department Charges Determined by Overhead Costs allocated TOTAL OPERATING COSTS THAT this report relates to issues which are considered of low significance in terms of Councils Policy on Significance. Staff Comments- Chief Financial Officer Staff support the recommendation in accordance with the report titled Draft Annual Budget as considered by the Katikati Community Board on 30 November Significance and Engagement The Local Government Act 2002 requires a formal assessment of the significance of matters and decisions in this report against Council's Significance and Engagement Policy. In making this formal assessment there is no intention to assess the importance of this item to individuals, groups, or agencies within the community and it is acknowledged that all reports have a high degree of importance to those affected by Council decisions. The Policy requires Council and its communities to identify the degree of significance attached to particular issues, proposals, assets, decisions, and activities. In terms of the Significance and Engagement Policy this decision is considered to be of low because A Page 2

15 Date Subject November Open Session Recommendatory Report from Katikati Community Board - Draft Annual Budget Recommendation 1. THAT the Long Term and Annual Plan Committee approves the following Annual Budget for the Katikati Community Board: 0Rerating > Costs Conference Expenses Contingency 14,000 Grants 8,000 Mileage 2,000 Allowance Security 2,000 Street 4,700 Decoration Salaries Inter Department Charges TOTAL OPERATING COSTS '"'' Determined by Remuneration Authority Determined by Overhead Costs allocated 2. THAT the report relates to an issue that is considered to be of low significance in terms of Council's Significance and Engag ement Policy. A Page 3

16 Date Subject November 2016 Open Session Recommendatory Report from Maketu Community Board- Draft Annual Budget Western Bay of Plenty District Council Long Term and Annual Plan Committee Recommendatory Report from Maketu Community Board - Draft Annual Budget Summary The Long Term and Annual Plan Committee is required to consider the recommendations and resolve accordingly. The following options are available to the Long Term and Annual Plan Committee and where appropriate the preferred option has been recommended. Please note the following is a recommendation only. The Long Term and Annual Plan Committee to resolve to: (a) (b) (c) (d) adopt as recommended to modify refer to another Committee to decline (giving reasons) and refer back to the Maketu Community Board. Recommendation from the Maketu Community Board - 6 December 2016 MC1.12 Draft Annual Budget 2017/ THAT the report from the Democracy Advisor dated 8 November 2016 and titled Draft Annual Budget be received. 2. THAT it be recommended to the Long Term and Annual Plan Committee that the Maketu Community Board Draft Annual Budget be: A Page 1

17 Date Subject November 2016 Open Session Recommendatory Report from Maketu Community Board - Draft Annual Budget Rerating !2021 "'2022 ) -; Costs )) v By Law 0 Enforcement Contingency 17,000 Grants 5,000 Mileage 1,000 Allowance Security 2,000 Salaries Determined by Remuneration Authority Inter Department Charges Determined by Overhead Costs Allocated TOTAL OPERATING COSTS 3. THAT this report relates to issues which are considered of low significance in terms of Council's Policy on Significance. Staff Comments - Chief Financial Officer Staff support the recommendation in accordance with the report titled Draft Annual Budget as considered by the Maketu Community Board on 6 December Significance and Engagement The Local Government Act 2002 requires a formal assessment of the significance of matters and decisions in this report against Council's Significance and Engagement Policy. In making this formal assessment there is no intention to assess the importance of this item to individuals, groups, or agencies within the community and it is acknowledged that all reports have a high degree of importance to those affected by Council decisions. The Policy requires Council and its communities to identify the degree of significance attached to particular issues, proposals, assets, decisions, and activities. In terms of the Significance and Engagement Policy this decision is considered to be of low because A Page 2

18 Date Subject November 2016 Open Session Recommendatory Report from Maketu Community Board- Draft Annual Budget Recommendation 1 1. THAT the Long Term and Annual Plan Committee approves the following Annual~:...:;,... ~ for the Maketu r,.....,ity Board: 0Rerating ~ ,: Costs 9 i10thw cia 20~~~ ::'2~~ By Law 0 Enforcement Contingency 17,000 Grants 5,000 Mileage 1,000 Allowance Securiq 2,000 Salaries Inter Department Charges TOTAL OPERATING COSTS Determined by Remuneration Authority Determined by Overhead Costs Allocated 2. THAT the report relates to an issue that is considered to be of low significance in terms of Council's Significance and Engagement Policy... ~... ful:x~... Ai! naity ~ Democra Advisor A Page 3

19 Date Subject November 2016 Open Session Recommendatory Report from Te Puke Community Board - Draft Annual Budget Western Bay of Plenty District Council Long Term and Annual Plan Committee Recommendatory Report from Te Puke Community Board - Draft Annual Budget Summary The Long Term and Annual Plan Committee is required to consider the recommendations and resolve accordingly. The following options are available to the Long Term and Annual Plan Committee and where appropriate the preferred option has been recommended. Please note the following is a recommendation only. The Long Term and Annual Plan Committee to resolve to: (a) (b) (c) (d) adopt as recommended to modify refer to another Committee to decline (giving reasons) and refer back to the Te Puke Community Board. Recommendation from the Te Puke Community Board - 8 December 2016 WB1.12 Draft Annual Budget 2017/ THAT the report from the Democracy Advisor dated 8 November 2016 and titled Draft Annual Budget be received. 2. THAT it be recommended to the Long Term and Annual Plan Committee that the Te Puke Community Board Draft Annual Budget be: A Page 1

20 Date Subject November 2016 Open Session Recommendatory Report from Te Puke Community Board - Draft Annual Budget erating Costs Conference Expenses , Contingency 7,000 Grants 11,000 Mileage 2,000 Allowance Security 2,000 Street 10,000 Decoration Salaries Determined by Remuneration Authority Inter Department Charges Determined by Overhead Costs Allocated TOTAL OPERATING COSTS 3. THAT this report relates to issues which are considered of low significance in terms of Council's Policy on Significance. Staff Comments - Chief Financial Officer Staff support the recommendation in accordance with the report titled Draft Annual Budget as considered by the Te Puke Community Board on 8 December Significance and Engagement The Local Government Act 2002 requires a formal assessment of the significance of matters and decisions in this report against Council's Significance and Engagement Policy. In making this formal assessment there is no intention to assess the importance of this item to individuals, groups, or agencies within the community and it is acknowledged that all reports have a high degree of importance to those affected by Council decisions. The Policy requires Council and its communities to identify the degree of significance attached to particular issues, proposals, assets, decisions, and activities. In terms of the Significance and Engagement Policy this decision is considered to be of low because A Page 2

21 Date Subject November Open Session Recommendatory Report from Te Puke Community Board - Draft Annual Budget Recommendation 1. THAT the Long Term and Annual Plan Committee approves the following Annual Budget for the Te Puke Community Board: Operating Costs L';:!~@ :n Conference 2,000 Expenses Contingency 7,000 Grants 11,000 Mileage 2,000 Allowance Security 2,000 Street 10,000 Decoration Salaries Determined by Remuneration Authority Inter Department Charges Determined by Overhead Costs Allocated TOTAL OPERATING COSTS 2024 t i\~~:25 2. THAT the report relates to an issue that is considered to be of low significance in terms of Council's Significance and Engagement Policy. A Page 3

22 Date Subject March 2017 Open Session Recommendatory Report from Katikati Community Board March Service Delivery Contractor for Katch Katikati Western Bay of Plenty District Council Long Term and Annual Plan Committee Recommendatory Report from the Katikati Community Board - March 2017 Service Delivery Contract for Katch Katikati Summary The Long Term and Annual Plan Committee is required to consider the recommendations and resolve accordingly. The following options are available to Long Term and Annual Plan Committee and where appropriate the preferred option has been recommended. Please note the following is a recommendation only. The Long Term and Annual Plan Committee to resolve to: (a) (b) (c) (d) adopt as recommended to modify refer to another Committee to decline (giving reasons) and refer back to the Katikati Community Board Recommendation from the Katikati Community Board - 15 March 2017 K3.3.5 Service Delivery Contract - Katch Katikati The Board reaffirmed their support of the work undertaken by Katch Katikati in their promotion of Katikati and would like to see an increase in the current Service Delivery Contract for Katch Katikati to include costs for recurring functions that had been funded (at the request of Katch Katikati) by the Board (from their Contingency Account) in the past on an annual or bi-annual basis. They include: the annual Community Christmas Variety the annual ECHO Walking and the bi-annual funding of the Katikati & Waihi Beach Community Business $6, A Page 1

23 Date Subject March 2017 Open Session Recommendatory Report from Katikati Community Board March Service Delivery Contractor for Katch Katikati The Chief Executive Officer advised the Board to make a recommendation to the Long Term and Annual Plan Committee to consider a minor adjustment to the Annual Plan in regard to this item. Resolved: Member Warren I Councillor Mackay THAT the Katikati Community Board recommend to the Long Term and Annual Plan Committee that the Service Delivery Contract funding allocation for Katch Katikati be increased to include annual and bi-annual functions and events costs up to $8, and that the Katikati Community Board decrease their Contingency Account accordingly. Staff Comments- Chief Finance Officer The proposed increase would result in the Katch Katikati rates increasing from; $6.19 to $7.19 for all properties in the area of benefit; and $ to $ for all properties zoned commercial or industrial in the area of benefit. The proposed reduction of the Katikati Community Board budget of $8,500 would reduce the Community Board rate from $22.40 to $20.34 per property in the area of benefit. 1. Significance and Engagement The Local Government Act 2002 requires a formal assessment of the significance of matters and decisions in this report against Council's Significance and Engagement Policy. In making this formal assessment there is no intention to assess the importance of this item to individuals, groups, or agencies within the community and it is acknowledged that all reports have a high degree of importance to those affected by Council decisions. The Policy requires Council and its communities to identify the degree of significance attached to particular issues, proposals, assets, decisions, and activities. In terms of the Significance and Engagement Policy this decision is considered to be of low significance because the decision enables Katch Katikati to deliver services without additional request for funding from the Katikati Community Board. A Page 2

24 Date Subject March 2017 Open Session Recommendatory Report from Katikati Community Board March Service Delivery Contractor for Katch Katikati Recommendation 1. THAT the Long Term and Annual Plan Committee agree to the suggested increased funding allocation for the Katch Katikati Service Delivery Contract of $8, to met the costs for regular annual and bi-annual functions and events and that the Katikati Community Board Contingency Account be decreased accordingly. 2. THAT the report relates to an issue that is considered to be of low significance in terms of Council's Significance and Engagement Policy. g\ Aile~n ~ lty ~~!l~-\ Democracy Advisor ' A Page 3

25 Date Subject May 2017 Open Session Bay of Plenty Film Trust - Funding Request Western Bay of Plenty District Council Long Term and Annual Plan Committee Recommendatory Report from Council Bay of Plenty Film Trust- Funding Request Summary The Committee is required to consider the recommendations and resolve accordingly. The following options are available to the Long Term and Annual Plan Committee and where appropriate the preferred option has been recommended. Please note the following is a recommendation only. The Committee to resolve to: a. adopt as recommended b. to modify c. refer to another Committee d. to decline (giving reasons) and refer back to the <<Council I Committee >> Recommendation from Council CS -18 May 2017 C5.7 Bay of Plenty Film Trust - Funding Request Council considered a report from the Strategic Advisor dated 26 April 2017 as circulated with the agenda. Anton Steel representing the Bay of Plenty Film Trust was in attendance for this item. In response to a question he advised that he believed that Rotorua District Council were likely to approve their portion of the funding. It was noted that this item would need to be referred to the Long Term and Annual Plan Committee as it was a matter for the budget in the first year. Resolved: Murray-Benge I Dally 1. THAT the Strategic Advisor's report dated 26 April 2017 and titled Bay of Plenty Film Trust - Funding Requesc be received. 2. THAT the report relates to an issue that is considered to be of low significance in terms of Council's Significance and Engagement Policy. 3. THAT funding to the Bay of Plenty Film Trust is recommended to the Long Term and Annual Plan Committee for approval as follows: A Page 1

26 Date Subject May Open Session Bay of Plenty Film Trust- Funding Request Year /18 financial year - $1~200 from General Rate Rese!Ve Years 2 and /19 and 2019/20- agreement in principle for $1~200 plus GST; to be funded by District Rates (Uniform Annual General Charge) subject to: satisfactory progress by BOP Film Trust reasonable expectations of support from other funders to fund years 2 and 3 decision-making through the Long Term Plan process and the 2019/20 Annual Plan process. Staff Comments- Strategic Advisor Staff support the recommendation in accordance with the report titled Bay of Plenty Film Trust- Funding Request as considered by Council on 18 May Recommendation 1. THAT funding to the Bay of Plenty Film Trust be approved for inclusion in the Annual Plan as follows: Year /18 financial year- $18,200 from General Rate Reserve And Years 2 and /19 and 2019/20- agreement in principle for $18,200 plus GST, to be funded by District Rates (Uniform Annual General Charge) subject to: satisfactory progress by BOP Film Trust reasonable expectations of support from other funders to fund years 2and3 decision-making through the Long Term Plan process and the 2019/20 Annual Plan process. 2. THAT the report relates to an issue that is considered to be of low significance in terms of Council's Significance and Engagement Policy.. ~ I ~~ ~~:a- Fleur Sweeney Democracy Mana ment Advisor A Page 2

27 Date Subject May 2017 Open Session Recommendatory Report from Community Committee - Surf Lifesaving - Service Delivery Contract Western Bay of Plenty District Council Long Term and Annual Plan Committee Recommendatory Report from Community Committee - Surf Lifesaving - Service Delivery Contract Summary The Long Term and Annual Plan Committee is required to consider the recommendations and resolve accordingly. The following options are available to the Long Term and Annual Plan Committee and where appropriate the preferred option has been recommended. Please note the following is a recommendation only. The Long Term and Annual Plan Committee to resolve to: a. adopt as recommended b. to modify c. refer to another Committee d. to decline (giving reasons) and refer back to the Community Committee Recommendation from the Community Committee (CC2) - 16 March 2017 CC2.3 Surf Lifesaving - Service Delivery Contract The Community Committee considered a report from the Community Relationship Advisor dated 1 March 2017 as circulated with the agenda. Chris Emmett, Regional Manager of Surf Lifesaving New Zealand was in attendance to update the committee as a requirement of the service delivery contract and to request a funding increase within the contract. Mr Emmett spoke to a powerpoint presentation. In response to questions, Mr Emmett explained: Incidents recorded in Pukehina were largely due to people not reading the tides correctly and the impact of the weather on the Pukehina Bar. Surf Lifesaving involved both reactive rescue and proactive action to prevent situations that required rescue. Surf Lifesaving received the bulk of their funding from the Western Bay of Plenty District Council and some funding from the Bay of Plenty Regional Council. A Page 1

28 Date Subject May 2017 Open Session Recommendatory Report from Community Committee Surf Lifesaving - Service Delivery Contract Surf Lifesaving had approached other local councils in the area whose residents frequented the Western Bay of Plenty beach to get funding from them and had been declined. There was a current project looking at a rapid access road to the beach in Bowentown that could potentially be shared with the coastguard. 90% of the increase requested by Surf Lifesaving was to go towards wages Resolved: Mackay I Williams 1. THAT the Community Relationship Advisor's report dated 27 February 2017 and titled ''Surf Life Saving New Zealand- Community Service Delivery Contract" be received. 2. THAT the report relates to an issue that is considered to be of low significance in terms of Council's Significance and Engagement Policy. 3. THAT it be recommended to the Long Term and Annual Plan Committee that an increase of $10,000 for the financial year 2017/2018 be made to the Surf Life Saving New Zealand Service Delivery Contract, and that it be recommended that in 2017 there be negotiations with Bay of Plenty Regional Council made to share the costs of supporting Surf Lifesaving more equitably. Staff Comments - Community Relationships Advisor Staff support the recommendation in accordance with the report titled Surf Life Saving New Zealand - Community Service Delivery Contract as considered by the Community Committee on 16 March Recommendation 1. THAT the Long Term and Annual Plan Committee recommend to Council an increase of$10,000 for the financial year 2017/2018 be made to the Surf Life Saving New Zealand Service Delivery Contract. 2. THAT the report relates to an issue that is considered to be of low significance in terms of Council's Significance and Engagement Policy. Michelle Parnell Democracy Advisor A Page 2

29 29 Annual Plan Contents Internal Submissions & Issues and Options Papers Item Title Page No. 01 Transportation Omokoroa Industrial Road LED Street Light Conversion Utilities Re-budgets Katikati Wastewater Treatment Plant Renewals Omokoroa Stormwater Renewals Stormwater Network Modelling Oropi Hall Rate Katikati Library and Community Hub Reserves & Facilities IT and IS Projects and ALOS Re-Budgets Information Centres Animal Shelters 127 Since the Annual Plan workshop held on 25 May 2017 the following Internal Submissions & Issues and Options Papers have been revised: - Transportation - Omokoroa Industrial Road - LED Streetlight Conversion - Oropi Hall - Reserves & Facilities Please note: that the Internal Submission & Issues and Options Paper for Fairview Estate - Reduction in Recreation & Leisure Financial Contribution will be sent separately.

30 Annual Plan Internal Submissions & Issues and Options Paper Reference Number Description Topic Transportation Issue Transport project re-budgets from 2017 to 2018 and 2019 Project No Multiple As per attached list Related strategies Submission & Staff Comment Staff support option 1 30 General Ledger Job Project Amount Re budget from 2017 to *02* The Omokoroa structure plan works are part of the Omokoroa Road upgrade funding package. The project is spread over two years. Omokoroa Roading SP Walkway and Cycling - Catchment Ref X *02* Omokoroa Structure Plan Works Require for structure plan implementation. 30*02* Strategic Roading - SH2, Rangiuru industrial roading link, mid block connection Rangiuru industrial roading link Development timing by Quayside is still uncertain. 200, ,000 68,500 Total Re budget from 2017 to ,500 Re budget from 2017 to *02* Eastern Arterial road These funds were spent in 2016/17 on Te Puke Highway upgrading and are therefore not required /18.. (500,000) Re budget from 2018 to *02* Eastern Arterial road (Prev: ) - JOG TEM balance of funding for Te Puke Highway upgrading. 30*02* Waihi Beach Roading SP - RD 22 Waihi Beach Road upgrade. Timing will relate to a project that requires a NZTA Business Case in order to receive subsidy. 300,000 1,554,626 1,854,626 1,154,626 Total Re budget from 2017 and 2018 to 2019 Options 1 Approve the re-budgeting of the transportation projects as listed. 2 Do not approve re-budgeting recommendation.

31 31 Option 1: Approve re-budget recommendation Advantages Deliver approved Annual Plan project works Provision of network improvement for road user benefits Meet Long Term Plan commitments Increase NZTA financial assistance income Improve network and road safety Support economic and land use development. Option 1 Implications for Work Programme/Budgets y/e June 2017/18 $000 Capital cost Capex funding Rates Fin Contribution External Other (specify) Opex cost Opex funding Rates External Other (specify) 2018/19 $ ,500 1,354, /20 $ /21 $ /22 $ /23 $000 Disadvantages Do not deliver approved Annual Plan project works. 2023/24 $ /25 $000 Comments

32 32 Option 2: Do not approve re-budgeting recommendation Advantages Expenditure reduction Rates surpluses will accumulate into the roading current account. Option 2 Implications for Work Programme/Budgets No financial impact Disadvantages Does not deliver annual plan expectations as consulted with the community Loss of NZTA financial assistance income Does not spend collected roading rates Loss of network improvement benefits.

33 33 Recommended Decision (to be completed by staff prior to decision-making meeting) THAT the re-budgeting of the transportation projects as listed be approved. General Ledger Job Amount Re budget from 2017 to *02* ,000 30*02* ,000 30*02* ,500 Total Re budget from 2017 to ,500 Re budget from 2017 to *02* ,000 Re budget from 2018 to *02* ,000 30*02* ,554,626 1,854,626 1,354,626. Decision (To be completed in the decision making meeting) Reason (To be completed in the decision making meeting)

34 Annual Plan Internal Submissions & Issues and Options Paper Reference Number Description Topic Omokoroa Industrial Road Issue Project No Related strategies Submission & Staff Comment 34 To bring forward the timing of the design and consenting of the Omokoroa Industrial Road of $100,000 from 2019/20 to 2017/18. The construction timing remains in 2019/20 and will be reviewed in the Long Term Plan. This will enable development of the industrial area and access to the proposed Greenwaste recycling area. Construction of the road will assist in the resolution of adjoining landowner concerns over reverse sensitivity and compliance issues. Note: Council already owns a 20m wide strip from proposed intersection at Omokoroa Road over the full length. There is potential to stage the construction project based on demand. Note: Consideration should be given to acquiring the industrial property. Length of road (from intersection on Omokoroa Road to end) = $4,000/m = $1,600,000. (note reduction to 13m wide in 20m corridor) Water Supply = $250/m = $113,750 Waste water = $240/m = $109,200 Stormwater (incl manholes and connections) = $400/m = $182,000 Total = $2,005,000 The budget is currently based on unit rates as a design has not yet been undertaken. The project is split over several years to enable design, consenting and land owner agreement to occur in Year 1. $100,000. Following design, the decision could be made to construct in two stages to reduce the initial cost. This will depend on development demand. The industrial financial contribution will need to be reviewed, re-setup and agreed by the property owners. Options 1. THAT Council approve bringing forward a budget of $100,000 for design and consenting of the Omokoroa Industrial Road from 2019/20 to 2017/ THAT Council does not approve bringing forward the budget of $100,000 for the design and consenting of the Omokoroa Industrial Road from 2019/20 to 2017/18.

35 35 Option 1: THAT Council approve bringing forward a budget of $100,000 for design and consenting of the Omokoroa Industrial Road from 2019/2020 to 2017/18. Advantages Disadvantages To facilitate the design of the industrial Road on Council s existing Additional Industrial land will not be available to meet current growth land, enabling expansion of the current industrial zone. predictions. Option 1 Implications for Work Programme/Budgets y/e June 2017/ / / / /22 $000 $000 $000 $000 $000 Capital 100 1,905 cost Capex funding Rates Fin Contribution 100 1,905 External Other (specify) Opex cost Opex funding Rates Fin Contribution 2022/23 $ /24 $ /25 $000 Interest costs Comments

36 36 Option 2: THAT Council does not approve bringing forward a budget of $100,000 for design and consenting of the Omokoroa Industrial Road from 2019/2020 to 2017/18. Advantages Disadvantages Debt not incurred. Delays development of the industrial area. Option 2 Implications for Work Programme/Budgets No financial impact

37 37 Recommended Decision THAT Council approve bringing forward a budget of $100,000 for design and consenting of the Omokoroa Industrial Road from 2019/20 to 2017/18. Decision (To be completed in the decision making meeting) Reason (To be completed in the decision making meeting)

38 Annual Plan Internal Submissions & Issues and Options Paper Reference Number Description Topic LED Streetlight Conversion Issue Project No LED Streetlight Conversion Related strategies Submission & Staff Comment LED Streetlight Conversion Issue: To take advantage of a temporary NZTA subsidy of 85% to invest in converting street lights to LED and recover costs through savings in operational costs. Introduction Council owns and operates approximately 2500 streetlights on local roads. Close to 100 of these are LED due to recent light conversions and vesting with new subdivisions in accordance with our Development Code. Installation of LED lights reduces power consumption by 60% when replacing the standard High Pressure Sodium (HPS) lights due to their efficiency in converting energy into light and as a result of reduced wastage of upward light. Power costs are not reduced in proportion to the reduction of energy, because a substantial component of the power cost is in the line charges and profit set by the Commerce Commission. These charges are effectively fixed notwithstanding the reduction of power consumption. Operation Power supply charges are in the order of $200,000 per year. This includes energy and line charges. Energy makes up $90,000 and the balance of $110,000 is line charges. The savings can only be derived from the energy costs, that is, 60% of $90,000 gives total power savings of $54,000 per year. This is subsidised so the power saving to Council is $27,000 per year. Subsidised maintenance costs of light fittings are included in the lump sum of the road maintenance contract. This includes pole and light replacements, accident and vandal damage, inspections and repairs. These costs amount to around $300,000 per year. Assuming a 1/3 saving, the total maintenance saving amounts to $100,000 per year, and taking into account NZTA subsidy, Council s maintenance saving Council s portion of this cost amounts to $50,000 per year. Total annual savings amount to $154,000 of which $77,000 is a saving of Council rates.

39 39 Capital Total of 2,400 conversions including professional services at $1,100 each: Total cost $2,640,000. Miscellaneous improvements, pole replacements and professional fees total $400,000. Council s capital outlay in rates for the conversion is 85% of the total cost of $3,040,000 being $456,000. Other factors to consider: 1. LED lights will reduce energy consumption noting however that most of New Zealand electricity grid power is derived from renewable resources. 2. Our stock of street lights is ageing and will need replacing over the next 5 to 15 years for asset management purposes. The maintenance contract allows the contractor to replace unserviceable lights with used lights. This specification provides savings in operation costs, but is based on the assumption that at some time during or after the contract a district wide conversion to LED would become economic. 3. Smart Control or Central Management System (CMS) is an option Council may consider but is not recommended. Sensors dim or turn lights on and off so they are only used when they are needed, and lights are centrally controlled and automatically provide operation information to a central control panel. The concept can help reduce our energy consumption and addresses public safety concerns to promote sustainability, resiliency and quality of life. However the technology is new and expensive, and is not recommended in this business case. This option will increase the capital outlay by 20%, that is $715,200 and extend the payback period to 16 years. It is relatively new technology and its reliability in NZ is untested. 4. Further information is to be found in the Price Waterhouse Coopers document Assessing the potential cost savings from accelerating the roll-out of LED road lights. See Attachment 1 5. Replacement of non standard decorative lights may incur some additional cost. Next Steps: Council is required to present a business case to NZTA to secure the subsidy for the conversion. NZTA will review Council s stock in terms of its type, age and condition before confirming the investment of their subsidy. Options 1 That the street and flag lights be converted to LED lights at an estimated cost of $3,040,000. NZTA subsidy $2,584,000 Roading Current Account 456,000 Total $3,040,000 2 That the existing street lights are not converted to LED s and Council does not take advantage of the 85% subsidy.

40 40 Option 1: That the street and flag lights be converted to LED lights at an estimated cost of $3,040,000. NZTA subsidy $2,584,000 Roading Current Account 456,000 Total $3,040,000 Advantages Payback within 9 years. Ongoing savings. Reduces future costs for light replacement. Energy efficient. Disadvantages Capital outlay. Option 1 Implications for Work Programme/Budgets y/e June 2017/ / / /21 $000 $000 $000 $000 Capital 2021/22 $ /23 $ /24 $ /25 $000 Comments 3,040 Total Capital outlay for LED conversion cost Capex funding Rates 456 Current account Fin Contribution External 2,584 NZTA Capital outlay for LED conversion Other (specify) Opex cost Total annual savings NZTA and Council Opex funding Rates Rates annual savings External NZTA annual savings - Other (specify)

41 41 Option 2: That the existing street lights are not converted to LED s and Council does not take advantage of the 85% subsidy. Advantages No capital outlay. Option 2 Implications for Work Programme/Budgets y/e June 2017/ / / / /22 $000 $000 $000 $000 $000 Capital cost Capex funding Rates Fin Contribution External Other (specify) Opex cost Opex funding Rates External Other (specify) 2022/23 $000 Disadvantages No savings Temporary 85% subsidy may not be available in the future. Energy saving not achieved. 2023/24 $ /25 $000 No change No Change Comments

42 42 Recommended Decision (to be completed by staff prior to decision-making meeting) That the street and flag lights be converted to LED lights at an estimated cost of $3,040,000. NZTA subsidy $2,584,000 Roading Current Account 456,000 Total $3,040,000 Decision (To be completed in the decision making meeting) Reason (To be completed in the decision making meeting)

43 www. pwc.co.nz 43 Energy Efficiency and Conservation Authority 28 October 2014 pwc

44 44 pwc Terry Collins Energy Efficiency and Conservation Authority LevelS 44 The Terrace Wellington, October 2014 Assessing the potential cost savings from accelerating the roll-out of LED road lights Dear Terry In accordance with the Contract for Services dated 10 October 2014, we attach our report on the potential cost savings from accelerating the roll-out of LED road lights. Please do not hesitate to contact us if you would like to discuss any aspect of this draft report Our report should be read in conjunction with the important notice set out in appendix A. Kind regards Richard Forgan Engagement Partner T: (64) PricewaterhouseCoopers, The Terrace, PO Box 243, Wellington 6140, New Zealand T: , F: , pwc.co.nz

45 45 Draft for comment -strictly confidential Table of contents Table of contents Executive summary Introduction Findings and recommendations Economic case for adopting LED technology for road lighting Road Controlling Authorities' intentions to roll out LED road lights Strategic reasons for intervening in the roll-out of LED road lights Assessing potential cost savings from a targeted intervention Appendix A Important notice Appendix B Characteristics of survey respondents PwC Page i

46 46 Executive summary Over the next decade, Road Controlling Authorities (RCA) and the New Zealand Transport Agency (NZTA) expect to replace most of the road lights they own with lights based on light emitting diode (LED) technology. LED road lights are expected to deliver road lighting at a lower whole-of-life cost than current road lights, while performing better. Around 2% of the around 370,0000 road lights in New Zealand use LED technology. The Energy Efficiency and Conservation Authority (EECA) and NZTA, the co-sponsors of this project, have asked PwC to assess whether there are strategic and economic reasons for intervening in the roll-out of LED road lights. Mainfindings The main findings from our analysis are that: LED road lights are expected to deliver road lighting at a lower whole-of-life cost than current road lights. Over the next decade most road lights in New Zealand are expected to be replaced by road lights using LED technology. There is not a strong case for using crown funding to accelerate the roll-out of LED road lights. However, there is likely to be a valuable role for EECA and NZTA for targeted interventions such as providing advice to RCAs to ensure the roll-out occurs at the lowest cost to rate payers. A comparison of the cash flows under business-as-usual and an EECA intervention scenario shows that an intervention (involving 97,000 road lights) may deliver cost savings of up to net present value$7.5 million over 20 years. The estimate assumes that these savings are: the result of a 15% bulk discount on the purchase price of LED luminaires; and installation cost savings of 5%. Recommendations Based on our findings we recommend that: EECA and NZTA continue providing support to RCAs (for example by providing advice to RCA in developing business cases). EECA and NZTA consider which types of targeted interventions are likely to be effective in promoting the roll-out of LED road lights. PwC Page 2

47 47 1. Introduction Over the next decade, Road Controlling Authorities and NZTA expect to replace most of the road lights they own with lights based on LED technology. LED road lights are expected to deliver road lighting at a lower whole-of-life cost than current road lights, while performing better. Around 2% of the approximately 370,0000 road lights in New Zealand currently use LED technology. 1 The EECA and NZTA, the co-sponsors of this project, have asked PwC to assess whether there are strategic and economic reasons for intervening in the roll-out of LED road lights, so as to accelerate the adoption of this technology. The purpose of this report is to: summarise the economic case for adopting LED technology for road lighting provide an overview of the stated intentions of RCAs to roll out LED road lights set out potential strategic reasons for intervening in the roll-out of LED road lights assess the potential from a targeted intervention to increase the economic benefit from the roll-out of LED road lighting above which will occur without such an intervention. Process for developing this report We developed this report based on discussions with stakeholders of LED road lighting, desktop research and economic modelling. As part of the work for this report we: reviewed and assessed reports, technical information and cost modelling provided to us by EECA andnzta reviewed information published by larger New Zealand cities to assess their investment plans for road lighting held weekly meetings with EECA to discuss emerging ideas and progress agreed the inputs used in our economic modelling with NZTA and EECA discussed LED related issues and received feedback on key findings of our work from EECA, NZTA, Auckland Transport, and the Ministry of Business, Innovation, and Employment. 1 Source: EECA and Lighting Council NZ. PwC Page 3

48 48 2. Findings and recommendations In this chapter we set out the main findings and recommendations from the analysis in this report. In the remainder of this report we explain how we have reached these findings and recommendations. Main findings The main findings from our analysis are that: LED road lights are expected to deliver road lighting at a lower whole-of-life cost than current road lights. Over the next decade most road lights in New Zealand are expected to be replaced by road lights using LED technology. There is not a strong case for using Crown funding to accelerate the roll-out of LED road lights. However, there is likely to be a valuable role for EECA and NZTA for targeted interventions such as providing advice to RCAs to ensure the roll-out occurs at the lowest cost to rate payers. A comparison of the cash flows under business-as-usual and an EECA intervention scenario shows that an intervention (involving 97,000 road lights) may deliver cost savings of up to net present value$7.5 million over 20 years. The estimate assumes that these savings are the result of a 15% bulk discount on the purchase price of LED luminaires, and installation cost savings of 5%. Recommendations Based on our findings we recommend that: EECA and NZTA continue providing support to RCAs (for example by providing advice to RCAs in developing business cases). EECA and NZTA consider which types of targeted intervention are likely to be effective in promoting the roll-out of LED road lights. PwC Page4

49 49 3 Economic case for adopting LED technology for road lighting Findings LED road lights are expected to deliver road lighting at a lower whole-of-life cost than current road lights. In this section we summarise the economic case for adopting LED technology for road lighting. Cost structure of providing road lighting The cost of road lighting depends on a range of factors, including: the number of road lights needed to provide the quality of lighting required the characteristics of the network of roads for which road lighting is provided; this determines the performance characteristics of the road lights that are required to deliver the desired quality of road lighting to major roads, footpaths, etc the condition of the road lights currently in operation; the condition affects the amount of maintenance, renewal and enhancement expenditure needed to provide similar or better levels of lighting service to road users the road lighting technology used; most current road lights in New Zealand use high pressure sodium (HPS) lights but there is broad agreement that LED is the technology that will replace HPS as the main technology operating characteristics, such as the number of hours of operation the purchase cost of road lights, the cost of electricity, and the costs of installing and maintaining the lights. LED technology reduces the whole-of-life cost of road lighting LED technology provides road lighting services at a lower whole-of-life cost than HPS technology. This means that when considering all the capital, operating and maintenance costs associated with providing road lighting over a representative period to a required level of quality, LED based road lights are cheaper than HPS based road lights. Whole-of-life cost of road lighting In figure 3.1 below we compare the whole-oflife-cost of a representative LED and a HPS light-bulb representative of New Zealand road lighting needs. We have estimated these costs as the weighted average of the operating and capital cost offour types of light bulbs. We used their current estimated use in New Zealand roads as weighting factors. The figures are the discounted cashflow of operating and capital costs over 20 years. The illustration shows that the whole-of-life cost of LED road lights is around 20% lower than that of HPS technology. This difference is made up of almost so% lower energy use charges by the LED light (ie the combination of wholesale electricity prices and retail prices) PwC Page 5