Keeping. on track K E E P I N G O N T R A C K K E Y I S S U E S : C O N S U L T A T I O N D O C U M E N T. Key issues

Transcription

1 LONG TERM PLAN Keeping K E E P I N G on track C O N S U L T A T I O N D O C U M E N T O N T R A C K Long Consultation Term Plan Document K E Y I S S U E S : Earthquake debt Earthquake-prone buildings Footpath maintenance Road funding Amberley swimming pool Key issues - Earthquake debt - Earthquake-prone buildings - Footpath maintenance - Road funding - Amberley swimming pool Submissions close 6 May submissions@hurunui.govt.nz Phone: S U B M I S S I O N S C L O S E 6 M A Y

2 What is a Long Term Plan? The issues we re facing Every three years your Council is required to draw up a plan for the following ten years. This is called the Long Term Plan or LTP. Part of the process of developing this LTP is consultation with our community over the issues that your council is facing. We carry out various consultations throughout each year, but the formal LTP consultation is a special opportunity for you to submit on our proposals before they are finalised. The LTP is always a balancing act. Its a balance between all the things our community would like us to do (seal roads, build a swimming pool, have perfect water, etc.) and how much the community is prepared to pay (in rates and other charges). All services have to be paid for, either by raising new funds or by cutting back on other services. In this consultation document we have set out options for the most significant issues facing the district, to show how they could be funded. We have set out three options for each issue, including the Council s preferred option, but this is not set in concrete. Your feedback on these options is invited and will be properly considered by the Council before a final Long Term Plan is published. This is YOUR plan, just as much as it is the Council s plan. So please examine the issues and the options and let us know what you think. That way we will achieve a Long Term Plan that will keep the Hurunui on track for a great future. Contents: - What is a Long Term Plan? p.2 - The issues we are facing p Earthquake debt p Earthquake-prone buildings.... p Footpath maintenance p Road funding p Amberley swimming pool..... p.12 - Rating changes p.15 - Where your rates go p.17 - Infrastructure strategy p.18 - Financial strategy p.20 - Future projects p.22 - Auditor s report p.24 - How to have your say p.27 Principles that guide our planning Our mission: To promote the well-being of Hurunui people, businesses, visitors and environment by providing planning, infrastructure and services that are efficient, effective and appropriate to our Hurunui community. Our vision: Hurunui is a contented and prosperous community. Focus Areas 1. One Hurunui: Strengthen Hurunui s identity, support communities to realise their aspirations, deliver infrastructure and services equitably across the Hurunui district, encourage the Hurunui district to work together for a successful future. This is the one Hurunui approach. 2. Growth: Facilitate appropriate and sustainable growth to attract people, businesses, services and tourists while maintaining the rural character of the Hurunui District and the individual flavour of our various townships. 3. Communication: Improve our communication to tell our stories, inform and listen to our communities, and promote the district to New Zealand. 4. Finances: Shape our financial strategy to support Hurunui s future as well as our long term objectives and plans in an affordable and sustainable manner. 5. Relationships: Build strong, productive relationships with our communities, Ngai Tahu and other key stakeholders to foster better understanding and facilitate change when it becomes necessary, and to work through contentious issues. The big issues: - Earthquake debt - Earthquake-prone buildings - Footpath maintenance - Road funding - Amberley swimming pool The next 10 years Mayor Winton Dalley The November 2016 earthquake has had a significant impact on our draft Long Term Plan. The severity of the earthquake caused devastation for many, and has had a negative financial impact on your Council and, ultimately, you as a ratepayer. Thankfully, because of our responsible approach to our financial management in the past, we consider that we are in a good position to manage the impact going forward. After receiving grants and payments from insurance, government agencies and various funding organisations, we will be left with approximately $3.2 million to fund ourselves. While much of the repair work has already been done but there is still more to do. This unexpected and unplanned debt has strongly influenced our thinking across a range of services in terms of what we can afford and the time-frame for the repayment of this debt. As a result, the overall rate increase we are proposing is higher than we had predicted in our 2015/25 Long Term Plan. To arrive at this increase, we have thoroughly explored our expenditure and debt levels, and we have reviewed the type of rates to apply (general rates versus targeted or amenity rates, capital or uniform charges, and the number of years to spread the rate over). The capital works programme for our infrastructure services has been judiciously re-assessed to balance affordability and debt, with the continued delivery of critical services. We have taken a great deal of time to critically examine our budgets to ensure that we are not placing unfair financial expectations on you, but at the same time, continue to deliver the services we have a responsibility to deliver. We believe that our resulting Long Term Plan has been well thought out and, while it deals with our unplanned new debt, it still focuses on a business as usual approach, and it also includes the major projects that we have been planning for a number of years. These include: Meeting the New Zealand Drinking Water Standards. We have been working toward this and talking to you for a number of years now and finally the work begins in earnest in year three of this plan. This costly exercise will meet legislative requirements to ensure that our water supplies are compliant. [Refer to page 20] Assessing council buildings that are earthquake prone. [Refer to Page 6] We are proposing that the road maintenance and renewal programme will have a bigger investment going forward with a proposed increased government funding contribution which is required to be matched with an increase in our local roading rate. [Refer to Page 10] Planned major footpath maintenance throughout the district. [Refer to Page 8] Continuation of stormwater and sewer improvement and maintenance programme. Build a new swimming pool in Amberley. [Refer to Page 12] Before the draft Long Term Plan was developed, the Council cultivated our own strategic direction based on what each of us considered important to us and our communities. Through this process we established a new mission, vision and objectives to focus on. We have been mindful of our strategic direction throughout the development of the Long Term Plan over 10 workshops and many meetings to carefully examine and confirm the proposals we are now seeking your feedback on. We are very keen to hear your views on these proposals and the following pages outline the issues and the proposals in more detail. The changes will affect some people more than others. Although the proposed changes will increase rates from our historically low levels, we are still confident that the Hurunui district will remain an affordable place to live and that our debt will be responsibly managed into the future. Your Council has not made a final decision on any of these matters yet. We want to hear what you have to say before we confirm our way forward, and I strongly encourage you to participate. We look forward to hearing from you. Your submission must reach us on or before Sunday 6 May 2018 Council s Strategic Direction 2 Draft Long Term Plan 2018/28 3 More LTP documents can be found at:

3 Issue 1: Earthquake debt The issue The 14 November 2016 Hurunui/Kaikoura earthquake, centred close to Waiau, had a severe impact on the Hurunui district and its residents. The consequence of the damage and subsequent repair to council owned infrastructure including roads, bridges, water pumps, pipes and buildings, will leave the Council with a debt of approximately $2.3 million as at 30 June With further work to be carried out in 2018/19 on bridges and utility assets, the debt is forecast to be $3.2 million as at 30 June The net cost of the earthquake repairs for 2018/19 will be $1,156,000. This is made up of an estimated $4,618,000 on bridges and $833,000 on water supplies, with funding from insurance process and NZTA subsidies estimated at $4,295,000. Although the majority of the earthquake damage has been assessed and repaired, calculating the exact debt balance is not possible until all of the repair work has been done. It is still possible that there is more damage that has not yet been identified, and we will continue to update our assessments of the extent of damage but based on our best information, we do not expect the final result to be far off the estimated $3.2 million. It needs to be emphasised that this our best estimate at this stage. Fortunately the Council s financial situation was solid and robust and the resulting unexpected debt is manageable. It is particularly important that we repay this debt without causing an undue additional burden to our ratepayers. We now have no choice but to use rates to pay off the earthquake debt. When considering how to do this, several factors were explored such as: Whether to add the debt to the general rate and spread the debt repayment over a longer period of time. Whether to apply a rate only to the areas and wards of the district that were most affected by the earthquake, or to rate across the entire district. We have used a targeted approach in the past to repair infrastructure damaged through severe weather events such as floods and storms, but the cost each time has been smaller. Whether to create a new rate solely for the earthquake debt for 10, 15, 20 or more years until repaid. What impact the earthquake debt and repayment period has on the Council s Debt Limits Policy and the ability to fund other core projects. After considering all of these factors, the Council s preferred option was to create a new uniform general rate across the district so that all ratepayers contribute toward the repayment of the earthquake debt. This new rate would be charged evenly across the district to minimise the cost for everyone rather than target ratepayers in specific areas. This spreads the financial burden, and recognises that at any time, any part of the district could be effected by future events which could also result in unexpected debt. Our preference was for a shorter repayment period of only 10 years to deal with it quickly but also be affordable. Cr. Geoff Shier, Amberley Last year s earthquake caused severe damage to land, buildings, infrastructure and the community s welfare. Fixing all this came at a cost. After insurance claims, support from organisations and Central Government, there is a funding shortfall and, despite a healthy financial position, we have no choice but to borrow this money. The options Option 1 (preferred) Create a new district-wide rate for earthquake debt for 10 years. This will spread the financial burden across the whole district so that everyone contributes to repaying the debt over a short period of time. A separate rate is easier for the community to track and to know when it is repaid. $62.08 per property per annum for 10 years district wide. (This would be $38.70 per property per annum if the period was extended to 20 years.) Option 2 A new targeted rate for earthquake debt. This option would apply only to the wards and areas deemed to have been affected by the earthquake. This is a difficult exercise given the indiscriminate nature of earthquakes and where damage occurs, but also place a greater financial burden on those who have suffered the most. If the earthquake impacted only on a quarter of the district, the resulting rate would be $ for 20 years. Over 10 years this would be approximately double this amount. Option 3 Increase the existing general rate for the earthquake debt. This option would be added to the general rate and charged based on the capital rate. It would not be separated to show that it relates to the earthquake. It would not be obvious to ratepayers how this debt was tracking nor why the rate had increased. $5.75 per $100,000 property capital value for 20 years. Your feedback Do you support our proposal to introduce a new district wide rate to repay the earthquake debt? Do you support our proposal to repay this debt over 10 years rather than stretch it over a longer period? If not, what do you consider to be a reasonable alternative? This will strengthen the Council s financial situation in the face of future earthquakes or catastrophes, and at the same time, continue to deliver our important capital works programme for essential infrastructure (such as roads, water and sewerage). Cost and rate impact The proposal is to establish a separate earthquake debt rate to be spread over 10 years, and at a set rate per property (uniform annual charge). The debt is estimated to be $3.2 million and the resulting rate will be $62.08 per annum per property for 10 years from the 2018/19 year. In the event that the total earthquake debt exceeds $3.2 million, the Council will re-assess the loan period and the rate payable. Earthquake repair schedule 4 5

4 Issue 2: Earthquake-prone buildings The issue In recent years, earthquake standards for buildings have been tightened up, particularly post the 2010 and 2011 Canterbury earthquakes. The Hurunui District Council owns 50 buildings throughout the district that were built before 1976 before earthquake standards were established. Of those 50, we have estimated that about 50% of them are potentially earthquake prone, according to the National Building Standard. The new legislation is still in the process of defining an earthquake prone building, but at this stage it certainly appears that we will need to address this issue within 15 years. New Zealand is categorised into areas of high, medium and low seismic risk. The timeframes for strengthening earthquake-prone buildings is 15, 25 and 35 years, depending on the seismic risk of the area. Hurunui is in the highest seismic risk zone and therefore will have shorter timeframes. The process to assess the strength of each building, identify what works are needed to bring them to the required code, complete the actual strengthening work, and to work this through on a priority basis, is lengthy and costly. The total cost has not yet been estimated, but is expected to be several million over a number of years. Please note that this work does not relate to actual earthquake damage. The cost of this is included in the earthquake debt discussed on page 4. To commence the process, the proposal is to charge a new district wide rate for earthquake prone building work. This new rate will fund the assessments, feasibility studies (where needed) and the strengthening work. The assessments will provide a fuller picture of need and cost. This will likely result in community discussions to work through some of the resulting decision making about public buildings and their future. This new legislation has a huge financial impact on the district. The Council considered whether to increase the current general rate, or to apply a targeted rate for areas according to the number of buildings in each, or to create a new rate. The Council also considered how much money would need to be collected and over what period of time, taking into account the legislative timeframes. The preferred option was for a new earthquake prone building district rate to be established. This new rate would be charged evenly across the district to minimise the cost for everyone rather than target ratepayers in specific areas. This would be phased in at a lower rate for the first five years, and increased for the following five years. This was deemed to be the most practical in light of the Council s current debt balance, the new earthquake debt and the planned works programme. It was also considered to be impractical to implement a targeted rate system when ultimately, council buildings are collectively for the benefit of the whole district rather Cr. Fiona Harris, Glenmark Public Services Committee Chair Making sure our public buildings meet earthquake standards is an expensive undertaking. I urge you to read this so that you are informed. than specified areas. The strengthening work needed for the buildings will differ depending on a range of factors such as age, materials, and the type of work needed. A targeted rate would result in a disproportionate rate for different wards or areas which could lead to unaffordability issues. Cost and rate impact The preferred proposal is to collect a total of $3,500,000 over 10 years. This would equate to $200,000 each year The options Option 1 (preferred) Create a new district-wide rate for earthquake prone buildings over a 10 year period. This will spread the financial burden across the whole district so that everyone contributes to the fund. A separate rate will clearly identify what ratepayers are paying for. $27.75 per annum per property for 5 years, increasing to $66.95 per annum per property for 5 years from 2023/24. Option 2 Apply a targeted rate to each ward to fund the earthquake-prone building work required in that ward. This would result in a different rate for different areas depending on the number of council owned buildings in each. This could result in some communities having a higher rate than others and removes the opportunity for Council to prioritise across the district with decisions made on a ward by ward basis. This option was not practical to assess until the building assessments have been undertaken and the amount of strengthening required is known. for the first five years, and increase to $500,000 per year for the remaining five years of the Long Term Plan. This would be collected as a new earthquake prone building district rate commencing from 2018/19 and amounting to: $27.75 per annum per rateable property for five years; and then increase to; $66.95 per annum per rateable property for five years from 2023/24. Option 3 Increase the existing general rate. This option would collect the $3,500,000 from properties based on the capital value. The fixed charge is preferred as it rates equally across all ratepayers for a situation that impacts on everyone equally. From 2018/19: $3.88 per $100,000 property capital value for 5 years From 2023/24: $9.70 per $100,000 property capital value for 5 years. Your feedback Do you support our proposal to introduce a new district wide rate to pay for earthquake strengthening assessments on council buildings? Do you support our proposal to stage this rate in at a lower rate for the first 5 years and then to increase it for the following 5 years? If not, what do you consider to be a reasonable alternative? Council owned earthquake prone building schedule 6 7

5 Issue 3: Footpath maintenance The issue In 2017 an extensive footpath survey was undertaken in the district to provide information about the state of our existing footpaths. No such overarching information existed previously as footpaths have always been treated as a local amenity, and decisions made about them have been made by local ward/community committees and the community board for their particular wards. The survey revealed 969 faults impacting on almost 5,500 square metres of footpaths in total. Many of these faults The options Option 1 (preferred) New Footpath Maintenance District-wide Rate A new district-wide rate to be established to rate all properties in the district for the maintenance of footpaths. 80% of the funding will be applied to the urban areas and 20% to the rural areas. A local amenity rate will be charged for capital works as has been the practice for many years. This will not be charged until at least year 4 of the LTP with any capital works being funded by existing roadside construction funds. $40.02 per urban property per annum. $8.12 per rural property per annum. Option 2 Targeted rate for Footpath Maintenance For local ward/community committees and the community board to increase the local amenity rate to include the maintenance work required for their area. This is not preferred as the work must be done and the cost on a ward basis will present affordability issues for some wards. Differs for each ward as follows: Rates per property per annum would be: Amberley Urban $32.21; Rural $15.63 Amuri Urban $103.80; Rural $9.61 Cheviot Urban $156.66; Rural $11.82 Waipara Urban $42.68; Rural $0 Hanmer Springs Urban $50.61; Rural $25.74 Hurunui Urban $78.96; Rural $10.94 are potential trip hazards. Although amenity rates are collected for footpaths, most of this fund has been aimed at expenditure for new footpaths. The survey identified maintenance work to cost an estimated $1,296,340. A number of options have been explored to work out an affordable and equitable way of bringing all of our footpaths into good order throughout the district. Discussion included exploring: Increasing the local amenity rates to include both Option 3 District wide rate for Footpath Maintenance and Capital The local amenity rate would be removed and a new district rate created instead. This would mean the removal of the footpath delegations for the local committees and board with decisions being made at the council level instead. This option was not preferred as the Council wanted to retain local input. $89.92 per urban property per annum. $18.22 per rural property per annum. Your feedback Do you support our proposal to introduce a new district wide rate to fund the maintenance work needed on footpaths? Do you support our proposal to proportion the rate at 80% for urban dwellings and 20% for rural dwellings? If not, what do you consider to be a reasonable alternative? maintenance and capital costs. This would require the local committee or board to decide what and when certain footpaths would be repaired and maintained, and where to build new footpaths. This option would also lead to some areas paying disproportionate amounts for their footpaths compared to other parts of the district depending on the number of footpaths and the condition of them. Treating all footpath work capital and maintenance as a district rate instead of a local amenity rate. The main advantage would be the ability to apply a strategic approach across the district and to have an equitable quality of footpaths in all townships. The disadvantage is that we would lose the valuable input of the local ward/community committees and the Hanmer Springs Community Board which have had the responsibility of establishing footpaths in their areas for many years. Whether or not rural ratepayers should contribute to the cost of footpaths when there are none in the rural areas. There was general agreement that there should be some contribution as all people use footpaths at some time irrespective of where people live. Creating a new district rate for footpath maintenance (and retain the capital works aspect as a local amenity). The Council has a preference for local communities to decide on new footpaths and for the maintenance plan to be managed at a Council level and charged as a district rate. It would enable efficiencies in managing the extensive maintenance programme now and in future. Footpath maintenance should be treated in a similar manner to roads. This option also respects that local committees and the community board are performing an important role in understanding their communities needs and determining affordability aspects against needs. Cost and rate impact A new district footpath maintenance rate is proposed to be established to fund all of the maintenance costs of footpaths throughout the district as well as the key trip hazard elimination works in all of the townships. A differential rate is proposed for urban and rural areas so that 80% of the rate is set as a fixed charge on the urban ratepayers and the other 20% is set as a fixed charge on rural ratepayers. To help pay for this new expenditure, the current Roadside Construction Rate applied to most Wards will be suspended for at least three years and any new or renewal work on footpath and streetlights will be funded by existing Roadside Construction Funds or as a local targeted rate from Year four of the Long Term Plan onwards. The rate impact for footpath maintenance will be $40.02 per annum per rateable urban property and $8.12 per rateable rural property commencing from 2018/19. When local ward committees or the community board build new footpaths, this will continue to be charged as a local amenity rate and will differ in each rateable area depending on plans for new footpaths. Cr. Nicky Anderson, Amuri-Hurunui Under our One Hurunui banner, we would like to see each town and village with the same level of safe, sightly and affordable footpaths. To this end, we are planning a change from having footpath maintenance funded through amenity rates, to general rates (80% urban and 20% rural ratepayer funded). Footpath maintenance plan 8 9

6 Issue 4: Road funding The issues The funding for the district s local roads comes from two main sources; rates and government funding through New Zealand Transport Agency (NZTA). Each three years, NZTA confirms the amount it will fund each council which is dependent on the road programme in place and the amount of funding available. NZTA has indicated that it will fund 51% of our roading programme for the next three years, but there are a number of issues associated with this. Firstly, NZTA will not be in a position to confirm the funding available until July This is a problem as this is after we have confirmed our budgets. The new government is setting its priorities for transport across New Zealand,and there is a risk that NZTA may not receive the funding earlier indicated by the previous government. In short, there is no guarantee of what share of funding we will receive until we get confirmation. Secondly, the funding we receive is conditional to the Council contributing the remaining 49% of our roading programme. The roading programme for which we sought funding is a bigger programme than in previous years which will require a bigger council share if we are Cr. Jason Fletcher, Hanmer Springs I strongly believe in democracy and this plan is an example of how this works. You can influence our thinking with your submission. Don t miss the opportunity. to receive 51% from NZTA. To fully fund the 49% means a large increase in the rates we charge for roads. We have concerns about affordability, but the alternative option of taking a lesser amount puts us in a less than desirable situation regarding the future of our roads. Another issue is that if we don t accept the full funding made available to us, it undermines our roading programme and suggests that the funding we require is not as necessary as we have implied. There is no guarantee that future funding will continue to be as high as the current indication from NZTA. In the last Long Term Plan (2015/25), the combined NZTA and council share fell short of the money required to maintain our roads in accordance with our asset management plan. This caused us to seriously consider how long we could sweat the assets and hold off some maintenance for as long as possible. Over time, this would cause problems as work needing to be done would accumulate and become more difficult to fund. The alternative was to significantly adjust the rates upwards to fund the shortfall. The 51% share from NZTA would put the Council in a good position to maintain our roads appropriately. In addition to the funding discussed above, we have a rate for emergency work on our roads in the case of damage caused by severe weather or natural events (such as floods and slips). This rate collects $250,000 each year. The question now becomes; is this an essential rate or a nice to have? We do know that our residents consider roads to be the most important asset we should be focusing resources on. Our annual resident satisfaction survey has confirmed this year upon year. After weighing up these issues, we have concluded that our best position is to accept the maximum funding available from NZTA, and to make other adjustments to our road rates so that the overall effect is affordable for The options Option 1 (preferred) Accept the full NZTA fund available and make other rates adjustments for affordability This is the option that will produce the best outcomes for our roading asset to allow us to maintain our levels of service. Rates on capital property value to collect $3.7 million in 2018/19; $3.5 million in 2019/20; and $3.0 million in 2020/21. Removal of emergency road reinstatement rate collecting $250,000 per annum. Examples: $ per year for a property valued at $250,000. $ per year for a property valued at $1 million. Option 2 Accept the full NZTA fund available with no other rates adjustments Although this option will provide the most income for the maintenance of our roads, the Council considers this to be an unfair financial burden on our ratepayers. This option would allow us to maintain levels of service and build up a fund for emergency reinstatement works. This is the same as option one. our ratepayers. Therefore, our proposal is to: Accept the full NZTA funding available to the Council. Remove the rate totalling $250,000 for emergency roadworks reinstatement. In the event of a disaster, the Council would fund emergency repair work in arrears should the need arise. In otherwords, we would do the work and pay later. Rate for 49% of our roading programme and for NZTA to fund the remaining 51%. Our roading programme is $1.5 million more than last year. Cost and rate impact The roading rate will collect $3.7 million in 2018/19; $3.5 million in 2019/20; and $3.0 million in 2020/21 via a capital value rate. This is an increase from $3.2 million Plus retain the emergency road reinstatement rate to collect $250,000. This is based on capital value. Examples: $ per year for a property valued at $250,000. $ per year for a property valued at $1 million. Option 3 expected to be collected in 2017/18. Do less maintenance than our roading asset management plan sets our and accept a lesser NZTA fund. Doing less work than our road programme will be detrimental to our roading assets and we can expect further deterioration of our roads. Rates on capital property value to collect $3.2 million per annum. Plus retain the emergency road reinstatement rate to collect $250,000. Examples: $ per year for a property valued at $250,000. $ per year for a property valued at $1 million. Your feedback Do you support our proposal to accept the full NZTA fund available which will result in a rate increase to fund the remaining 49% of the roading programme? Do you support removing the emergency reinstatement rate, thereby not collecting a further$250,000 in rates? If not, what do you consider to be a reasonable alternative? Because the actual rate for each property will differ depending in the capital value of the property, a couple of examples are provided below: A property with a capital value of $250,000, will be $ next year (up from $ charged in 2017/2018). A property with a capital value of $1,000,000, will be $ next year (up from $ charged in 2017/2018). The removal of the emergency roadworks reinstatement rate, which collects $250,000 per year, commences in 2018/19. Therefore no one will pay this rate from next year. Road Asset Management Plan 10 11

7 Issue 5: Amberley swimming pool The issues The Amberley swimming pool is over 90 years old and at the end of its useful life. Although still operating, this is the result of being carefully nurtured and continually repaired. The pool is unheated and although covered, the roof is clear plastic to allow light into the pool so that the sun can heat the water. When there is no sun, the water temperature and the inside of the facility is cold. When it is sunny, non-swimmers and the life guards have to tolerate the discomfort of a very hot, humid environment similar to being in a glass-house. The pool does not meet today s swimming pool standards or modern day expectations of a public swimming pool. The Amberley pool has been the subject of much discussion over the past decade, with a community desire to have a recreational swimming pool facility that is heated, covered, and operational all year round. After considering specialist reports and options for newly built and renovated pools, the Amberley Ward Committee recommended to the Council that a new pool be built rather than attempt to update or modernise the current pool. In the Long Term Plan, $4.5 million had been set in the 2018/19 budget, conditional on $1.75 million being fund raised to offset a portion of the cost. Therefore, $2.75 million would be met by the ratepayer instead of the full amount. Around $100,000 was allowed for a deficit in operating costs per annum from 2019/20 to be met from Amberley Ward ratepayers. Recent estimates have suggested that a minimum of $568,000 per year should be allowed for operating costs to run the pool all year round. With income deducted from the $568,000, this would leave a deficit of about $289,300 compared to the $100,000 previously budgeted. The cost has been of huge concern for the Council because of the small population to fund the pool, and the fear that the operating costs could well exceed our best Reports to the Amberley Ward Committee estimate at this time. To build a $4.5 million pool with year round operating costs, the annual rates worked out to around $213 per rateable unit in the Amberley Ward until the capital to build the pool was repaid. Then the operating cost of around $120 per year per property would continue infinitum. To add to the concerns about affordability, the Amberley pool fundraising committee has raised approximately $100,000 which falls far short of the agreed $1.75 million. Many hours have been spent trying to find a way forward without placing excessive burden of cost on our ratepayers. The Council has fully considered the following: As per the original proposal in the 2015/25 Long Term Plan, building a new indoor, heated, all year round swimming pool facility in 2018/19. This would operate as a normal public pool with lifeguards and pool staff, and admission through gate fees. This proposal does not sit comfortably with the Council due to the high cost for a small community, particularly the ongoing operating expenses. The Council considers this to be unaffordable at this stage. To split the cost of the capital required to build the $4.5 million pool and the operating costs from the entire district on a 20/80 ratio with the Amberley Ward. The Amberley ward ratepayers would fund 80% of the costs, and the rest of the district would fund the remaining 20%. Spreading the cost across the district did not sit comfortably with the Council. People in the other wards have access to their own local pools and are already contributing to the running of these. It is expected that those who live the closest to the Amberley swimming pool will be those who use it the most; exceptions aside. Renovating the existing pool has been explored over the years and various estimates have been given to upgrade what we already have. The costs have ranged from $500,000 to $1.5 million to turn the current pool into a heated, indoor, all year round facility. Given that the Amberley pool is 90 years old, this option has been discounted as we do not have real confidence that this would be the right step in the right direction to properly achieve the desired result. Although the capital cost would be lower, the high operating costs would still be a factor. Applying a staged approach to ultimately achieve an all year round, heated, covered swimming pool, but to stage this over a number of years. Through this discussion and the affordability factor, a staged approach was developed. Stage one heated, outdoor, community pool (2018/19) The first stage would be to build a heated, outdoor swimming pool facility to meet today s standards. This is proposed to be two pools - a 25 metre, lane pool as well as a learn-to-swim pool. This stage excludes pool staff such as lifeguards and pool access would be via key purchases or season passes (in the way many school and community pools are accessed). Adults would have to ensure their children s safety. The pool would be a community facility and used for sporting events and swimming clubs, etc. Cr. Julia Mclean, Amberley I am confident we have found a way forward to address this community s desire for an indoor, heated, all year round swimming pool. This issue has gone on long enough, and I am keen to hear your feedback on the staged funding proposal. It s achievable, affordable and work could start next year There is an expectation that there would be serious community involvement in the operation of the first stage of the pool to keep the operating costs down. As this stage is for an outdoor swimming facility, it would remain a summer time pool until the second stage was completed. The operating costs are expected to be similar to the present cost of running the Amberley swimming pool with staff costs being swapped for pool heating costs. The cost of this proposal (stage one) would be met solely by ratepayers in the Amberley Ward. Stage two indoor, year round, public pool This stage has not been budgeted into the Long Term Plan. The second stage is to build the pool surrounds (walls and roof), and to operate it as a staffed public swimming pool. When the facility becomes an indoor pool, it will then operate with staff and organised programmes. This stage could occur at any time it is deemed affordable and the funds become available through the community or grants and/or rates. Later stages could be added to include additional attractions depending on demand at the time. The staged option is preferred by the Council because it is affordable and provides the community with a modern swimming pool quickly, while at the same time, future proofing the facility. At present, the cost of running an all year round, heated swimming pool is deemed to be unaffordable by the small population that would pay for it. The district is already facing additional costs due to the November 2016 earthquakes and the very important issue of drinking water standards. The cumulative effect of an expensive swimming pool, plus the other costs set out in this document has led the Council to a preferred staged approach. Cost and rate impact The capital budget set aside to build the new pool facility is $1.5 million in the 2018/19 year. The operational budget is $52,000 per annum (after taking into account the anticipated income).

8 Amberley swimming pool (continued) Rating changes Note: the cost of the second stage has not been included in the 2018/28 Long Term Plan but could be re-examined in future Long Term Plan reviews. The targeted rate for the Amberley Ward would be: $64 per annum per rateable property for the capital cost until the $1.5 million is repaid. This rate commenced in 2016/17 and is expected to be repaid in Plus; The options Option 1 (Preferred) Staged approach 1st stage a heated, summer, community pool - $1.5 million. This proposal is to build a new heated, outdoor swimming facility, including a 25 metre, lane pool and a learn to swim pool in the 2018/19 year. Amberley ward Capital cost: $64 per property per annum (from 2016/17) until the $1.5m is repaid (approximately 2025). Operating cost: $25 per property per annum (until stage two of the pool is completed after 2028). This is based on serious community involvement in the operation of the first stage of the pool District wide $0. Total rate for the Amberley ward is $89 per property per annum. No change to the current rate. Option 2 Original concept New indoor, heated, all year round pool - $4.5 million. ($2.75 million funded through rates and $1.75 million from community fund raising.) This proposal is to build a new indoor, heated all year round swimming pool facility in 2018/19 with lifeguards and pool staff. This proposal does not sit comfortably with the Council due to the high cost for a small community, particularly the ongoing operating expenses. Amberley ward Capital cost: $64 per property per annum (from 2016/17) for 14 years. Operating cost: $25 per property until 2019/20 for the existing pool. $133 per property per annum from 2019/20 after the new pool is built. District wide (including Amberley Ward) $16 per property per annum from 2019/20 for 20 years Total rate for the Amberley ward from 2019/20 is $213 per property per annum. $25 per annum per rateable property for the operating cost. This is the same as for the existing pool with no change until the next stage of the pool has occurred. This could be at any time depending on affordability. This will result in the combined swimming pool annual rate for the Amberley Ward being $89. This is no change from the current rate. Option 3 Renovate existing pool to achieve a heated, all year round pool - $0.5 to $1.5 million. This option has been explored over the years and various estimates have been given to upgrade what we already have. This option was not preferred due to the age of the current pool, lack of confidence that this would achieve the desired result, and the high annual operating costs as per option two. Amberley ward Capital cost: $64 per property per annum (from 2016/17) until repaid depending on cost, up to Operating cost: $25 per property until 2019/20 for the existing pool. $133 per property per annum from 2019/20 after the renovation is complete. District wide $0. Total rate for the Amberley ward from 2019/20 is $197 per property per annum. What you will pay The proposals in our long term plan will mean changes to your rates. The overall rates increase after growth will be 8.5% in year 2018/19; 6.5% in 2019/20; and 5% for the remaining 8 years of the Long Term Plan. This does not take into account the variations due to targeted rates. The amount you pay will depend on not only the general rate but the services that may be unique to your particular township or area. How your rates are made up We use a mix of rating types across the district for different services depending on who benefits. Because of the many variables, it is not practical to set out the exact rates each property will pay in each area. To demonstrate the differences, the following charts show the rating mix for properties in Amberley township, Cheviot township, Amuri rural (farm) and a Hanmer Springs holiday home. rates@hurunui.govt.nz to find out what your rates will be. Cr. Michael Ward, Amberley After lengthy discussions your Council has settled the rate review for the next years. This has been a balance between doing the works we must and also some of the community desires. Councillors are aware of the cost and strive to keep increases as low as possible. Table 1 - Examples of rate increases for different areas Rate years Amberley township Amuri rural Cheviot township Hanmer Springs dwelling property (farm) dwelling holiday home Capital value 2017 $400, $2,620, $250, $470, Actual rates 2017/18 $2, $6, $1, $2, Proposed rates 2018/19 $2, $7, $1, $2, Increase from last year $ $ $ $ % Increase from last year 9.92% 5.77% 7.20% 8.56% Proposed rates 2019/20 $2, $7, $2, $2, Increase from year before $ $ $86.84 $ % Increase from last year 5.32% 5.90% 4.50% 5.55% Proposed rates 2020/21 $2, $8, $2, $2, Increase from year before $ $ $70.64 $ % Increase from last year 4.33% 4.58% 3.50% 4.62% Table 2 - Average residential rates per rateable unit for all Councils - from NZ Taxpayers Union Ratepayers Report 2017 Your feedback Do you support our proposal to stage the development of a new swimming pool in Amberley? Do you support our proposal for stage one to be a heated, outdoor, community swimming pool in 2018/19? If not, what do you consider to be a reasonable alternative? 125 Sample properties rate examples rates@hurunui.govt.nz or phone to request your new rates proposed for 2018/19

9 Rating changes (continued) Where your rates go New rates We have a number of new rates which will commence from the 2018/19 year. These are discussed within the document with the exception of the environmental stormwater rate. This new rate is to enable an extensive stormwater assessment to be done and ongoing compliance costs. See the table for the summary of these new rates. Table 3 - New rates commencing from the 2018/19 year Type Explanation Rate per year Area Earthquake debt rate Refer to key issues section $62.08 per property District wide Earthquake prone building assessments rate Footpath maintenance rate Amberley swimming pool operational rate Environmental stormwater rate Revenue and Financing Policy Refer to key issues section $27.75 per property for 5 years from 2018/19. $66.95 for the 5 years from 2023/24. District wide Refer to key issues section $40.02 per urban property District wide $8.12 per rural property Shown separately rather than $25 per property (status quo) Amberley ward hidden within the Amberley amenity rate To develop a district stormwater catchment and management plan (as per the 30 Year Infrastructure Strategy) $17.82 per property This replaces a portion of the cost of stormwater that was previously funded on a capital value basis as part of the general rate. Cr. Dick Davison, Amuri-Hurunui Finance, Audit & Risk Committee Chair The Finance, Audit and Risk Committee has the responsibility of ensuring that we spend money prudently, accountably, and provide resilience through insurance and debt management. This community has recently faced challenges with drought and earthquake. Our residents assume that council can cope with adversity, and we will meet that expectation. District wide for urban areas only Public Services $24 Including waste, recycling, libraries, parks, social housing, civil defence swimming pools, medical centres and halls. This is how we spend each $100 of rates we collect Sewerage $9 Includes capital and operational costs districtwide. Roads and footpaths $23 Including all district roads, bridges and footpaths, excluding State Highways Governance $2 Includes all Council governance costs. Water Services $31 Including urban and rural water supply across the district. Stormwater and drainage $3 Includes capital and operational costs districtwide. Regulatory Services $5 Including building inspections, health, licensing, dog control, policy and planning. Earthquake debt $3 Repayment of debt incurred from damage during the November 2016 earthquake.

10 Infrastructure strategy Summary The Council has reviewed and updated its 30 Year Infrastructure Strategy (30YRIS). This is our second 30YRIS which has been prepared from Council workshops and aligns to our Asset Management Plans (AMPs) and our Financial Strategy and ultimately, the Long Term Plan. This strategy is aligned to reflect and respond to the emerging infrastructure issues within the district while also continuing to provide existing services at an affordable level, and in an efficient and effective manner. The 30YRIS is focussed on water supply, wastewater, stormwater, roads and footpaths. Our strategy is to: focus on core services and maintain levels of service continuous improvement in service for everyone in our district facilitate appropriate growth in the district. The six most significant issues which have been identified are: 1. Vulnerability to natural hazards, especially earthquakes given the high seismic rating of the 3. Good data is required to make sound decisions to district and recent earthquake activity. increase operational efficiency and prioritisation of 2. Aging infrastructure and the replacement of assets future budgets rather than relying on age related while considering affordability, service levels and data alone. Pre-earthquake the Council had reliable avoiding financial bulges in expenditure. data for all infrastructure assets except for above Table 4 - significant issues for infrastructure Asset Significant infrastructure issues Water supply Cost of meeting future Drinking Water Standards New Zealand compliance Pipe asset performance measurement and monitoring Poor information surrounding facility assets Reliability and resilience of continued water supply (including storage issues) Wastewater Fresh water management requirements of natural waterways Hydraulic modelling capability for future growth Poor information surrounding plant and facility assets Pipeline inflow and infiltration, and subsequent peak demand of treatment ponds Stormwater Stormwater management and catchment plans Asset condition assessments Localised hydraulic, flooding, and maintenance issues Management of land drains within the rural sector Roads and footpaths Sealed pavements: seal width; extra-heavy and extra-wide vehicle use Unsealed pavements: heavy vehicle use on under designed structural layers Bridges: ageing stock, traffic loadings and extra-wide vehicle use Traffic services: adequate signs, road markings, traffic delineation Road safety: increasing crash trends, improved road environment designs Route 70: as alternative route to SH1, higher maintenance costs to service a higher level of service demand Footpaths: trip hazards and maintenance General Understanding future demand Future Land and Water Regional Plan requirements. Full Infrastructure Strategy Cr. Vince Daly, Cheviot Infrastructure Committee Chair My biggest concerns include repairing earthquake damaged infrastructure and meeting regulations for drinking water, stormwater and sewerage. My focus is that we do in an affordable and timely fashion that meets the needs of our communities. ground water assets. A programme of works has been set to obtain better asset information over the next few years. Post-earthquake, the Council has carried out asset by asset assessments for insurance claim purposes. More damage may be identified as more assessments are done and the resulting repair work. 4. Safe drinking water for all and managing the required significant water scheme upgrades to achieve NZ drinking water standards within the next 8 years for all of Council s 19 schemes in the most cost effective manner. 5. Changes in legislation and regulation are in the making across a number of the infrastructural activities which Annual Expenditure ($M) Annual Expenditure ($M) $25 $20 $15 $10 $5 $0 $30 $25 $20 $15 $10 $5 $0 Table 5 - projected capital expenditure for infrastructure assets Water Supply Wastewater Stormwater Roads Table 6 - projected operational expenditure for infrastructure assets Combined Infrastructure Forecast - Operations and Maintenance are expected to impact on levels of service and cost. 6. Affordability is an ongoing issue to manage upgrades, compliance, expectations and provide good services with a small population and rating base. The most significant issues identified for the next 30 years and beyond are showed in table 4. These significant issues form the strategic direction for Council s infrastructure capital expenditure; the detail of which is contained within the AMPs. The estimated financial forecasts for the 30 year period are shown in table 5 for capital (new and renewal) and table 6 for operational expenditure. Water Supply Wastewater Stormwater Roads

11 Financial strategy The Council s strategic direction, confirmed in July 2017, prioritised finance as being one of the five key focus areas. Within the context of the Council Strategy, the key factor that shapes our Financial Strategy over the life of this LTP We want to ensure that our infrastructure and services remain affordable to communities throughout the district. We want to be financially prudent by keeping debt at manageable levels sufficient to meet costs in the medium to long term. Our key funding mechanisms are: 1. Rates, both District Wide and Targeted rates 2. The appropriate use of the surpluses derived by the Hanmer Springs Thermal Pools and Spa 3. Funding Depreciation on Three Waters (Water, Sewer and Stormwater) 4. The use of the Internal Financing structure which provides internal loans for communities requiring funding to carry out Capital Projects. With the Long Term Plan, affordable infrastructure was an important focus which led to Council s decision to cap rate increases at 6% per annum for the first five years of the plan and then a 3% increase for the remainder of the plan. After consultation, these increases were accepted by the community. Since adopting that LTP, new pressures on Council rates have emerged in the preparation of the LTP. The Council has a shortfall in funding the response and reinstatement costs of the November 2016 earthquakes and is planning for an increased work programme for roading to meet the levels of service set out in the Asset Management Plans. Table 7 - Rate increase Limits v. budgeted rate increases The Financial Strategy stipulates two key limits that shape the finances for the Council during the life of the LTP: Limits on the increases in Rates Limits of the level of debt. Rate Increase Limits: The Council has set a policy of rate increases (after allowing for an assumed amount of growth) as: 8.5% for 2018/2019 (Year 1) 6.5% for 2019/2020 (Year 2) 5.0% for 2020/2021 (Year 3) 5.0% for the remainder of the LTP The budgeted rates increases will be in line with the Council Rate Increase Limits for the first three years of the LTP. For the remainder of the Plan, the rate increase per annum is budgeted to be 3.5%. To ensure that the Rate Increase Limit is not breached and the rate increases remain relatively smooth, a mechanism to balance the rates charged for roading on an annual basis is used. This is considered appropriate as it is a rate that it applied to all ratepayers across the district. The mechanism defers or advances funding for the roading programme by using internal debt, with the proviso that the debt is fully repaid by the end of the ten-year period. External Debt Limits The Local Government Act requires us to set a limit on our external debt levels. These debt levels are set out in our External Liability Management Policy, which forms part of our Treasury Risk Management Policy. The limits are based on ratios centred on the level of income and are still lower than what is considered standard for the local government sector. The Policy allows for four key ratios that the Council needs to meet: Total debt is no more than 100% of total income (excluding development contributions and vested assets income) Total debt is no more than 10% of total equity Total external interest cost is no more than 6.25% of total income (excluding development contributions and vested assets income) Total external interest cost is no more than 12.5% of total rates Based on the budget information for the LTP, the Council will not exceed any of these limits over the period of the LTP. The debt levels compared to total income is depicted in table 8. While the Council has opted to set its external debt limit at 100% of total income, the Local Government Funding Agency (which holds the majority of Council s debt) provides for a maximum of 175% for unrated councils. As a result, the Council does have scope to increase its debt limits should a further disaster befall the district. Implications of the Council s Financial Strategy The Local Government Act requires us to assess whether we have the ability to provide and maintain existing levels of services and meet additional demands for services within the rates and debt limits as set out within the financial strategy. Table 8 - Debt levels compared to total income Council will be reliant on the level of funding provided by New Zealand Transport Agency to ensure that the levels of service are maintained for the roading network. The budgets have proposed an increase to the roading programme to meet the levels of service and the NZTA subsides and the Council s rating input are critical to ensure that programme is achieved. For the three waters assets, as part of the development of the Infrastructure Strategy, the focus has moved from determining renewals on an age basis to a performance based approach. This means that assets, which have reached the end of their forecast useful lives, may not necessarily be replaced if the asset is still performing effectively. Council has allowed for an unallocated level of renewals for the three waters throughout the Long Term Plan budgets. Should the renewal requirement be significantly greater than the level allowed for, Council will need to consider the funding options available (which may include extending debt levels) as necessary. Working within the Council s limits on debt and rate increases, it has been assessed that Council has the ability to maintain the existing levels of service and to meet additional demands for service $millions Debt Limit (100% of Total Income) Total Forecast Debt Year Full Financial Strategy Development Contributions Policy 20 Treasury Policy 21

12 Future projects Summary of the Main Projects Planned We are planning to do a range of projects during the next 10 years. The following is a summary of the main projects planned and the scheduled time for delivery. Water upgrades 2018/ / / District wide renewals $337,000 $309,000 $316,000 $2,180,000 Drinking water standards compliance $866,000 $20,411,000 Amberley $1,013,000 $4,008,000 Ashley $737,000 $501,000 $663,000 $2,655,000 Amuri Plains $129,000 Cheviot $184,000 $130,000 $176,000 $213,000 Culverden $140,000 Hanmer Springs $110,000 $296,000 $161,000 Hawarden - Waikari $581,000 Hurunui rural $933,000 $364,000 Waipara $325,000 Waiau Rural $153,000 Waiau Town $130,000 Amberley 2018/ / / Swimming Pool Stage 1 $1,500,000 Amberley Eastern Reserve dev. $250,000 Hanmer Springs Domain 2018/ / / Upgrade $299,000 Hanmer Springs Pools 2018/ / / Renewals $200,000 $307,000 $470,000 $2,665,000 Waterslide $1,500,000 Cascade pools $2,044,000 Private bathing $2,089,000 New activities $10,360,000 Water and environmental $664,000 $1,202,000 Sewerage 2018/ / / District-wide renewals $371,000 $358,000 $249,000 $5,399,000 Amberley improvements $104,000 $4,427,000 Cheviot desludging $194,000 Motunau Beach desludging $214,000 Hanmer Springs improvements $215,000 $660,000 Hawarden improvements $144,000 $1,479,000 Stormwater 2018/ / / Hanmer Springs improvements $148,000 $245,000 $1,260,000 Amberley improvements $102,000 $828,000 Leithfield Beach outfall $115,000 Earthquake-prone buildings 2018/ / / Assessment and strengthening of Council owned buildings across the district $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $2,900,000 Earthquake repair costs 2018/ / / Bridges $4,619,000 Water repairs $833,000 Roads and footpaths 2018/ / / Road maintenance $4,042,000 $4,086,000 $4,300,000 $4,873,000 p.a. Road renewals $3,847,000 $3,777,000 $3,709,000 $4,564,000 p.a. Road capital works $1,154,000 $1,428,000 $1,246,000 $1,327,000 p.a. Footpath repair & maintenance $1,291,000 $226,000 $137,000 $172,000 p.a. Capital programme budgets 22 23

13 Auditor s report misstatement and the Council s systems and processes applying to the preparation of the Consultation Document. Independent auditor s report on Hurunui District Council s Consultation Document for its proposed Long-Term Plan I am the Auditor-General s appointed auditor for Hurunui District Council (the Council). Section 93C of the Local Government Act 2002 (the Act) requires an audit report on the Council s Consultation Document. We have done the work for this report using the staff and resources of Audit New Zealand. We completed our report on 5 April Opinion In my opinion: the Consultation Document provides an effective basis for public participation in the Council s decisions about the proposed content of its long-term plan, because it: fairly represents the matters proposed for inclusion in the long-term plan; and identifies and explains the main issues and choices facing the Council and district, and the consequences of those choices; and the information and assumptions underlying the information in the Consultation Document are reasonable. Emphasis of matter Uncertainty about the effect of the Hurunui/Kaikoura earthquake on proposed rates Without modifying our opinion, we draw attention to Issue 1 on page 4 of the consultation document about earthquake debt. Issue 1 outlines some uncertainty over the full extent of damage that has been done to Council owned bridge and water supply assets, as a result of the Hurunui/Kaikoura earthquake, and the forecast costs to repair that infrastructure. Some of these costs will be met by Council debt, which will be repaid through a separate earthquake rate. Should the actual cost of repairs differ from the financial forecasts, the Council will need to reassess the proposed period to repay debt and amount of the rate. Basis of opinion We carried out our work in accordance with the International Standard on Assurance Engagements (New Zealand) 3000 (Revised): Assurance Engagements Other Than Audits or Reviews of Historical Financial Information. In meeting the requirements of this standard, we took into account particular elements of the Auditor-General s Auditing Standards and the International Standard on Assurance Engagements 3400: The Examination of Prospective Financial Information that were consistent with those requirements. We assessed the evidence the Council has to support the information and disclosures in the Consultation Document. To select appropriate procedures, we assessed the risk of material We did not evaluate the security and controls over the publication of the Consultation Document. Responsibilities of the Council and auditor The Council is responsible for: meeting all legal requirements relating to its procedures, decisions, consultation, disclosures, and other actions associated with preparing and publishing the Consultation Document and long-term plan, whether in printed or electronic form; having systems and processes in place to provide the supporting information and analysis the Council needs to be able to prepare a Consultation Document and long-term plan that meet the purposes set out in the Act; and ensuring that any forecast financial information being presented has been prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting practice in New Zealand. I am responsible for reporting on the Consultation Document, as required by section 93C of the Act. I do not express an opinion on the merits of any policy content of the Consultation Document. Independence In carrying out our work, we complied with the Auditor-General s: independence and other ethical requirements, which incorporate the independence and ethical requirements of Professional and Ethical Standard 1 (Revised); and quality control requirements, which incorporate the quality control requirements of Professional and Ethical Standard 3 (Amended). In addition to this report on the Council s consultation document and all legally required external audits, we have provided an assurance report on certain matters in respect of the Council s Debenture Trust Deed. These assignments are compatible with those independence requirements. Other than these assignments, we have no relationship with or interests in the Council or any of its subsidiaries. Bede Kearney Audit New Zealand On behalf of the Auditor-General, Christchurch, New Zealand 24 25

14 Where to get more information How to make a submission Presentations will be made at the following locations: Date Time Where Wednesday, 18 April 6:30pm - 7:30pm Ex Council Chambers, Culverden Thursday, 19 April 6:00pm - 8:00pm Weka Pass Railway Station and Train Monday, 23 April 5:00pm - 6:00pm Hanmer Springs Library and Service Centre Thursday, 26 April 6:30pm - 7:30pm Waikari Hall, Waikari Tuesday, 1 May 5:00pm - 6:00pm Cheviot Library and Service Centre Thursday, 3 May 6:30pm - 7:30pm Council Chamber, Amberley Other Watch out for your local councillor s invitation to discuss the Long Term Plan key issues. We are very happy to come to your local group or committee to discuss the matters in this document and any other matters important to you. Contacts: Jo Retallick, jo.retallick@hurunui.govt.nz Audrey van der Monde, audrey.vandermonde@hurunui.govt.nz David Ford, david.ford@hurunui.govt.nz Jason Beck, jason.beck@hurunui.govt.nz Phone Amberley office: Amuri- toll free number: Cheviot toll free number: Hanmer Springs toll free number: Deputy Mayor, Marie Black, Amuri-Hurunui Regulatory Committee Chair There are a number of priorities described in the LTP. Our challenge as councillors is to find a fair and equitable mechanism to ensure that we can adequately resource these projects. The aftermath of the earthquake has left our district with considerable unexpected debt. We welcome your feedback on this and any other issue identified. The options presented in this Consultation Document are proposals. The Council has considered the issues and believes that the options presented represent the best interests of our communities. This Consultation Document is an invitation for you to contribute your feedback on the issues presented, or on any other topic, within the Council s responsibility. Your views will be carefully considered by the Council before any final decision is made and the Long Term Plan adopted. Your submission does not need to be very detailed; it may simply be to let us know which of the options presented in this document you prefer. If you have an idea not canvassed in this document, then the more detail you are able to provide, the better the Council will be able to understand your submission. Where to send your submission Submissions must be made in writing. The form opposite, is provided for your convenience, but you may simply send us an outlining your submission ( address below) or send us a letter, either through the post (address below) or taken to one of our libraries or service centres Submissions close on Sunday 6 May 2018 Submissions close on Sunday 6 May All submissions received by that date will be put before the Council at a hearing during May The Council will then decide what changes to the proposals need to be made before finalising the Long Term Plan. Presenting your submission You may present your submission to the Council at the Long Term Plan hearing. Your personal presentation should take no more than ten minutes and councilors may ask you questions about your submission. If you have requested to speak at the hearing, you will be contacted to arrange a day and time submissions@hurunui.govt.nz on line: Send to: Hurunui District Council, PO Box 13, Amberley 7441 Questions? Phone The Long Term Plan will be finalised on 28 June Following adoption, the Long Term Plan will be available on our website ( or at your local library or service centre.

15 Tell us what you think Hurunui District Council is currently seeking submissions relating to the proposals outlined in this Consultation Document. You can submit by completing this form and sending it to the address below, or you may submit by using the address at the bottom of the page. Submissions must be received by Sunday 6 May Full name of submitter: Postal address: Phone: Date: Signature: Please write your submission here: Please indicate whether or not you wish to speak in support of your submission (tick one box) on 15 or 16 May. I wish to speak in support of my submission I do not wish to speak in support of my submission If you wish to speak to your submission, you will need to keep your presentation to 5-10 minutes. Councillors will have read your written submission prior to the meeting. If you intend to present additional material during the hearing you will need to supply 14 copies at the time. PLEASE NOTE: Submissions to the Council are normally made public and may also require to be disclosed in response to any requests under the Official Information Act. If you are an individual, as opposed to an organisation, we will consider removing your personal details from the submission if you tick the box below. Please consider removing my personal details from the submission: submissions@hurunui.govt.nz Send to: Hurunui District Council, PO Box 13, Amberley 7441 Questions? Phone