Agenda of Report to Tasman District Council Meeting

Tasman District Council Agenda – 15 February 2024

7.2 Retrospective Approval of Submissions

Decision Required

Report To:	Tasman District Council
Meeting Date:	15 February 2024
Report Author:	Diana Worthy, Team Leader – Natural Resources Policy; Myaan Bengosi, Policy Planner - Urban & Rural Development; Guinevere Coleman, Team Leader Biosecurity & Biodiversity; Barbara Lewando, Senior Climate Change Advisor; Tania Bray, Policy Planner
Report Authorisers:	Barry Johnson, Environmental Policy Manager
Report Number:	RCN24-02-5

1. Purpose of the Report / Te Take mō te Pūrongo

1.1 To retrospectively approve five Tasman District Council submissions regarding:

1.1.1 Ministry for the Environment’s consultation on a proposed National Policy Statement for Natural Hazards Decision-making; and

1.1.2 Ministry for the Environment and Ministry for Primary Industries’ consultation on potential amendments to the National Policy Statement for Highly Productive Land; and

1.1.3 Ministry for the Environment and Department of Conservation’s consultation on exploring a biodiversity credit system for Aotearoa New Zealand; and

1.1.4 Environment Committee’s Inquiry into Climate Adaptation; and

1.1.5 Ministry for the Environment’s consultation on the Draft Transitional National Planning Framework.

1.2 These five submissions were submitted in the latter part of 2023 under delegated authority on behalf of the Council. Staff now seek retrospective approval of these submissions.

2. Recommendation/s / Ngā Tūtohunga

That the Tasman District Council;

1. receives the Retrospective Approval of Submissions report RCN24-02-5; and

2. retrospectively approves the Council’s submission to the Ministry for the Environment’s consultation on a proposed National Policy Statement for Natural Hazards Decision-making (Attachment 1); and

3. retrospectively approves the Council’s submission to the Ministry for the Environment and the Ministry for Primary Industries’ consultation on potential amendments to the National Policy Statement for Highly Productive Land
(Attachment 2); and

4. retrospectively approves the Council’s submission to the Ministry for the Environment and Department of Conservation’s consultation on exploring a biodiversity credit system for Aotearoa New Zealand (Attachment 3); and

5. retrospectively approves the Council’s submission to the Environment Committee’s Inquiry into Climate Adaptation (Attachment 4); and

6. retrospectively approves the Council’s feedback on the Ministry for the Environment’s Draft Transitional National Planning Framework (Attachment 5).

3. Background / Horopaki

3.1 The Ministry for the Environment consulted on a proposed National Policy Statement for Natural Hazards Decision-making (NPS-NHD), with the submission period closing on
20 November 2023. The proposed NPS is an initial step towards a more comprehensive national direction for natural hazards and would introduce consistency around decision making on new developments where there is risk from natural hazards. The proposed NPS-NHD is expected to limit new development in areas that are at high risk from natural hazards and require mitigations for other areas to ensure people and property are protected. The Council’s submission is available in Attachment 1.

3.2 The Ministry for the Environment and the Ministry for Primary Industries consulted on potential amendments to the National Policy Statement for Highly Productive Land 2022 (NPS-HPL). Submissions closed on 31 October 2023. The Council’s submission is available in Attachment 2. The consultation document sought feedback on potential amendments to two issues raised by stakeholders, being (a) no clear pathway for new specified infrastructure and (b) no clear pathway for intensive indoor primary production and greenhouses. The consultation document also welcomed any further general feedback. The Council’s submission supported the proposed amendments to the NPS-HPL to address the two issues raised by stakeholders and highlighted the following additional issues:

· no clear pathway for developing and using cool stores, packhouses and workers accommodation on highly productive land where those buildings serve multiple users; and

· the NPS-HPL definition for ‘identified for future urban development’ conflicts the National Policy Statement on Urban Development 2020; and

· Clause 3.8(1) of the NPS-HPL does not clearly provide an exception for boundary adjustments, where some highly productive land is permanently lost to productive uses.

3.3 The Ministry for the Environment and the Department of Conservation sought submissions on a proposed system for biodiversity credits entitled ‘Exploring a biodiversity credit system for Aotearoa New Zealand’. The Council’s submission is available in Attachment 3 and was submitted early November 2023. Generally, staff are supportive of the approach. Within the Council’s submission further information and clarification has been sought, in addition to responding to the questions asked, which are at this stage very high level. There is a level of uncertainty in this first step as the framework for a future biodiversity credit system is not yet available.

3.4 Parliament’s Environment Committee consulted on an Inquiry into Climate Adaptation. Submissions closed on 1 November 2023. The Council’s submission is available in Attachment 4. This inquiry sought feedback on what new powers, roles and responsibilities will be needed to support community-led retreat and how the cost of adaptation will be met. The findings of this enquiry were intended to support the Climate Adaptation Bill, although the future of this proposed legislation is now uncertain with the incoming new government.

3.5 The Ministry for the Environment consulted on the draft Transitional National Planning Framework (dTNPF) with submissions closing on 13 December 2023. The Council’s submission is available in Attachment 5. The dTNPF was the Ministry’s first attempt at drafting a National Planning Framework under the Natural and Built Environment Act 2023 (NBEA) and consultation was limited to iwi and councils. The dTNPF combined the existing National Policy Statements and National Environmental Standards into one document and realigned the wording to reflect the requirements of the NBEA. During the submission period it became evident that the new government would repeal the NBEA. However, despite this the Council continued with our submission and took the opportunity to feedback to MfE as there remained relevance to the existing National Policy Statements and National Environmental Standards or any future alternative framework. To this extent the Council’s submission has retained some enduring value. Subsequently, the NBEA was repealed at the end of December 2023.

3.6 Several staff contributed to the five submissions and their input was collated by lead authors. The draft submissions were circulated to the Council for review, and any feedback received was incorporated into the final submissions. The submissions were signed off by the Mayor and/or the Chief Executive under delegated authority.

4. Attachments / Tuhinga tāpiri

1.⇩	Submission on NPS Natural Hazards Decision-making	26
2.⇩	Submission on proposed amendments to the NPS Highly Productive Land	37
3.⇩	Submission on Exploring a Biodiversity Credit System	43
4.⇩	Submission on the Inquiry into Climate Adaptation	55
5.⇩	Submission on draft Transitional National Planning Framework	72

Tasman District Council Agenda – 15 February 2024

7.3 Referral Report - Golden Bay Community Board - Golden Bay Kayaks - Request for a 20 year lease (Cornwall Place Park)

Report To:	Tasman District Council
Meeting Date:	15 February 2024
Report Author:	Robert Cant, Programme Leader - Land & Leases
Report Authorisers:	Richard Kirby, Group Manager - Community Infrastructure
Report Number:	RCN24-02-6

1. Purpose of the Report / Te Take mō te Pūrongo

1.1 To present a recommendation from the Golden Bay Community Board regarding public notification of a request for a 20-year lease term to Golden Bay Kayaks at Cornwall Place Park.

2. Summary / Te Tuhinga Whakarāpoto

2.1 At its 11 December 2023 meeting, the Golden Bay Community Board resolved as follows:

GBCB23-12-3

That the Golden Bay Community Board:

1. receives the Golden Bay Kayaks - Request for a 20-year lease (Cornwall Place Park) RGBCB23-12-3; and

2. recommends to the Tasman District Council that Golden Bay Kayaks request for a 20 year lease term be publicly notified in accordance with Section 138 of the Local Government Act 2002. Staff recommend the 20-year term be by way of a five year lease with a further three rights of renewal,

3. request that consideration be given for Golden Bay Community Board to undertake the responsibility of acting as the hearing panel.

3. Recommendation/s / Ngā Tūtohunga

That the Tasman District Council

1. receives the Referral Report - Golden Bay Community Board - Golden Bay Kayaks - Request for a 20 year lease (Cornwall Place Park) report RCN24-02-6; and

2. approves public notification of Golden Bay Kayaks request for a 20-year lease term in accordance with Section 138 of the Local Government Act 2002; and

3. agrees that the 20-year term be by way of a five year lease with a further three rights of renewal; and

4. appoints the Golden Bay Community Board as the hearing panel to consider submissions to the public notification and to make a subsequent recommendation to the Council regarding the granting of the lease to Golden Bay Kayaks at Cornwall Park.

4. Background / Horopaki

4.1 The background to this request is set out in the report to the Golden Bay Community Board dated 11 December 2023 which is attached to this report (Attachment 1).

4.2 The lease would only cover the buildings already on the property and the public will still have access to the remainder of the property to access the beach.

5. Analysis and Advice / Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

5.1 Under the terms of their delegations, the Golden Bay Community Board only has the power to make recommendations to the Council on the granting of leases and licences within their boundary.

5.2 Should they choose this approach, the Golden Bay Community Board, will act as a hearings panel and provide a report and recommendation to the Council in relation to the granting, or not of the lease.

6. Options / Kōwhiringa

6.1 The options are outlined in the following table:

Option	Advantage	Disadvantage
1.	Approves public notification and appointment of Golden Bay Community Board as hearing panel.	This will give the public the opportunity to provide feedback on the concept of allowing Golden Bay Kayaks to continue to use Cornwall Place “Park” for its commercial operation.	Staff time will be required to support this process.
2.	Decline to renew the lease.	This would avoid the need for public notification.	The community’s views will not be heard and there is a risk that Golden Bay loses a business that benefits the region.

Option

Advantage

Disadvantage

Approves public notification and appointment of Golden Bay Community Board as hearing panel.

This will give the public the opportunity to provide feedback on the concept of allowing Golden Bay Kayaks to continue to use Cornwall Place “Park” for its commercial operation.

Staff time will be required to support this process.

Decline to renew the lease.

This would avoid the need for public notification.

The community’s views will not be heard and there is a risk that Golden Bay loses a business that benefits the region.

7. Significance and Engagement / Hiranga me te Whakawhitiwhiti ā-Hapori Whānui

7.1 This decision on notification is considered of low significance to the wider community. However, for the business operations it will be of high significance as the decision not to notify will have an impact on their business.

	Issue	Level of Significance	Explanation of Assessment
1.	Is there a high level of public interest, or is decision likely to be controversial?	No
2.	Are there impacts on the social, economic, environmental or cultural aspects of well-being of the community in the present or future?	Yes	If the decision is to not notify then this will have an economic impact on the business and the region.
3.	Is there a significant impact arising from duration of the effects from the decision?	No
4.	Does the decision relate to a strategic asset? (refer Significance and Engagement Policy for list of strategic assets)	No
5.	Does the decision create a substantial change in the level of service provided by Council?	No
6.	Does the proposal, activity or decision substantially affect debt, rates or Council finances in any one year or more of the LTP?	No
7.	Does the decision involve the sale of a substantial proportion or controlling interest in a CCO or CCTO?	No
8.	Does the proposal or decision involve entry into a private sector partnership or contract to carry out the deliver on any Council group of activities?	No
9.	Does the proposal or decision involve Council exiting from or entering into a group of activities?	No
10.	Does the proposal require particular consideration of the obligations of Te Mana O Te Wai (TMOTW) relating to freshwater and Affordable Waters services?	No

8. Communication / Whakawhitiwhiti Kōrero

8.1 If public notification is approved, then a communications plan will be put in place. This will include engagement with Manawhenua Ki Mohua and notices in Newsline.

9. Financial or Budgetary Implications / Ngā Ritenga ā-Pūtea

9.1 There will be staff time and minimal costs associated with this decision. However, should the final lease be granted there will be a nominal financial benefit to the Council.

10. Conclusion / Kupu Whakatepe

10.1 As the public notification in 2015 drew substantial public interest (over 50 submissions), staff consider it is appropriate to seek public feedback on the request for a 20-year lease.

10.2 In essence, staff feel this decision is of predominantly local importance for Golden Bay, and it is appropriately investigated at a local level.

11. Next Steps and Timeline / Ngā Mahi Whai Ake

11.1 If approved, public notification will take place and the Golden Bay Community Board will hear submissions and report back to the Council.

12. Attachments / Tuhinga tāpiri

1.⇩

Report to 11 December 2023 Golden Bay Community Board meeting

Tasman District Council Agenda – 15 February 2024

7.4 Temporary Road Closures

Decision Required

Report To:	Tasman District Council
Meeting Date:	15 February 2024
Report Author:	Tania Brown, Road Network Coordinator
Report Authorisers:	Jamie McPherson, Transportation Manager
Report Number:	RCN24-02-7

1. Summary / Te Tuhinga Whakarāpoto

1.1 This report seeks the Council’s approval for temporary road closures for the following local events:

· Annual Muddy Buddy Fundraising event on Sunday 17 March 2024.

· Nelson Car Club Sandy Bay Hill Climb on Sunday 7 April 2024.

· ANZAC Day parades on Thursday 25 April 2024.

2. Recommendation/s / Ngā Tūtohunga

That the Tasman District Council

1. receives the Temporary Road Closures report RCN24-02-7; and

2. approves the following Temporary Road Closures:

· Aporo Road, Tasman between Dicker Road and Baldwin Road for the annual Muddy Buddy Fundraising event from 10.00 am to 3.30 pm on Sunday 17 March 2024.

· Riwaka-Sandy Bay Road from the intersection with the Tākaka Hill Highway for approximately 3 kilometres (RP 0.0 - RP 3.0) from 7.00 am to 5.00 pm for the Nelson Car Club Sandy Bay Hill Climb on Sunday 7 April 2024.

· Queen Street, Richmond from Sundial Square to McIndoe Place, Cambridge Street from Oxford Street to Queen Street, and Oxford Street from Wensley Road to Gladstone Road (SH6) for the annual ANZAC Day parade from 10.00 am to 12.30 pm on Thursday 25 April 2024.

· Pah Street, Motueka – from Talbot Street to Countdown Carpark exit for the annual ANZAC Day parade from 6.00 am to 7.30 pm on Thursday 25 April 2024.

· Aranui Road, Māpua – from Higgs Road to the tennis courts for the annual ANZAC Day parade from 10.30 am to 11.30 am on Thursday 25 April 2024.

· Whitby Way, Wakefield – from Edward Street to Wakefield car park entrance for the annual ANZAC Day parade from 9.00 am to 12 noon on Thursday 25 April 2024.

· School Road, Riwaka – from the intersection SH60 to 12 School Road for the annual ANZAC Day parade from 8.45 am to 9.30 am on Thursday 25 April 2024.

3. Background / Horopaki

3.1 As specified in the Local Government Act 1974 section 342 and schedule 10, temporary road closures for events can only be approved by the Council or a delegated Committee of the Council.

Muddy Buddy – Fundraising Event

3.2 The Tasman School Board of Trustees has applied to temporarily close Aporo Road, Tasman (between Dicker Road and Baldwin Road) on Sunday 17 March 2024 from 10.00am to 3.00pm for the Muddy Buddy event.

3.3 The location and road closure has been approved in previous years for this multisport event with an anticipated number of competitors and spectators of approximately 1400.

3.4 The event will have an approved Traffic Management Plan in place for the duration of the road closure.

3.5 Marshalls will be on duty to allow residents safe access to their properties and to help direct other road users.

3.6 There have been no previous complaints or objections to temporary road closures for this event.

3.7 The proposed closure was advertised in Newsline on 26 January 2024, and on the Tasman District Council’s website.

3.8 As at the time of writing this report, no objections have been received. Staff will update the Council on any objections received after this report was prepared.

3.9 The emergency services have been advised of the proposed closure and have no objections or concerns.

Nelson Car Club Riwaka-Sandy Bay Hill Climb – Car Rally Event

3.10 The Nelson Car Club has applied to temporarily close Riwaka-Sandy Bay Road – from the intersection with the Tākaka Hill Highway for approximately 3 kilometres (RP 0.0 - RP 3.0) on Sunday 7 April 2024 from 8.00am to 5.00pm for the Nelson Car Club Sandy Bay Hill Climb.

3.11 This route has been used in previous years for this event.

3.12 The rally will be conducted under the provisions of the Motorsport New Zealand National Sporting Code and its Appendices and Schedules including all event Supplementary Regulations and Safety Plans. Motorsport New Zealand will issue an Event Permit for the event upon application which includes Public Liability Insurance.

3.13 This proposed closure is also in accordance with the Transport (Vehicular Traffic Road Closure) Regulations 1965.

3.14 The proposed closure was advertised in Newsline on 26 January 2024, and on the Tasman District Council’s website.

3.15 Affected landowners and the Marahau-Sandy Bay Residents Association were sent a letter notifying of the proposed temporary closure.

3.16 As at the time of writing this report, no objections have been received. Staff will update the Council on any objections received after this report was prepared.

3.17 Emergency services and Waka Kotahi have been advised of this closure and have given feedback that any concerns they have will be remedied through the approval of the traffic management plan for the event. This traffic management plan needs to be approved by both Council staff and Waka Kotahi for the event to proceed.

3.18 The Nelson Car Club will deliver a letter advising the closure to affected residents at least one week before the car rally event as well as erecting signs at the location advising of the closure details.

ANZAC Day Parades

3.19 The proposed closure ANZAC Day Parades were advertised in Newsline on 26 January 2024, and on the Tasman District Council’s website.

3.20 The closure of Queen Street will affect the regular bus service that runs along Queen Street. Council staff will work with SBL and the traffic management provider to set up a temporary bus stop on Talbot Street as per previous similar closures and notify the public of this leading up to the event.

3.21 As at the time of writing this report, no objections have been received. Staff will update the Council on any objections received after this report was prepared.

3.22 The emergency services have been advised of the proposed closures and have no objections or concerns.

4. Options / Kōwhiringa

4.1 The options are outlined in the following table:

Option		Advantage	Disadvantage
1.	Approve the proposed temporary road closures described in this report.	The events can safely proceed as planned.	Some business owners, residents and road users may be temporarily inconvenienced.
2.	Approve some of the proposed temporary road closures described in this report.	Some of these events can proceed as planned. Less effect on road users or residents.	Some of the events would not be able to proceed, to the disappointment of attendees.
3.	Decline the proposed temporary road closures described in this report.	No effects on road users or residents.	The events would not be able to proceed as planned, to the disappointment of attendees.

4.2 Option one is recommended.

5. Legal / Ngā ture

5.1 It is a requirement that temporary road closures for certain types of events made under Schedule 10 Clause 11(e) of the Local Government Act 1974 come to the Council (or delegated Committee of Council) for approval. Approval for temporary closures for certain events cannot be delegated to Council staff.

5.2 As per clause 11 of Schedule 10 of the Local Government Act 1974, consultation with the Police and the New Zealand Transport Agency has been undertaken for the proposed temporary road closures.

5.3 As per clause 11(e) of Schedule 10 of the Local Government Act 1974, the road closures will not exceed the aggregate of 31 days for any year.

5.4 As per clause 11A of Schedule 10 of the Local Government Act 1974, and clause 5 of the Transport (Vehicular Traffic Road Closure) Regulations 1965, Council staff will advertise the temporary road closures in Newsline and on the Council’s website.

6. Significance and Engagement / Hiranga me te Whakawhitiwhiti ā-Hapori Whānui

6.1 The following table describes the level of significance of the decision. Overall, the significance is considered low as the effects of the closures are temporary in nature, and appropriate engagement has taken place with affected parties.

	Issue	Level of Significance	Explanation of Assessment
1.	Is there a high level of public interest, or is decision likely to be controversial?	Low	The Nelson Car Club runs a series of annual events and have done so for many years. The Muddy Buddy is a well-supported event and is seen to have a limited impact on the community. The ANZAC Day Parades are part of loved national tradition that are well attended and supported by the community.
2.	Are there impacts on the social, economic, environmental, or cultural aspects of well-being of the community in the present or future?	Low	As above
3.	Is there a significant impact arising from duration of the effects from the decision?	Low	The car rally event is for one day only and if there are any effects on the network the Car Club will remedy these. The Muddy Buddy event is for one day only and alternate access is provided for residents. There are no lasting effects on the roading network. ANZAC Day Parades are well supported community events that are short in duration and will have no lasting effects on the roading network.
4.	Does the decision relate to a strategic asset? (refer Significance and Engagement Policy for list of strategic assets)	Low	The Council’s roading network is considered a strategic asset but this decision only relates to the temporary closures of small sections of the network for a short duration.
5.	Does the decision create a substantial change in the level of service provided by Council?	No
6.	Does the proposal, activity or decision substantially affect debt, rates or Council finances in any one year or more of the LTP?	No
7.	Does the decision involve the sale of a substantial proportion or controlling interest in a CCO or CCTO?	No
8.	Does the proposal or decision involve entry into a private sector partnership or contract to carry out the deliver on any Council group of activities?	No
9.	Does the proposal or decision involve Council exiting from or entering into a group of activities?	No
10.	Does the proposal require particular consideration of the obligations of Te Mana O Te Wai (TMOTW) relating to freshwater and Affordable Waters services?	No
11.	Does the proposal require inclusion of Māori in the decision making process (consistent with s81 of the LGA)?	No

7. Financial or Budgetary Implications / Ngā Ritenga ā-Pūtea

7.1 The management of temporary road closures is a normal part of the Council’s daily business and there are no financial or budgetary implications. Administrative costs for road closures are covered by the application fees.

8. Risks / Ngā Tūraru

Nelson Car Club Riwaka-Sandy Bay Hill Climb

8.1 Some people will be inconvenienced by the temporary road closure of Riwaka-Sandy Bay Road.

8.2 The detour route will be via Kaiteriteri, and residents will be let through the closure area between races. Residents have also been given a phone number to call if they need to exit their property.

Muddy Buddy Event

8.3 Some people will be inconvenienced by the temporary road closure. However, the closure will be managed, and traffic will be diverted via alternate routes.

8.4 There will be many vehicles heading to the event including competitors and spectators, communications will be put out by the event organisers to advise appropriate parking areas for those attending.

ANZAC Day Parade

8.5 Some people will be inconvenienced by the temporary road closures. However, the closures will be short in duration and are part of a strong New Zealand tradition that is cherished and supported by the local community. Similar road closures have been in place in previous years for the ANZAC Day parades, and improvements made as needed to traffic management plans from previous years.

9. Climate Change Considerations / Whakaaro Whakaaweawe Āhuarangi

9.1 All events involving travel to sites cause emissions, through travel to the site by attendees, and in the case of rally events, use of the site by participants.

9.2 Normal daily vehicle usage on these roads also causes emissions.

9.3 The potential emissions effects resulting from the decision to either approve or not approve the temporary road closures in this report are impossible to calculate. Not approving the rally event may mean no rallying activity occurs at all (causing nil emissions), or it may mean rally participants travel further afield to attend a different event (causing greater emissions).

9.4 Overall, the climate change effects of the proposed road closures are considered negligible.

10. Conclusion / Kupu Whakatepe

10.1 The Nelson Car Club rally is part of an annual series and attracts entrants and spectators from all over New Zealand.

10.2 The Muddy Buddy event is a well-known community event well attended by local people from across the region, the event has been hosted by the Tasman School for several years now and is seen as a positive outcome for the community.

10.3 The ANZAC Day Parades are a positive and loved community event with good attendance by residents.

10.4 Temporary road closures for these events require the Council’s approval.

10.5 Staff recommend that the Council approve the temporary road closures in accordance with the Local Government act 1974 section 374 and Schedule 10.

11. Next Steps and Timeline / Ngā Mahi Whai Ake

11.1 If the Council approves the proposed temporary road closures:

11.1.1 Staff will advertise the closures in Newsline and on the Council website.

11.1.2 The Nelson Car Club will undertake a letter drop to affected landowners.

11.1.3 Staff will work with SBL to provide an alternative bus route for the day of the Richmond ANZAC Day parade.

11.1.4 The applicants will submit a Traffic Management Plan to the Council’s Road Corridor Manager for approval one month before the event.

11.1.5 Staff will inform emergency services of the road closure details.

12. Attachments / Tuhinga tāpiri

Nil

Tasman District Council Agenda – 15 February 2024

7.5 Amendment to the Council's Traffic Control Devices Register and Traffic Control Bylaw 2016

Decision Required

Report To:	Tasman District Council
Meeting Date:	15 February 2024
Report Author:	Mike van Enter, Senior Transportation Engineer
Report Authorisers:	Jamie McPherson, Transportation Manager
Report Number:	RCN24-02-8

1. Purpose of the Report / Te Take mō te Pūrongo

1.1 The purpose of this report is to gain the Council’s approval to make changes to the Traffic Control Devices Register and map display, to ensure these are enforceable under the Traffic Control Bylaw 2016.

2. Summary / Te Tuhinga Whakarāpoto

2.1 The Council’s Traffic Control Bylaw 2016, and its accompanying Traffic Control Devices Register and map display, is the mechanism for the Council to record all authorised traffic control devices such as parking restrictions and regulatory traffic signs.

2.2 This report requests the Council’s approval for various changes and additions to the Traffic Control Devices Register.

2.3 A summary of the changes can be found in Section 5, and a diagrammatic description of each change is in Attachment 1.

2.4 Traffic Control Devices that are predominantly added by the creation of new subdivisions or additions from recent capital projects where records have simply been corrected or moved slightly, have been identified from our Road Asset and Maintenance Management (RAMM) database and are included in Attachment 2. These are Traffic Control Devices on newly constructed roads, or existing traffic control devices that should be added to our Bylaw schedule for completeness.

3. Recommendation/s / Ngā Tūtohunga

That the Tasman District Council

1. receives the Amendment to the Council's Traffic Control Devices Register and Traffic Control Bylaw 2016 report RCN24-02-8; and

2. approves amendments to regulations, controls, restrictions and prohibitions in the Traffic Control Devices Register of the Tasman District Traffic Control Bylaw 2016 (Chapter 7 of Tasman District’s Consolidated Bylaw) pursuant to clause 7(3) of the Bylaw, as proposed by the Diagrammatic Descriptions and associated GIS co-ordinates in Attachment 1, Development Traffic Control Devices table in Attachment 2 to the agenda report, with effect from 15 February 2024 or the date the traffic control device is installed, whichever is later; and

3. notes that the Traffic Control Devices Register of the Traffic Control Bylaw 2016 be updated accordingly.

4. Background / Horopaki

4.1 The Council’s Traffic Control Bylaw enables the Council to establish, alter or remove traffic control devices by resolution, amending the Traffic Control Devices Register and map display.

4.2 Parking restrictions and certain regulatory Traffic Control Devices are managed through this bylaw. Changes require a resolution of the Council to become legally enforceable.

4.3 Consultation should be appropriate and in accordance with the Local Government Act Section 82, which sets out the principles of consultation. The consultation principles include:

4.3.1 That persons who will or may be affected by, or have an interest in, the decision or matter should be provided by the local authority with reasonable access to relevant information in a manner and format that is appropriate.

4.3.2 The nature and significance of the decision or matter, including its likely impact from the perspective of the persons who will or may be affected by, or have an interest in, the decision or matter.

4.3.3 The costs and benefits of any consultation process or procedure.

4.4 Some of the proposed Traffic Control Device changes are considered to have minor or very isolated effects. Where the effects are considered isolated, consultation is typically via letter inviting feedback from adjacent property owners and businesses. Changes that may be wider reaching are typically associated with more significant transportation projects.

5. Analysis and Advice / Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Parking Management

5.1 McShane Road no-stopping restriction around the Old Factory Corner (Connings) access. Request due to safety concerns when vehicles are parked on McShane Road around this busy access.

5.2 Carmello Grove no-stopping restriction. The proposal is to restrict parking in the turning head to allow drivers to undertake a 180 degree or 3-point turn to exit the road.

5.3 Berryfield Drive no-stopping restriction. Install 16m of No Stopping lines across the combined vehicle accessways of Numbers 86 and 88 Berryfield Drive, due to the separating space being used for parking during high demand.

5.4 Church Street, add two P10 time restricted spaces to allow daycare pick up and drop off. Specific feedback request that the two spaces are split up so that each residential property still has an unrestricted space along their frontage. This alternative layout would require more signs to be installed as each restriction should be bookended with signs. The layout may be less clear to general motorists.

5.5 Charlotte Lane no-stopping restrictions to provide pedestrians with 20m crossing sight distance.

5.6 Memorial Hall carpark, Motueka change from P120 time restriction to P180 time restriction.

Bus Service

5.7 Relocate Bus Stop from 432 High Street to 406 High Street in response to feedback on the current location.

Transport Choices - Motueka

5.8 Te Āwhina Marae Shared Path. New Shared Path from number 99 Pah Street, ending at Whakarewa Street on Queen Victoria Street.

5.9 Whakarewa Street new no-stopping restrictions where the new footpath deviates to bypass existing power poles.

5.10 Queen Victoria Street new shared path from Green Lane to King Edward Street.

5.11 Main Road Lower Moutere shared path from Wildman Road to Community Road and no-stopping restrictions across driveways. This project is constructing a short new section of shared path to enable parking opposite the Lower Moutere store. This existing shared path has not previously been added to our Bylaw.

Development

5.12 The attached list (Development Traffic Control Devices) shows Traffic Control Devices that have been installed and added to our Road Asset and Maintenance Management (RAMM) database. These are predominantly added by the creation of new subdivisions, but the list may also include additions from recent capital projects where records have simply been corrected or moved slightly.

5.13 An example of a capital project that has moved Traffic Control Devices is the Brightwater Town Centre upgrade of Ellis Street. The project extended existing no-stopping lines across driveways (as shown by Figure 1 below). This is not a change to the existing parking provision, but the RAMM data output identifies it as a change to the Traffic Control device. These are included here to ensure consistency between our Bylaw record and on the ground markings.

A high angle view of a bus stop

Description automatically generated

Figure 1: Example of Traffic Control changes identified by the RAMM output.

6. Options / Kōwhiringa

6.1 The options are outlined in the following table:

Option		Advantage	Disadvantage
1.	Approve changes proposed in the report and in Attachment 1 with effect from 15 February 2024, or the date the traffic control device is installed, whichever is later. This is the recommended option.	Improved function and safety of the road network at these locations. Positive feedback from the community who raised some of the concerns and proposals with Council staff.	Minor reduction in on-road parking.
2.	Approve some of the proposed changes	Some improved function and safety of the road network at these locations. There would be some positive feedback from the community who raised concerns with some of the proposals from the Council.	Minor reduction in on-road parking. If changes are not approved, there could be safety issues and negative feedback from the community.
3.	Do not approve the proposed changes.	Nil identified.	There could be safety issues and negative community feedback.

6.2 Option one is recommended.

7. Legal / Ngā ture

7.1 The proposed changes meet the requirements of the Tasman District Council Traffic Control Bylaw 2016.

8. Iwi Engagement / Whakawhitiwhiti ā-Hapori Māori

8.1 Staff used the Tasman District Council iwi portal for engagement and the Transport Choices Motueka project team held a hui with interested Iwi.

8.2 No specific iwi engagement has occurred for the changes that are not part of the Transport Choices project. These changes are relatively minor operational issues and isolated in effects.

9. Significance and Engagement / Hiranga me te Whakawhitiwhiti ā-Hapori Whānui

9.1 The following table describes the level of significance of this decision. Overall, the level of significance is considered low as the changes are generally minor and we have consulted with directly affected residents, businesses, and stakeholders.

	Issue	Level of Significance	Explanation of Assessment
1.	Is there a high level of public interest, or is decision likely to be controversial?	Low	Changing road layouts can create a high level of interest, particularly on more highly trafficked roads. This decision affects a relatively small number of roads in the District. The changes associated with projects have had consultation undertaken on the proposed changes and a decision made to proceed with the project. For non-project changes, Council staff have consulted with immediately adjacent landowners. Several proposed changes have come from members of the community who are directly affected. There will be improved road safety or function for many transport system users at the locations of the proposed changes.
2.	Are there impacts on the social, economic, environmental or cultural aspects of well-being of the community in the present or future?	Low	Good management of traffic controls and parking can contribute towards the success of a place; poorly managed and designed traffic controls and parking can undermine efforts to create highly liveable urban areas. The parking restrictions proposed are to address issues identified.
3.	Is there a significant impact arising from duration of the effects from the decision?	Low	Traffic devices are not permanent and can be changed if required.
4.	Does the decision relate to a strategic asset? (refer Significance and Engagement Policy for list of strategic assets)	Low	The Council’s roading network is considered a strategic asset. The changes are intended to improve safety and accessibility of our transport network to a variety of user types.
5.	Does the decision create a substantial change in the level of service provided by Council?	Low
6.	Does the proposal, activity or decision substantially affect debt, rates or Council finances in any one year or more of the LTP?	Low	Delivering some of the proposed traffic control devices now as part of the Transport Choices projects with external funding, may reduce planned expenditure to deliver these changes in future years.
7.	Does the decision involve the sale of a substantial proportion or controlling interest in a CCO or CCTO?	No
8.	Does the proposal or decision involve entry into a private sector partnership or contract to carry out the deliver on any Council group of activities?	No
9.	Does the proposal or decision involve Council exiting from or entering into a group of activities?	No
10.	Does the proposal require particular consideration of the obligations of Te Mana O Te Wai (TMOTW) relating to freshwater and Affordable Waters services?	No

10. Communication / Whakawhitiwhiti Kōrero

10.1 The Transport Choices projects have included extensive communications.

10.2 Directly affected residents and businesses have been engaged to provide feedback on the proposed changes.

11. Financial or Budgetary Implications / Ngā Ritenga ā-Pūtea

11.1 The cost of installing the proposed traffic control devices, and updating the register, will be met from existing budgets.

12. Risks / Ngā Tūraru

12.1 There are safety risks associated with not approving some of the traffic control devices.

13. Climate Change Considerations / Whakaaro Whakaaweawe Āhuarangi

13.1 Providing improved facilities for walking, cycling and public transport, are likely to reduce transport emissions.

14. Alignment with Policy and Strategic Plans / Te Hangai ki ngā aupapa Here me ngā Mahere Rautaki Tūraru

14.1 The proposed traffic control device changes are consistent with the Council’s Walking and Cycling Strategy, the Richmond and Motueka Town Centre Parking Strategy 2018–2038, and the Regional Public Transport Plan (RPTP).

15. Conclusion / Kupu Whakatepe

15.1 The changes to traffic control devices are proposed to ensure the safe functioning of the road network at these locations, and to contribute to achieving the objectives of the Transport Choices projects, the Walking and Cycling Strategy, and the Regional Public Transport Plan.

16. Next Steps and Timeline / Ngā Mahi Whai Ake

16.1 If the Council approves the proposed changes

16.1.1 Staff will provide instructions to our contractors to implement the changes required.

16.1.2 Staff will update the Traffic Control Devices Register as soon as changes are in place.

16.2 Community Infrastructure staff will provide the Communications team with details of the significant approved changes to be included in Newsline and on the Council’s website.

17. Attachments / Tuhinga tāpiri

1.⇩	Traffic Control Devices - Diagramatic Descriptions	115
2.⇩	Development Traffic Control Devices	140

Tasman District Council Agenda – 15 February 2024

7.6 Proposal to Stop Unformed Legal Roads

Decision Required

Report To:	Tasman District Council
Meeting Date:	15 February 2024
Report Author:	Robert Cant, Programme Leader - Land & Leases
Report Authorisers:	Richard Kirby, Group Manager - Community Infrastructure
Report Number:	RCN24-02-9

1. Purpose of the Report / Te Take mō te Pūrongo

1.1 To seek the Council’s approval to publicly notify the intention to stop two portions of unformed legal road and to approve the stopping of the relevant roads if no objections are received, and subsequent disposal of the land to adjacent landowners.

2. Summary / Te Tuhinga Whakarāpoto

2.1 The first of the portions of unformed legal road proposed to be stopped is a short section of road adjacent to 469 Tasman View Road, near Harley Road, Tasman.

2.2 The second of the portions of unformed legal road proposed to be stopped is an isolated portion of legal road, which is effectively surrounded by private land at 105 River Road, Appleby.

2.3 The road stopping process will be undertaken in accordance with Schedule 10 of the Local Government Act 1974. The process requires approval of the survey plan by Land Information New Zealand prior to public notification of the proposal which provides an opportunity for objections to be made to the proposal.

2.4 If no objections are received the road stopping(s) will proceed and be confirmed by the Council by public notice. The Council is asked to delegate to the Chief Executive Officer the authority to sign all documents required to give effect to the stopping of the road(s), and disposal of the land to adjacent landowners.

2.5 If objections are received, a hearing panel may consider the objections if the adjacent landowner (or landowners) wish to continue with the process. The Council is asked to appoint a hearing panel to consider any objections. If objections are received in relation to one proposal, but not the other, the panel will only consider the objections pertaining to the relevant property.

2.6 The hearings panel will make a recommendation to the Council whether to uphold the objection which will bring the process to an end or refer the matter to the Environment Court to determine.

3. Recommendation/s / Ngā Tūtohunga

That the Tasman District Council

1. receives the Proposal to Stop Unformed Legal Roads report RCN24-02-9; and

2. approves the preparation of survey plans for the portion of road to be stopped adjacent to 469 Tasman View Road, Tasman, 837 sq m (approximately, subject to survey), being unformed legal road adjacent to Sec 2 SO 399229, Pt Lot 9 DP 756 (Record of Title 442909) as shown on the aerial map being Attachment 1 to the report, to be submitted to Land Information New Zealand for approval; and

3. approves the preparation of survey plans for the portion of road to be stopped adjacent to 105 River Road, Appleby, 3971 sq m (approximately subject to survey), being unformed legal road adjacent to Section 1 SO 442090 and Pt Lot 7 DP 232 (Record of Title 653065) as shown on the aerial map being Attachment 2 to the report, to be submitted to Land Information New Zealand for approval; and

4. subject to the approval of Land Information New Zealand to both or one of the survey plans, proceed with public notification of the proposed road stoppings (or stopping) in accordance with Schedule 10 of the Local Government Act 1974; and

5. approves the appointment of a Hearings Panel to consider any objections received to the stopping of the unformed legal roads adjacent to 469 Tasman View Road, or 105 River Road, and to make recommendations to the Council on whether to uphold any objections or refer the matter to the Environment Court in either or both cases, should objections be received; and

6. appoints the following Councillors to the Hearings Panel:

Councillor ………………………. (Chair)

Councillor ……………………….

Councillor ……………………….; and

7. agrees that the Chair shall have the power to appoint other Councillors in substitution should either Councillor appointed to the Hearing Panel be unavailable; and

8. approves the stopping of the unformed legal road adjacent to 469 Tasman View Road, Tasman. 837 sq m (approx., subject to survey), being unformed legal road adjacent to Sec 2 SO 399229, Pt Lot 9 DP 756 (Record of Title 442909); and

9. approves the stopping of the unformed legal road adjacent to 105 River Road, Appleby, 3971 sq m (approximately subject to survey), being unformed legal road adjacent to Section 1 SO 442090 and Pt Lot 7 DP 232 (Record of Title 653065) by public notice, subject to there being no objections received; and

10. approves entering into a Sale and Purchase Agreement for the disposal of the land subject to the road stopping adjacent to 469 Tasman View Road, Tasman, 837 sq m (approximately subject to survey), being unformed legal road adjacent to Sec 2 SO 399229, Pt Lot 9 DP 756 (Record of Title 442909) with a requirement to amalgamate the stopped road with 442909 with the land price to be determined by valuation and subject to the purchaser(s) agreeing to meet all of the Council’s costs for the road stopping and disposal process (including survey, legal, valuation and staff costs); and

11. approves entering into a Sale and Purchase Agreement for the disposal of the land subject to the road stopping adjacent to 105 River Road, Appleby, 3971 sq m (approximately subject to survey), being unformed legal road adjacent to Section 1 SO 442090 and Pt Lot 7 DP 232 (Record of Title 653065) with a requirement to amalgamate the stopped road with 653065, with the land price to be determined by valuation and subject to the purchaser(s) agreeing to meet all of the Council’s costs for the road stopping and disposal process (including survey, legal, valuation and staff costs); and

12. delegates to the Chief Executive Officer the power to complete any processes and sign any documentation required to stop the unformed roads and to the disposal of the stopped road land, subject to there being no objections received.

4. Background / Horopaki

4.1 Staff routinely respond to enquiries about the stopping of unformed roads in the Tasman District. Many enquirers are discouraged from making a formal application and paying the application fee. Common reasons for discouraging applications include proposals to stop roads that would leave other road land isolated from the wider road network, or where a potential stopping removes public access to other public land (National Parks, Reserves, or other roads). The most common reason to discourage a road stopping application is that it would impact technical road frontage for other ratepayers further along the unformed road.

4.2 As a result of that approach, the majority of road stopping proposals involve road exchanges – essentially moving the location of a legal road to facilitate subdivision development.

4.3 From time to time, applications are received involving the outright purchase of unformed legal road land, without any new road land being acquired. This report covers two such applications – legal road adjacent to 469 Tasman View Road, near Harley Road, Tasman and an isolated parcel of legal road near River Road, Appleby.

4.4 The proposal adjacent to Tasman View Road has been requested by the adjacent owner. The unformed legal road only extends for about 50m and ceases. The proposal retains sufficient legal road to provide road frontage to another adjacent property. There is no obvious reason to retain this land as road. A GIS map showing the road proposed to be stopped is attached to this report (Attachment 1).

4.5 The proposal near River Road involves an ‘orphaned’ parcel of legal road which does not connect to any other legal road. It is surrounded by the title to the property at 105 River Road, except at either end, where it fronts the Council’s River Berm Title (300+ hectares). There is already well-established public access only a few metres from this road land. There is no obvious reason to retain this land as legal road. A GIS map showing the road proposed to be stopped is attached to this report (Attachment 2).

4.6 Both road stoppings are proposed to be undertaken under the Local Government Act 1974, using the process in Schedule 10. This involves preparation of a survey plan to be submitted to Land Information New Zealand, and then, if approval is provided, a public notification process – the preferred mechanism where a road stopping involves the disposal of road land.

4.7 In both cases, given the proximity of public land (the road land adjacent to 469 Tasman View Road is close to Tasman’s Great Taste Trail, and 105 River Road is adjacent to the popular River Berm Land) it would be best practice in any case to allow the public to provide input. In both cases, however, there are already recreational facilities only a few metres from the roads proposed to be stopped.

4.8 The road stopping process in the Local Government Act 1974 is that the Council notifies its own intention to stop the road. The Act does not contemplate the practical reality that the Council receives applications from external parties.

4.9 There are other parties which the Council will consult prior to the public notice process to notify the Council’s intention to stop the road. These include Herenga ā Nuku Aotearoa (formerly Walking Access NZ), Wakatū Inc, relevant iwi and Heritage New Zealand. All these parties would have a right to object as part of the public notice, but staff will specifically draw attention to the proposal. Some of this consultation may have already commenced to minimise the length of the process. Advice to the relevant organisations will be clear that the Council’s approval is pending, and not assured.

4.10 The process is to publicly notify the intention to stop the roads. This report seeks the appointment of a hearing panel. If objections are received, the panel hears the objections, but can only decide to recommend to the Council to whether to allow the objection. The Council can uphold the objection which will bring the process to an end or if the Council does not agree with the objector, the proposal is referred to the Environment Court to decide whether to stop the road.

4.11 The road stopping proposal requires that the applicants (in this case the owners of 469 Tasman View Road, and 105 River Road) must pay all of the Council’s costs, including staff time, legal fees, valuation fees, etc. Both parties will sign a formal undertaking to meet the Council’s costs before any application to Land Information New Zealand is made and any public notification.

4.12 In addition, the value of the land is paid to the Council. The value is determined by a land valuer based on the value the stopped road land adds to the property. The title of the stopped road is amalgamated with the existing land title.

4.13 If objections are received, the adjacent landowners/applicants will have the opportunity to cease the process or continue. If they continue, a hearing will be required, and Councillors are asked to appoint a hearing panel. The cost of the hearing will be met by the adjacent landowners/applicants.

4.14 If no objections are received, the Council is asked to delegate to the Chief Executive Officer the authority to complete any processes and sign any documents required to give effect to the road stopping and the disposal of the land which will be by way of a Sale and Purchase Agreement. This will include the authority to give public notice that the road has been stopped, and to complete processes for the amalgamation of the titles.

4.15 If the road stopping fails, the costs of the process remain payable by the applicant.

5. Analysis and Advice / Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

5.1 In both cases, the applicants have been clearly advised that the costs of the road stopping process will be payable by them, even if the application is declined following public notice. They will have signed a costs agreement prior to any notification. If there are no objections, or any objections are declined by a Council hearing, and the Environment Court agrees to the road stopping, the value of the land is payable in addition to the costs.

5.2 This is a significant disincentive to proceed with the road stopping application, but both have decided the benefits outweigh the risks. Given both applications involve land which is never likely to be formed as road, nor used for public recreation (given the proximity of existing recreation facilities), there is no obvious reason to not commence the road stopping process.

6. Options / Kōwhiringa

6.1 The options are outlined in the following table:

Option		Advantage	Disadvantage
1.	Decline to publicly notify either or both road stopping proposals.	No further work is required.	The opportunity for the potential positive outcome of a mutually beneficial road stopping is lost
2.	Agree to publicly notify either or both road stopping proposals.	Each applicant’s private aspirations for the road land are able to be considered through a robust public process	There is a significant amount of staff time involved, albeit the time can be cost recovered.

6.2 Option two is recommended.

7. Legal / Ngā ture

7.1 Schedule 10 of the Local Government Act 1974 is quite prescriptive in setting out the process for a road stopping. The land is first surveyed. After the land is surveyed, public notification is undertaken. This includes at least two notices in Newsline, information on the Council’s website, and signage erected on the relevant sites. The public has 40 working days to provide an objection. If objections are received, the Council hears the objection, and can either uphold the objection, or send the matter to the Environment Court.

7.2 At any stage of the process, the adjacent landowners/applicants would have the opportunity to stop the process. If objections are received, the applicant would have the opportunity to stop the process (considered reasonably likely) given the high cost of a Council hearing, and a potential Environment Court process.

7.3 Schedule 10 only provides for the Council to notify its intention to stop the road. The Act does not seem to contemplate the scenario of a private person applying to have road land stopped. Thus, the public notice will advise of the Council’s intention to stop the road.

8. Iwi Engagement / Whakawhitiwhiti ā-Hapori Māori

8.1 There is no statutory obligation to consult with iwi, albeit iwi entities have the same ability to object as any party. However, prior to notification staff intend to write to iwi alerting them to the proposal and advising iwi they may object. Pre-engagement will also be held with Wakatū Incorporation.

9. Significance and Engagement / Hiranga me te Whakawhitiwhiti ā-Hapori Whānui

9.1 This decision is considered to be of low significance given the areas where the portions of the road are located.

	Issue	Level of Significance	Explanation of Assessment
1.	Is there a high level of public interest, or is decision likely to be controversial?	Low	While difficult to predict both road stopping proposals have no obvious impact on present or future use of the road land
2.	Are there impacts on the social, economic, environmental or cultural aspects of well-being of the community in the present or future?	No
3.	Is there a significant impact arising from duration of the effects from the decision?	No
4.	Does the decision relate to a strategic asset? (refer Significance and Engagement Policy for list of strategic assets)	No	While both are part of the legal road network (a strategic asset in its whole), neither are formed, nor likely to ever be formed.
5.	Does the decision create a substantial change in the level of service provided by Council?	No
6.	Does the proposal, activity or decision substantially affect debt, rates or Council finances in any one year or more of the LTP?	No
7.	Does the decision involve the sale of a substantial proportion or controlling interest in a CCO or CCTO?	No
8.	Does the proposal or decision involve entry into a private sector partnership or contract to carry out the deliver on any Council group of activities?	No	If the road is stopped, a title will be raised and added to the owners existing land title.
9.	Does the proposal or decision involve Council exiting from or entering into a group of activities?	No
10.	Does the proposal require particular consideration of the obligations of Te Mana O Te Wai (TMOTW) relating to freshwater and Affordable Waters services?	No

10. Communication / Whakawhitiwhiti Kōrero

10.1 As is mentioned earlier in this report, staff will initiate communication with iwi, Wakatū Incorporation and other potentially interested agencies.

11. Financial or Budgetary Implications / Ngā Ritenga ā-Pūtea

11.1 There should be no unbudgeted costs for the Council as any Council costs, including staff time and legal fees, will be met by the applicants.

11.2 The road stopping proposals may have a minor impact on the Council’s finances if either or both road stopping proposals are concluded with the land being sold to the adjacent landowners/applicants. The land valuations are based on the value added to the existing land title, so are likely to be low.

12. Risks / Ngā Tūraru

12.1 This report seeks to minimise the risks associated with the sale of road land by undertaking the statutory requirement to publicly notify the intention to stop the road and dispose of the land. If there is significant opposition the Council will be able to terminate the process if objections are sustained at the hearing. If by any chance, there was significant opposition the adjacent owners/applicants would have the opportunity to stop the process.

13. Climate Change Considerations / Whakaaro Whakaaweawe Āhuarangi

13.1 The intention to stop the relevant roads will have no obvious impact on the Council’s climate change obligations or objectives.

14. Alignment with Policy and Strategic Plans / Te Hangai ki ngā aupapa Here me ngā Mahere Rautaki Tūraru

14.1 There is no formal road stopping policy. The present process has evolved over many years, with applications considered by a staff committee, ahead of a decision by the Council on whether to proceed with a road stopping. Each road stopping has its own unique aspects. Development of a formal policy would be very difficult given the wide variation of reasons to seek to stop roads. The present system is considered to work well.

15. Conclusion / Kupu Whakatepe

15.1 In both cases, the applications involve road land which is impractical to form or use for public recreation. There seems no obvious reason to refuse to publicly notify the road stoppings.

16. Next Steps and Timeline / Ngā Mahi Whai Ake

16.1 The road stopping proposed for Tasman View Road is more advanced, so is likely to be publicly notified in the next month or two, once the survey plan is available. The River Road proposal will involve the applicant commissioning a survey plan. That applicant can also commission a valuation ahead of incurring the cost of a survey plan.

16.2 Once public notification has been undertaken, 40 working days are allowed for objectors to submit their arguments. If objections are received, the adjacent owners/applicants will have the opportunity to cease the process, or agree to meet the cost of a hearing.

16.3 If no objections are received, a notice is undertaken formally stopping the road. A title to the land subject to the road stopping will be raised and incorporated into the landowners existing land title by way of amalgamation.

17. Attachments / Tuhinga tāpiri

1.⇩	469 Tasman View Road - Plan of road proposed to be stopped	152
2.⇩	105 River Road - Plan of Road proposed to be stopped	153

Tasman District Council Agenda – 15 February 2024

7.7 Granting of Community Leases - Golden Bay

Decision Required

Report To:	Tasman District Council
Meeting Date:	15 February 2024
Report Author:	Robert Cant, Programme Leader - Land & Leases
Report Authorisers:	Grant Reburn, Reserves and Facilities Manager
Report Number:	RCN24-02-10

1. Purpose of the Report / Te Take mō te Pūrongo

1.1 To obtain approval to grant leases of reserve land to community groups in Golden Bay.

1.2 To provide the consent of the Minister of Conservation, acting as the Minister’s delegate, to the granting of the community leases.

2. Summary / Te Tuhinga Whakarāpoto

2.1 Six community leases are proposed to be granted by the Council. All are in Golden Bay. The Golden Bay Community Board has supported the granting of the six leases.

2.2 Two leases are to be issued over parts of the Golden Bay Community Centre at
88 Commercial Street. This is Local Purpose Reserve land, so is not required to be publicly notified, nor is the Minister of Conservation’s consent required. The two leases are to be issued to Golden Kids Incorporated and Mohua Social Services Charitable Trust.

2.3 Four leases are to be issued over various Recreation Reserves. These are not required to be publicly notified, due to the fact they are contemplated in the Reserve Management Plan. Because they are issued on Recreation Reserves, the Minister of Conservation’s consent is required. This consenting role is delegated to the Council. These leases are to Aotearoa Playcentre, St John’s, Pōhara Bowling Club and the Tākaka Drama Society.

2.4 The Council must make a separate decision to consent to the granting of the leases, acting as the Minister of Conservation’s delegate.

3. Recommendation/s / Ngā Tūtohunga

That the Tasman District Council

1. receives the Granting of Community Leases - Golden Bay report, RCN24-02-10; and

2. approves the granting of a five-year lease under Section 61(2A) Reserves Act 1977 to Golden Kids Incorporated, over part of the Golden Bay Community Centre at 88 Commercial Street, Tākaka; and

3. approves the granting of a five-year lease, under Section 61(2A) Reserves Act 1977 with one right of renewal, to Mohua Social Services Charitable Trust, over part of the Golden Bay Community Centre at 88 Commercial Street, Tākaka; and

4. approves the granting of a five-year lease under Section 54(1)(b) Reserves Act 1977 to Pōhara Bowling Club Incorporated, over part of the Pōhara Recreation Reserve; and

5. approves the granting of a five-year lease to Tākaka Drama Society Incorporated, under Section 54(1)(b) Reserves Act 1977 over part of the Golden Bay Recreation “Park”; and

6. approves the granting of a five-year lease under Section 54(1)(b) Reserves Act 1977 to Order of St John South Island Regional Trust, over part of the Golden Bay Recreation “Park”; and

7. approves the granting of a five-year lease under Section 54(1)(b) Reserves Act 1977 to Te Whanau Tupu Ngatahi o Aotearoa – Aotea (Tākaka Playcentre), over part of the Killarney Recreation Reserve – 5 Lake Terrace, Tākaka; and

8. consents to the granting of the leases specified in clauses 4 – 7 of the resolution, acting as the Minister of Conservation, by virtue of a delegation from the Minister of Conservation dated 12 June 2013.

4. Background / Horopaki

4.1 The Council has approximately 100 leases issued in favour of community groups throughout the Tasman District.

4.2 The community groups listed later in this report have undertaken services which provide benefits to their community. The community groups have operated effectively and in accordance with their respective leases - with the exception of Mohua Social Services (which has not had a lease in the past but has operated effectively).

4.3 The Property Transactions team works with the Reserves and Facilities team to review each community lease. In each case listed, the community group has continued to operate effectively, and a new lease is recommended.

4.4 The leases are issued under the Reserves Act 1977. The Act does not differentiate between granting a new lease to an existing group and a new group seeking a lease, in terms of the process to decide whether or not to grant a lease to a community group. There is, however, a slightly different process depending on whether the occupation is of Recreation Reserve, or Local Purpose Reserve.

4.5 The leases listed below were referred to the Golden Bay Community Board and discussed at the Board meeting in December 2023. The Board recommended the granting of the leases to the following community groups.

4.6 The Council is asked to grant the following community leases, acting in its capacity as administering body of the relevant reserves.

4.7 Leases of Recreation Reserves (Sec 54, Reserves Act 1977) also require the consent of the Minister of Conservation. In 2013, the Minister delegated the powers to consent to Local Authorities. It is important to distinguish between the decision to grant the lease (Acting as the Council), and the decision to consent to the granting of the lease (Acting as the Minister). To add to the complexity, leases of Local Purpose Reserves do not require the consent of the Minister.

4.8 The following two leases are recommended to be granted. These leases are issued over Local Purpose Reserves, so do not require the consent of the Minister.

4.9 Golden Kids Incorporated – 88 Commercial Street Tākaka. Local Purpose Reserve. The activity is contemplated in the relevant management plan. Granted under Section 61(2A) Reserves Act 1977 for 5 years. Council owned building.

4.10 Mohua Social Services Charitable Trust (Mohua Social Services) – 88 Commercial Street, Tākaka. Local Purpose Reserve. This is a new lease, so not contemplated in a management plan. The Mohua Social Services group has occupied a part of the Hall Building for many years. On behalf of the Hall Committee, it has administered bookings for the Hall, while paying rent for the office accommodation used by Mohua Social Services. The lack of a formal lease has recently caused issues for Mohua Social Services, and it requested a lease to enable it to obtain funding to continue its work. The proposal is to grant a lease of the relevant portion of the Hall Building for five years, with a right of renewal for a further five years. Mohua Social Services will be obliged under the lease to continue to provide booking and other services to the Hall Committee. In effect, the lease will document long standing arrangements between the Hall Committee and Mohua Social Services, which are working well. Granted under Section 61(2A) Reserves Act 1977. Same Council owned building as Golden Kids.

4.11 The following four leases are recommended to be granted for five years. These leases are issued over Recreation Reserves, so also require the consent of the Minister of Conservation (under delegation to the Council). All are contemplated in the relevant management plan so public notice is not required. These leases are to be issued in accordance with Section 54(1) of the Reserves Act 1977 (Leasing of Recreation Reserves)

4.12 Pōhara Bowling Club Incorporated – Pōhara Recreation Reserve (NL9B/899). The activity is contemplated in the relevant management plan. The building and other improvements (bowling green) are owned by the Club.

4.13 Tākaka Drama Society Incorporated – Golden Bay Recreation “Park” (Recreation Reserve NL62/224 and NL75/221). The building is owned by the Society.

4.14 Te Whanau Tupu Ngatahi o Aotearoa – Playcentre Aotearoa (Tākaka Playcentre),
5 Lake Crescent. Recreation Reserve (204583). Building is owned by the Playcentre organisation.

4.15 Order of St John South Island Regional Trust Board. Golden Bay Recreation “Park” (Recreation Reserve NL62/224 and NL75/221). The building is owned by the Society.

4.16 In addition to deciding to grant the leases (acting as the Council – Reserve administering body) the Council is asked to consent to the granting of the leases acting as the Minister of Conservations’ delegate. In acting as the Minister, the Council needs to be satisfied that the granting of the leases does not conflict with the overall purpose of the Reserves Act 1977, and are appropriate activities on Reserve land. Given these activities are longstanding community uses, contemplated in the relevant management plans, providing consent to these leases is considered appropriate.

4.17 The Mayor and Councillors will be aware that the development of a community leasing policy is progressing. Ideally these leases would be delayed until the policy was finalised. Given the policy is unlikely to be finalised until late 2024, or early 2025 and these are routine and longstanding occupations, the likelihood of the new policy materially varying how these (and similar) uses operate is considered low. It is considered preferable to have up to date documentation than wait for the policy.

5. Analysis and Advice / Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

5.1 The occupations by these community groups are longstanding.

5.2 The Golden Bay Community Board was consulted on the intention to issue these leases and supported the leases at its meeting in December 2023.

5.3 All the occupations, except for Mohua Social Services, are contemplated in the relevant management plans which have undergone public consultation in the past. Mohua Social Services is a new lease, but one which documents a longstanding occupation. A lease is needed to allow Mohua Social Services to seek funding/grants to continue its work.

6. Options / Kōwhiringa

6.1 The options are outlined in the following table:

Option		Advantage	Disadvantage
1.	To grant all the community leases, and consent acting as the Minister, as listed	This will allow the important community work undertaken by the relevant groups to continue.	Other than the staff time administering the leases there is no obvious disadvantage.
2.	To refuse to grant some of the leases, but not others	This would mean the relevant groups would have to cease providing their services or find other accommodation.	Without having signalled in advance that the Council was contemplating refusing to issue a new lease, this would create reputational risk.
3.	To refuse to grant all of the leases.	This would mean the relevant groups would have to cease providing their services or find other accommodation.	Without having signalled in advance that the Council was contemplating refusing to issue a new lease, this would create reputational risk.

6.2 Option one is recommended.

7. Legal / Ngā ture

7.1 Sections 54 and 61 of the Reserves Act 1977 specifically provide for the issue of leases for community groups. The practice of issuing community leases is routine and in keeping with both the spirit and intention of the Act. There is no known legal risk in granting these leases.

8. Iwi Engagement / Whakawhitiwhiti ā-Hapori Māori

8.1 The granting of individual community leases is not an area of the Council’s work which has traditionally been consulted on with iwi. Given these are long standing occupations of reserve land and are relatively short terms, it is considered unlikely that iwi would have an interest. Iwi consultation does typically occur when new occupations are contemplated – albeit the Mohua Social Services occupation is of such a long-standing nature iwi consultation isn’t considered necessary.

8.2 Iwi consultation does occur when ward management plans are developed, albeit the Golden Bay Ward plan dates back to 2003, and would not have been specifically consulted on with iwi.

9. Significance and Engagement / Hiranga me te Whakawhitiwhiti ā-Hapori Whānui

	Issue	Level of Significance	Explanation of Assessment
1.	Is there a high level of public interest, or is decision likely to be controversial?	No	The renewals seem unlikely to draw any controversy. Even if all or some of the leases were declined (not recommended), the controversy would be comparatively localised.
2.	Are there impacts on the social, economic, environmental or cultural aspects of well-being of the community in the present or future?	Yes	Renewal of the leases will enhance community wellbeing.
3.	Is there a significant impact arising from duration of the effects from the decision?	No	These occupations/leases have existed for a long time
4.	Does the decision relate to a strategic asset? (refer Significance and Engagement Policy for list of strategic assets)	No	While reserves as a collective are a strategic asset, these individual leases would not be considered strategic in an overall sense.
5.	Does the decision create a substantial change in the level of service provided by Council?	No	These occupations/leases have existed for a long time
6.	Does the proposal, activity or decision substantially affect debt, rates or Council finances in any one year or more of the LTP?	No	These occupations/leases have existed for a long time
7.	Does the decision involve the sale of a substantial proportion or controlling interest in a CCO or CCTO?	No	These occupations/leases have existed for a long time
8.	Does the proposal or decision involve entry into a private sector partnership or contract to carry out the deliver on any Council group of activities?	No	The community groups involved would not meet the threshold of a “private sector partnership”.
9.	Does the proposal or decision involve Council exiting from or entering into a group of activities?	No	These occupations/leases have existed for a long time
10.	Does the proposal require particular consideration of the obligations of Te Mana O Te Wai (TMOTW) relating to freshwater and Affordable Waters services?	No	None of the activities will impact on water services.

10. Communication / Whakawhitiwhiti Kōrero

10.1 If the decision is to grant these leases, the relevant community groups will be sent a new document to sign. Communication has occurred already informing the groups that new leases are being contemplated.

11. Financial or Budgetary Implications / Ngā Ritenga ā-Pūtea

11.1 The granting of these leases realistically extends existing arrangements. There are no significant financial implications from granting these leases.

12. Risks / Ngā Tūraru

12.1 There is always some risk in dealing with community groups. From time to time, groups go into decline, or there is conflict within the memberships. In these cases, there are no known issues with any of the groups. If there were issues, it would be hoped the Community Board would be aware of them. The risk of granting these leases is considered low.

12.2 Having up to date lease documentation reduces the risks to the Council and the community groups. When arrangements are not properly documented, there is a greater risk of misunderstandings, with questions around maintenance and insurance a particular risk if responsibility is not documented.

13. Climate Change Considerations / Whakaaro Whakaaweawe Āhuarangi

13.1 These occupations/leases have existed for a long time and seem unlikely to impact Climate Change. The Pōhara Bowling Club location is potentially vulnerable to climate change, but granting this lease will not impact on the vulnerability.

14. Alignment with Policy and Strategic Plans / Te Hangai ki ngā aupapa Here me ngā Mahere Rautaki Tūraru

14.1 Granting these leases is consistent with the Golden Bay Ward Reserve Management Plan (2003) and Reserves General Policy.

15. Conclusion / Kupu Whakatepe

15.1 The proposal to offer new leases to the relevant community groups is either contemplated in the relevant management plan or is a long standing occupation (Mohua Social Services) being formalised with an agreement. The Golden Bay Community Board has been consulted and supports the granting of the leases.

16. Next Steps and Timeline / Ngā Mahi Whai Ake

16.1 Assuming the Council resolves to offer these leases to the relevant community groups, documentation will be prepared for signing.

17. Attachments / Tuhinga tāpiri

Nil

Tasman District Council Agenda – 15 February 2024

7.9 Treasury Quarterly Report

Information Only - No Decision Required

Report To:	Tasman District Council
Meeting Date:	15 February 2024
Report Author:	James Bagnall, Financial Analyst
Report Authorisers:	Mike Drummond, Group Manager - Finance
Report Number:	RCN24-02-12

1. Summary / Te Tuhinga Whakarāpoto

1.1 This report provides an update on the Council's Treasury operations, reporting on compliance with the Treasury Policy, along with a finance market update.

At 31 January 2024, Council's total debt had increased to $327.0 million.

1.2 The Council is compliant with most limits in the Treasury Risk Management Policy: §4.2 Borrowing Capacity; §6.2.2 Liquidity Funding/Risk Position; and §6.3 Counterparty Risk.

1.3 Available Financial Accommodation as a % of total debt – the "liquidity ratio" – is below the 110% limit due to the facility drawings having to be for a minimum of 30 days each, this technical breach will self-correct mid-February 2024.

1.4 The current interest rate risk position is temporarily non-compliant with §6.1.2 Interest Rate Risk limit in future years. The debt forecast includes fixed-rate loans for pass-through lending to Waimea Water Limited (WWL), including re-financing existing advances. However, those WWL loans have not been re-financed yet, so don’t drop out of the future forecast position until April 2024 bringing us back into compliance.

1.5 The interest rate differential between the amount the Council has pre-funded from the Local Government Funding Agency (LGFA), and the amount re-invested in term deposits is a current side benefit and not the driver of the pre-funding strategy. Currently, the average term deposit rates for all maturities six months or greater is higher than the LGFA borrowing cost, but quotes are solicited from banks as there can still be variation between them.

1.6 The Council’s cost of borrowing (loan interest, swaps interest differential, facility fees) is 4.794% on Total Debt, compared to a budget of 4.40% (2021-22 budget was 3.63%). The Treasury (internal bank) cost centre now has an operating deficit, despite lower than forecasted debt levels. Since most of our fixed-rate borrowing is pass-through funding, the increased cost is mostly due to our average interest rate after swaps being above budget. Without the use of these swaps to fix interest rates the average cost of borrowing would be higher at 4.977%. The additional financing costs will be passed on to the activities with loans so the treasury operation does not run a deficit for the year.

1.7 Inflationary pressures have caused the Reserve Bank to make larger increases to the OCR (Overnight/Official Cash Rate), which is now at 5.50% per annum. The OCR influences the price of borrowing money in New Zealand and allows the Reserve Bank to influence the level of economic activity and, therefore, inflation. Small increases to 5.75% by April 2024 are now predicted, along with a very slow decline after that. That's framed by debate about whether increased interest rates would help with addressing the current inflationary pressures. Those pressures are arising from monetary and fiscal policy settings, along with the global economic situation.

1.8 The Council has now pre-funded most of the next 12 months of scheduled LGFA loan repayments (excluding pass-through Shareholder advance lending to WWL) being $16.6 million due in April 2024 and $9.0 million due in July 2024. Pre-funding improves the Council’s liquidity position and is seen as positive from a credit-rating perspective as it helps reduce refinancing risk. Staff continue to monitor cash flows closely. This monitoring will inform the timing of any drawdown of additional borrowing.

1.9 Crown Irrigation Investments Limited (CIIL) interest-free facilities total $25.5 million following repayment of the first $2.5 million tranche. They were provided to assist with funding and cost over-runs for the Waimea Community Dam. Additional advances for this project are now all sourced from the LGFA.

2. Recommendation/s / Ngā Tūtohunga

That the Tasman District Council

1. receives the Treasury Quarterly Report, RCN24-02-12.

3. Treasury Activity

1.10 At 30 September 2023, the Council's total debt was $292.4 million. The key activities since the last report were:

· October 2023

o Pre-funded $9 million of Waimea Community Dam borrowing; funds were put on term deposit until they are needed in July 2024.

o Drew $7 million from ASB facility for cashflow timing fluctuations (repaid November 2023).

· November 2023

o Borrowed $6 million for the Council’s share of the Port Tarakohe upgrade project.

o Borrowed $5.1million for strategic land purchase (King Edward Street, Motueka).

· December 2023

o Re-financed $2.5 million of CIIL borrowing (Waimea Dam 2018 share purchases) via Local Government Funding Agency.

o Borrowed $3 million for Tasman District Council’s share of the Nelson Regional Sewerage Business Unit’s capital expenditure programme.

o Re-financed $9 million Waimea Community Dam shareholder advances (the "CCO Loan").

o Borrowed $2.5 million for Waimea Community Dam shareholder advances.

o Drew $9 million from ASB facility for cash flow timing fluctuations (to be repaid February 2024).

o Transacted $15 million of forward-start interest rate swaps (starting between 25 December and 26 December) to provide interest rate risk coverage in future years.

· January 2024

o Drew $5 million from Westpac facility for cashflow timing fluctuations (to be repaid February 2024).

4. Treasury January 2024

Borrowing

4.1 The Council is compliant with most of the 2023 Treasury Risk Management Policy, §4.2.

§4.2: Borrowing	Jan 2024	Within Limits	Possible Limit
Net external debt ≤20% of equity*	10.5%	ü	$436m	Net Debt
Net external debt ≤225% of total operating revenue*	141.0%	ü	$365m	Net Debt
Net interest* ≤15% of total revenue*	5.4%	ü	$24m	Net Interest
Net interest* ≤25% of total rates*	9.7%	ü	$22m	Net Interest
Liquidity ≥110% of total external debt	109.2%	✘	$278m	External Debt
* Latest audited results: Annual Report 2023, published 31-Oct-23

4.2 Available Financial Accommodation – the "liquidity ratio" – is below the threshold due to drawdowns from bank facilities. The minimum period is 30 days for each drawdown, so the limit will remain non-compliant until mid-February 2024.

4.3 The actual result closest to the limit sets the indicative maximum borrowing amount. When the liquidity ratio regains compliance, the debt-to-revenue limit would be the first one reached if external debt (total debt minus pre-funded loans) rose to $365 million.

4.4 The interest-to-revenue and interest-to-rates limits are sensitive to movements in borrowing costs. The current high limit on potential borrowings is due to the historically low interest rates (perpetuated using interest rate swaps).

4.5 LGFA financial covenants continue to be the same or less onerous than 2023 Treasury Policy limits.

Debt Levels

$327.0m	Total Debt	All borrowing
$235.8m	Gross Debt	Total Debt, minus pre-funded and pass-through loans
$229.0m	Net Debt	Gross Debt, minus all other deposits

Cost of Borrowing and Cost of Funds

4.977%	Cost of Loans	Interest, as % of Total Debt
-1.018%	Benefit of Swaps	Interest differential (w.a. -0.230%), as % of Total Debt
0.387%	Cost of Facilities	Line fees (w.a. 0.047%), as % of Total Debt
4.794%	Cost of Borrowing	Total interest and fees, as % of Total Debt

Interest Rate Risk Position

4.6 This shows a snapshot of the current fixed-rate debt – fixed-rate loans and floating-to-fixed swaps – with a maturity greater than 12 months, charting its maturity over time against a corridor of the policy maximum and minimum levels (as a % of forecast Gross Debt). "Fixed- rate" is defined as having an interest rate resetting maturity/expiry date greater than 12 months away.

4.7 The current debt forecast includes fixed-rate loans for pass-through lending to the Waimea Community Dam. However, those loans have not all been borrowed yet, or mature in April 2024 (therefore dropping out of the metric entirely) even though forecast to be re-financed, making the current position non-compliant in some future years.

§6.1.2: Interest Rate Risk	Minimum	Maximum	Fixed*	Within Limits
Current	40%	90%	50%	ü
Until Jan 2025	40%	90%	44%	ü
Until Jan 2026	35%	85%	41%	ü
* Fixed-rate loans and swaps still available at future date ÷ forecast debt at future date

Interest Rate Swaps

4.8 The Group Manager Finance has delegated authority to enter into interest rate swaps on behalf of the Council, on the proviso that such transactions are reported back to the Council. The Council’s approval is required before entering into long-dated swaps with a maturity over 12 years.

4.9 The Council's swap coverage will not currently exceed potential floating-rate debt (FRNs, short-term commercial paper, facilities) for several years.

4.10 The Council transacted their first swaps since June 2018 in December 2024, with $15 million of three-year forward-start swaps coming into effect between December 2025 and December 2026. Swaps prices are currently fluctuating, so $15 million was the minimum required to remain compliant with Treasury Policy limits when combined with the imminent re-finance of fixed-rate loans.

Liquidity

4.11 The liquidity ratio calculation represents the total committed bank facilities and term debt amounts, together with liquid investments – the Available Financial Accommodation – over the external debt amount (total debt minus pre-funded loans). The liquidity ratio is 109.2% (target: >110%) and represents the debt headroom available within the Council’s facilities, along with cash available over and above its existing external debt.

Funding Maturity Risk Position

4.12 This chart groups loan maturities in 12-month blocks. Also shown are available facilities, deposits linked to pre-funding loans, and pass-through loans. The shaded background shows the maximum and minimum liquidity maturity bands (including facilities) in the 2023 Treasury Risk Management Policy:

*§6.2.2: Liquidity/Funding Risk**	Minimum	Maximum	Jan 2024	Within Limits
0 – 3 Years	15%	60%	49%	ü
3 – 7 Years	25%	80%	47%	ü
7+ Years	0%	60%	5%	ü
* Including facilities, and net of linked deposits

4.13 Ensuring a spread of maturities reduces the risk of having to find large amounts of capital, or refinance loans, at a time in the future in which market conditions may be unfavourable.

Counterparty Credit Risk

4.14 The 2023 Treasury Risk Management Policy, §6.3 requires that New Zealand registered banks (as counterparties) must have a minimum S&P (or equivalent) short-term rating of A-1+ or long-term rating of AA-. All the Council’s counterparty banks are S&P AA- rated.

§6.3: Counterparty Risk – $30m	Deposits*	Swaps**	Jan 2024	Within Limits
ANZ	-	$2.3m	$2.3m	ü
ASB	$6.7m	$1.7m	$8.4m	ü
BNZ	$9.0m	-	$9.0m	ü
Westpac	$16.6m	$7.0m	$23.6m	ü
* 100% of principal ** 3% of notional value × remaining years

Current Borrowings

Counterparty	Fixed*	Floating	Jan 2024
LGFA	$96.2m	$164.8m	$261.0m
LGFA (short-term Commercial Paper)	-	$26.5m	$26.5m
Crown Irrigation Investments Ltd (interest-free loans)	$25.5m	-	$25.5m
ASB Facility/Overdraft	-	$9.0m	$9.0m
Westpac Facility	-	$5.0m	$5.0m
Total	$121.7m	$205.3m	$327.0m
* Having an interest rate resetting maturity/expiry date greater than 12 months.

Local Water Done Well

Future debt forecasts include the 3-waters activities remaining with the Council and are based on the draft 2024-34 Long Term Plan projections.

5. Investments

5.1 The Council’s cash investments total $32.3 million with an average interest rate of 6.023%. In line with the Treasury Policy, specific reserves are not kept as cash. The Council continues to maintain adequate cash reserves and committed bank facilities to support any drawdown against specified reserves.

5.2 The individual investment balances are as follows:

Counterparty		Jan 2024	Interest
ASB	Call Account	$6,704,495	5.50%
BNZ	Call Account	$100	-
Westpac	Call Account	$2,243	2.30%
ASB	On-call Money-market	$3,127	5.35%
Westpac	Term Deposit (238 Days)	$16,600,000	6.03%
BNZ	Term Deposit (254 Days)	$9,000,000	6.40%
Total		$32,309,964	6.023%

5.3 Since October 2021, ASB has included the Council in the all-of-government arrangement which pays interest on call account balances at the previous day's OCR. This is currently better than the ASB on-call money-market account rate that other customers receive. This account was usually used for daily surplus cash.

6. Emissions Trading Scheme

6.1 The objective of the Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS) carbon credit policy is to minimise the impact of the movements in the carbon credit prices on the Council.

6.2 ETS risk is managed under the limits in the 2023 Treasury Risk Management Policy, §6.4.

§6.4: Forward Cover Risk	Minimum	Maximum	Oct 2021	Within Limits
Committed*	80%	100%	100%	ü
Forecast Period
0 – 1 Years	0%	80%	80%	ü
1 – 2 Years	0%	50%	50%	ü
2 – 3 Years	0%	30%	0%	ü
* Exposure becomes committed in Jan-Mar (quarter following emission period as the Council must report emissions from the previous year)

6.3 Consultation has started on proposed amendments to the ETS. There are two sets of proposed amendments to strengthen the ETS framework and to reduce the complexity around the forestry scheme. The Council has no direct exposure to landfills' ETS liabilities as these are managed through the Nelson Tasman Regional Landfill Business Unit.

7. Market Update

7.1 Short term yields are mixed with 2 months to 6 month yields up 1 bp and 1-year yields down 4 bps over the week. Currently, markets are pricing the OCR (currently 5.5%), to be 5.52% at the next Reserve Bank meeting on 28 February 2024 before falling 149 bps by May 2025 to 4.03%. The expected rise in the OCR is because inflation is still high at 4.66% YoY. The recent increase in immigration has provided New Zealand's GDP with a boost – or at least masked the stagnation – but also increased demand (and aided inflation) in areas such as housing.

7.2 Long term interest rates are down between -2 bps (Apr 25’s) and -11 bps (Apr 33's). LGFA borrowing spreads have been mixed between -1 bp in the short end of the curve and 1 bp in the long end over the week to 1 February 2024. In local news, ANZ’s January Business Confidence rose by 4 pts to 36.6 pts while expectations fell to 4.28% (previous 4.61%). In offshore news, the Australian CPI which came out 31 January 2024 had the headline inflation slowing down to 4.1% y/y from 5.4% y/y. Both the RBNZ and US Federal Reserve cautioned markets about getting too bullish on the outlook for rate cuts in the near term.

8. Treasury Cost Centre

8.1 The Treasury cost centre operates as the Council’s internal bank. It manages the external costs of borrowing and allocates them across internal loans within individual activities. It also pays/charges interest on reserves and activity balances. In accordance with the Treasury Risk Management Policy, these interest rates are set quarterly. For the quarter starting January 2024, interest is charged on loans and overdrawn closed account balances at c5.0% and paid at c4.0% on credit balances for the next quarter. With the unbudgeted increase in borrowing costs these internal rates are still being finalised to ensure that the annual increased cost of borrowing is reflected in activities with loans and the Treasury Cost centre is forecast to end the year without a deficit.

9. LGFA ESG Borrowing

9.1 The LGFA is looking to borrowing councils to support its Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) reporting and funding initiatives. Investors are increasingly applying these non-financial factors as part of their analysis to identify material risks and growth opportunities. Councils who can align their new borrowing to these factors get a slightly reduced interest rate from the LGFA. Council staff will be reviewing how we can assist with reporting tracking ESG factors and borrowing over the next 12 months.

10. Attachments / Tuhinga tāpiri

Nil

Tasman District Council Agenda – 15 February 2024

7.10 Half Year Financial report to 31 December 2023

Information Only - No Decision Required

Report To:	Tasman District Council
Meeting Date:	15 February 2024
Report Author:	Paul Egan, Senior Management Accountant
Report Authorisers:	Mike Drummond, Group Manager - Finance
Report Number:	RCN24-02-13

1. Summary / Te Tuhinga Whakarāpoto

1.1 This six-monthly financial report provides an update on key financial information as at the end of December 2023. The Council’s borrowing position, compliance with covenants and projected debt levels are provided in the separate Treasury report to this meeting.

1.2 In the six months to December 2023 there have been events with several impacts on the headline financial performance. These arise from changes to operating revenue and expenditure items, sources of funding for capital expenditure and market valuations. Combined, these have a large impact on the reported Accounting Surplus result, even though some are unrealised non-cash items or are capital related.

1.3 In the second quarter of the financial year, we have seen the continued impact of cost increases within the current economic environment, this together with the abovementioned factors lead to a larger than budgeted operational deficit.

1.4 A full re-forecast to year end is being undertaken and will be presented at the March 2024 Council meeting.

1.5 In the current Annual Plan (2023/24), the Council budgeted for a December 2023 year to date controllable deficit of $14 million; the actual December 2023 result was a deficit of
$16.8 million, which is an unfavourable variance of $2.8 million. The drivers of the overall unfavourable movement are detailed in Table 1, but higher maintenance expenditure, forestry reinstatement and replanting costs and deficits in some Environmental Assurance activities are key drivers. We have budgeted an operational deficit as we are yet to move to fully fund depreciation and some project expenditure for the Tasman Environment Plan and the Digital Innovation Programme is classified as operational but is being loan funded.

1.6 The focus of this report is the year-to-date position as at 31 December 2023. Table 1 provides a reconciliation of the accounting result compared to the operational position. The operational position strips out non-cash items and items that can only be used to fund capital expenditure eg, swap revaluations, vested assets and capital subsidies. This is then a proxy for running a balanced budget where operational expenditure is covered by operational income.

Table 1

A screenshot of a computer screen

Description automatically generated

2. Recommendation/s / Ngā Tūtohunga

That the Tasman District Council

1. receives the Half Year Financial report to 31 December 2023, RCN24-02-13.

3. Purpose of the Report

3.1 The purpose of this report is to update the Council on the financial performance for the six months to 31 December 2023.

4. Background and Discussion

4.1 This is the second financial report for the 2023/2024 financial year and covers financial performance for the six months to 31 December 2023.

4.2 Controllable operating income for December 2023 YTD is $83.6 million. This is a YTD favourable variance of $4.5 million against a December 2023 YTD budget of $79.1 million. The drivers are set out in Section 6 with Operating Subsidies and Forestry Income being the key drivers.

4.3 Controllable operating expenditure for December 2023 YTD is $100.5 million. This is an unfavourable variance of $7.4 million on the December 2023 YTD budget of $93.1 million. The drivers are set out in Section 7 with roading and water maintenance, and forestry harvesting and reinstatement costs being the key drivers.

4.4 Capital expenditure to date totals $37 million at 31 December 2023. The full-year budget including carryovers is $102.5 million. Capital expenditure is being monitored closely with the high budget and the number of additional capital items approved since the start of the financial year.

4.5 Total net debt at 31 December 2023 is $225.4 million compared to the 2023/24 full-year budgeted net debt of $249.9 million. Careful management of the Councils cashflow and both capital and operational expenditure will be required to ensure the Council remains under its Net Debt cap of $250 million.

5. Statement of Comprehensive Financial Performance

Table 2

A screenshot of a computer screen

Description automatically generated

5.1 Commentary is provided on the revenue and expenditure in Sections 6 and 7.

6. Income Analysis

Table 3

A screenshot of a financial statement

Description automatically generated

Controllable Operating Income

6.1 We have received additional income of $4.6 million over and above the December 2023 YTD budget. The key drivers of the variance were New Zealand Transport Agency (Waka Kotahi) operating subsidies associated with higher maintenance spend, and forestry revenue in the Enterprise Portfolio.

6.2 The key driver of the unfavourable variance to budget in Environmental Assurance relates to reduced revenue for Building Assurance of $1 million and Resource Consents of
$0.3 million; this is demand-driven and reflects a decline in the number of consents applied for and granted. There has been a large reduction in the building work consent applications, particularly for new dwellings.

6.3 The favourable revenue variance in Community Infrastructure is driven by the New Zealand Transport Agency (Waka Kotahi) roading subsidy which has a favourable variance of $0.9 million. This relates to the subsidy for the roading costs, including the increased and continuing activities maintenance arising from the extreme weather event in August 2022.

6.4 The favourable revenue variance in the Enterprise Portfolio is largely driven by forestry harvesting revenues, however, lower log prices have impacted the revenue compared to last year. Forestry harvesting revenue is offset by the corresponding increase in harvesting, reinstatement, and replanting costs. It should be noted that recent harvesting volumes will decline significantly after next year as a low point in the harvesting cycle is reached. The Council does programme to maintain some harvesting even when log prices drop in order to support businesses and continued employment in the region.

Non-Controllable Income

6.5 Development and Financial Contributions were $3.2 million favourable to budget YTD. At this stage of the financial year, we are 74% of the full year budget. This reflects the continued growth the region has experienced, though it must be noted that in recent months both resource and building consent applications have fallen significantly and receipt of development contributions is somewhat volatile during the year.

6.6 Capital subsidies and grants were $7.5 million unfavourable to budget, due mainly timing of New Zealand Transport Agency (Waka Kotahi) subsidies for capital works. A large influence on this has been the general delay in programme detail and funding approvals from New Zealand Transport Agency (Waka Kotahi) for Transport Choices programmes nationwide. Following the election of the new government, these have been released with a reduced scope. The delays mean that less work than budgeted has occurred YTD, on this heavily subsidised programme, and the reductions mean that the programme will end at a lower value than budgeted.

7. Operating Expenditure Analysis

Table 4

A screenshot of a report

Description automatically generated

7.1 There was an unfavourable December YTD variance of $7.4 million in operating expenditure. There are several significant items that drive this variance.

7.2 Environmental Assurance had a slight favourable YTD variance to budget due to underspent wage related budgets due to vacant positions. These vacancies, driven by strong market competition for experienced staff, were more than offset by lower revenue particularly in consent application fees. Higher non-recoverable operating expenditure is expected before the end of the year, as hearings and appeals occur mainly in the resource consent space.

7.3 Community Infrastructure had a $3.7 million unfavourable YTD variance to budget due mainly to higher levels of roading maintenance expenditure of $2.4 million, water supply maintenance $1 million, and reserves and facilities maintenance $0.4 million. The roading maintenance costs are largely driven by after-effects of the weather events of recent years, and in water supply a combination of increased reactive work and work required to comply with changes to water standards from the Government. With the cessation of the Affordable Waters programme, additional funding that had been expected to meet increased costs of compliance to the proposed transition will not be received.

7.4 The Enterprise Portfolio had a $3.4 million unfavourable YTD variance to budget due to harvesting costs, reinstatement, slash management and replanting costs. Following the accelerated harvesting to clear windthrow from weather events, reinstatement, replanting, and fire risk mitigation costs are now occurring earlier than budgeted.

7.5 Operating costs, including maintenance contract costs, have generally had higher inflation impacts than budgeted due to cost pressures in the economy. Where contracts have mandated ways of allowing for inflation in annual rate increases these have generally been higher than our budgeted inflation increase.

7.6 Departmental overheads had a $641,000 favourable YTD variance to budget, due mainly to a combination of lower than YTD budgeted Employee expenses, Professional Fees, and overheads.

7.7 Employee related expenses were $85,000 favourable to budget. Where possible, role vacancies are being held back from commencing recruitment to contain costs and this result reflects the high level of annual leave used during the Christmas period.

7.8 Finance expense is higher than budgeted due to higher than budgeted interest rates and pre-funding of loan rollovers. This is partially offset by the favourable variance in Finance income arising from depositing this pre-funding primarily in term deposits, which have benefited from increased interest rates. For more discussion on this refer to the Treasury Report.

8. Statement of Financial Position

Table 5

A screenshot of a financial statement

Description automatically generated

8.1 Overall, while the financial position of the Council is currently strong, meeting year-end budget expectations will be challenging due to the demands of ongoing debt repayment, capital expenditure and increased inflationary pressures. The increased capital expenditure, including some additional capital expenditure approved by the Council during the current financial year will put pressure on Net debt levels. Careful management and constraint will be required if we are to avoid a breach of the net debt cap.

8.2 Cash and cash equivalents are lower than the full-year budget; this reflects the phasing of quarterly cash flows, which are largely driven by the month in which rates receipts fall. February is the next quarterly rates’ due month.

8.3 In other financial assets, there is a mismatch between current and long term other financial assets. This part of the balance sheet is where we pre-fund any debt maturing in the next six months or any long-term requirements like the CCO pre-funding associated with the Waimea Community Dam. Having a mismatch between short and long-term assets such as this reflects leveraging market conditions in terms of what length of maturity we enter in to.

9. Net Debt

9.1 Net Debt is $225.4 million at 31 December 2023, compared to a full-year budget of $249.9 million. The increase from an opening net debt of $201.4 million is due to the funding of capital expenditure during the first three months of the year. The quarterly rates’ take impacts on cash flow movements and, therefore, Net Debt. (Net Debt is gross debt less cash on hand and other liquid financial assets). Updated figures at December 2023 are available in the Quarterly Treasury Report

· Opening Net Debt July 2023 $201.4 million

· Net Debt 30 September 2023 $207.4 million

· Net Debt 31 December 2023 $225.4 million

· Net Debt June 2023 per 2023/24 Annual Plan $249.9 million

10. Capital Expenditure Analysis

Table 6

A screen shot of a computer

Description automatically generated

10.1 Overall, the capital expenditure (including approved unbudgeted expenditure) is tracking at 40% of full year budget including Joint Ventures and, on a straight-line basis this is
$12 million below the six-month YTD revised capital budget. Excluding Joint Ventures on a similar straight-line basis, the programme is tracking at 36%, and $14.3 million behind for six months.

10.2 The next full year capital re-forecast will be included in a forecast report to the March Council meeting. This will set the carryover expenditure for inclusion in the Long Term Plan.

10.3 The largest impact on the expenditure and forecast expenditure has been the delay, and then reduction of the largely New Zealand Transport Agency-funded Transport Choices programmes for Richmond and Motueka which combine to a $9 million reduction in the programme.

10.4 The impact of pre-construction and design factors together with contractor demand challenges continue to put pressure on delivery, the forecast, and budgets.

10.5 Capital Expenditure YTD exceeds the three-year average (see chart on the next page), though this has been influenced by $14.6m of additional expenditure approved during the year.

A graph with blue and orange bars and text

Description automatically generated

10.6 During the year to date, additional capital expenditure has been authorised by resolution and this has been added to capital budgets and is shown in the summary below:

Material Additional Capital Expenditure	Amount Authorised
Port Tarakohe Phase 2 funded by Kanoa Loan (Part 2024/25)	$                 6,000,000
Strategic Land Purchase – Motueka	$                 5,100,000
Commercial Property Development on Existing Enterprise Land	$                 1,050,000
Land Purchases for Roading	$                    850,000
Port Tarakohe Phase 1 Additional Scope	$                    836,000
Port Tarakohe Temporary Toilet block	$                    210,000
Other	$                    589,574
TOTAL ADDITIONAL CAPITAL EXPENDITURE AUTHORISED*	$               14,635,574
* At the time of report

10.7 The total capital budget is now summarised as follows.

Summary of Capital Expenditure Budget	Amount
Annual Plan 2023/24 Annual Plan	$              90,406,189
Net of Carry Forwards per Carry Overs Report	$              13,714,000
Additional Capital Expenditure authorised during the year	$              14,635,574
Less Budgeted Scope Adjustments for timing	$                4,370,943
CAPITAL BUDGET INCLUDING JOINT VENTURES	$            114,384,820
Less Joint Venture Component	$              11,896,811
Other	$                    589,574
TOTAL ADDITIONAL CAPITAL EXPENDITURE AUTHORISED*	$           102,488,009
* At the time of report

11. Attachments / Tuhinga tāpiri

Nil

Tasman District Council Agenda – 15 February 2024

7.12 Chief Executive's Update

Information Only - No Decision Required

Report To:	Tasman District Council
Meeting Date:	15 February 2024
Report Author:	Leonie Rae, Acting Chief Executive Officer
Report Number:	RCN24-02-15

1. Summary / Te Tuhinga Whakarāpoto

1.1 The purpose of this report is to provide an update on some key activity since the Chief Executive’s last report on 13 December 2023.

2. Recommendation/s / Ngā Tūtohunga

That the Tasman District Council

1. receives the Chief Executive's Update report, RCN24-02-15.

3. Chief Executive Update

3.1 On Friday 26 January 2024, we said farewell to Janine Dowding who stepped down from her role as Chief Executive.

3.2 I am both honoured and excited to be the new Chief Executive Officer of Tasman District Council, effective from 19 February 2024. As I step into this role, I am deeply inspired by the energy, passion, and dedication I witness from our amazing staff every day. I am genuinely delighted to be leading such an exceptional team of people.

3.3 Janine has left ‘big shoes’ for me to fill. Janine showed us that with determination we can overcome the challenges we have before us and how we can continue to improve our ways of working.

4. Legal and Democracy Services (Leith/Jennie)

Marshall/Buchanan - Pool fencing case

4.1 In February 2023 a judgment was entered against the Council in relation to proceedings issued in 2020. These proceedings related to a pool fencing dispute in relation to a property which received a code of compliance certificate in 2006. The Council’s insurers instructed the appeal of this decision, due to the potential implications for the local government sector. The matter will be heard in the Court of Appeal on 21 February 2024. The Council will be advised the outcome of this decision when it is released.

Representation review

4.2 Council staff have begun work on the required review of representation arrangements in the Tasman District. To achieve fair and effective representation at elections, local authorities are required by the Local Electoral Act 2001 to review their representation arrangements at least once every six years.

4.3 Council staff are gathering information to begin work on the initial proposal for representation arrangements, which will be consulted on in mid-2024. The representation arrangements will be in place for the 2025 local elections.

Review of information requests in 2023

4.4 Every day the Council receives a huge number of requests for information from members of the public. Technically, these are all information requests under the Local Government (Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 (LGOIMA)). Most of these are answered by our incredible customer services team or by Council staff directly. However, if staff are not able to answer the question within a short amount of time, then that request is referred to the Legal team for tracking and monitoring. We refer to these as formal LGOIMA requests.

4.5 The following analysis of LGOIMA’s received in 2023 only relates to formal LGOIMA requests.

4.6 In 2023 the Council received 509 formal LGOIMA requests. This is a significant increase from the 295 received in 2022. Figure 1 below shows how 2023 has compared to previous years.

A graph of numbers with different colored bars

Description automatically generated with medium confidence

Figure 1 – total LGOIMAs by year

4.7 As a comparison, Nelson City Council received 254 LGOIMAs in 2023.

4.8 As you can see from Figure 2 below the total number of LGOIMAs per month was greater than almost at any other time. The only time that came close was when the Council was responding to an increased number of LGOIMA requests in 2022 due to the introduction of the Covid-19 Vaccine Pass requirements for its library facilities.

A graph showing different colored lines

Description automatically generated

Figure 2 – comparison of LGOIMAs received by month

4.9 Despite these increased numbers, and staffing changes, the Council has managed to respond to most of these requests in a timely manner. Figure 3 below shows that for most months the average time to respond was less than 15 working days.

A graph with blue lines

Description automatically generated

Figure 3 – average time to respond by month.

4.10 It is noted that due to the statutory definition of ‘working day’ under the Act the data for January and December is not included in this graph.

4.11 While in July the average time to respond exceeded the 20 working days mandated by the Act, this is not a reflection that the response to LGOIMA requests was outside the statutory timeframes as the Council is able to seek an extension in limited circumstances. Figure 4 below shows that, despite the high numbers, the vast majority of LGOIMA requests were responded to either within the statutory or lawfully extended deadlines.

A blue circle with a orange triangle

Description automatically generated

Figure 4 – LGOIMAs outside statutory (or extended) timeframes.

4.12 While it is uncertain whether 2023 was an aberration or a new normal for the number of, LGOIMA requests, the Council is taking steps to try and reduce or at least manage the increasing number of LGOIMA requests. This includes increased digitising of files, producing FAQ sheets for major projects and publishing LGOIMA requests and responses of interest on our website.

LGOIMA requests in 2024

4.13 The high number of LGOIMAs appears to be a continuing trend in 2024 with the Council having received 73 LGOIMA requests this year (as of 7 February 2024). This breaks down to 58 requests received in January 2024 and 17 received as of 7 February 2024.

4.14 Part of this increase is due to many requests coming from two individuals who have made 34 requests in 2024 alone. Many of these requests contain numerous questions seeking information. They have also made several complaints that are not counted as LGOIMAs.

4.15 Council staff are working to provide appropriate responses to these requests as resourcing allows. Staff are seeking to charge these requesters for staff time in line with the Ombudsman’s charging guidelines as are other tools to manage these significant numbers of requests under the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987.

Ombudsman Investigations

4.16 In December 2023 the Ombudsman released a final opinion regarding the Council’s decision to withhold information in relation to the Motueka Aerodrome. This opinion disagreed with the Council’s response to two separate LGOIMA requests from one individual. The Council has accepted the opinion of the Ombudsman and has now taken steps to gather the information for release.

4.17 Staff have looked at the position taken by the Ombudsman and will bear this in mind when dealing with future LGOIMA requests.

4.18 As of 7 February 2024, there are six number of matters with the Ombudsman. Of these, two are preliminary inquiries. There is also one matter with the Privacy Commissioner which was transferred to them from the Ombudsman.

5. Te Kāhui Hononga – Māori Partnerships and Engagement

Māori Ward

5.1 In 2023 the Council resolved to have a Māori ward for the 2025 local elections. One of the decisions that the Council is required to make as part of the representation review is the name of the Māori ward. Council staff have engaged with iwi who unanimously endorse the ward being named ‘The Te Tai o Aorere Māori Ward’. This name will form part of the Council’s initial proposal in relation to the representation review, with the Council making the final decision after consultation.

5.2 It is noted that there has been a signalled legislative change in relation to Māori wards by the Coalition Government. At this stage Council staff are proceeding based on the current legislation. Should any changes be made then staff will consider the effect of those changes on the representation review process.

Other Items

5.3 In December 2023 the Te Tauihu Together relationship agreement was finalised and signed by the Mayors of the three councils and the Chairs of the eight iwi of Te Tauihu. This agreement is another step forward in strengthening the relationships between the councils and iwi across Te Tauihu.

5.4 Te Kāhui Hononga have been working through the Māpua Masterplan with iwi and in February the iwi will assist to present Māpua to the community at two public consultation events in person and via a video capturing some of the cultural narrative. This is a good example of the Te Tauihu Together relationship agreement being put into practice.

5.5 The rāhui remains in place covering the area north of the saltwater baths at Motueka to Riuwaka after a failure at the Motueka Wastewater Treatment Plant. Iwi have advised they won’t lift the rāhui until further testing is completed. The rāhui is not enforceable and it is noted that some people do ignore the warnings and signage. Te Kāhui Hononga is continuing to work with our iwi partners to connect them to the right agencies to assist with the testing.

6. People Management

Employment Related Legislation Changes

6.1 The Government indicated several employment related legislation changes would be happening from December 2023. So far none of the changes announced affect any of the Council’s existing employment obligations.

Staffing

6.2 The human resources statistics for the quarter ending December 2023 show that we have 408 FTE and a headcount of 433. This has decreased from the 410 FTE (headcount of 434) as at September 2023. Turnover for the quarter was 1.39% and the 12-month rolling period is 9.41%. It is good to report that our rolling turnover is indicating an overall decrease on previous years. The new positions are listed below, and the total headcount has been off-set by a number of disestablished roles and fixed term roles that have finished in the September quarter.

6.3 Recruitment continues to remain steady, and we are currently at various stages of recruiting for approximately twenty vacancies. Since the last report, another thirteen appointments have been made with some of these being internal promotions or movements which then result in another vacancy needing to be filled.

7. Dry Weather Advisory Group Update

7.1 The Dry Weather Advisory Group was set up at the end of 2023, due to the extended periods of dry weather in the region. The weather and lack of rain forecast were similar to the 2019 summer drought.

7.2 The Group consists of the Chief Executive Officer, Executive Leadership Team members, and key staff experienced in water monitoring, water supply, consents, RMA requirements, and iwi relationships. Ministry for Primary Industry representatives have been in attendance along with Fire and Emergency and Civil Defence personnel attending as required.

7.3 This group was set up to help inform and guide the Dry Weather Task Force. Recommendations from the Task Force are provided on a weekly basis to review and progress any water restrictions, and actions that may be needed.

7.4 There have been restrictions put in place where required and these have been based on rainfall in particular areas. Data analysis continues to occur on a weekly basis.

7.5 With the dry weather predictions lasting through to end of March/beginning of April, it may be necessary that higher restrictions are put in place over the coming weeks.

8. Resilience Project – 189 Queen Street, Richmond

8.1 The strengthening works are now progressing in Zone 3, on the ground floor of the Council’s Richmond office. This is the area where the Chief Executive’s Office and Council Operations teams are normally located.

8.2 We encountered a few issues when we opened the ceilings and walls but after working with our engineer, these matters have now been resolved.

8.3 Works on the ground floor will continue until May.

8.4 We will then move to the last phase of this resilience work, which is the first floor where the Service & Strategy team is located. This work is expected to go through until the end of August 2024.

9. Attachments / Tuhinga tāpiri

Nil

Tasman District Council Agenda – 15 February 2024

7.13 Mayor's Activity Update

Information Only - No Decision Required

Report To:	Tasman District Council
Meeting Date:	15 February 2024
Report Author:	Tim King, Mayor
Report Number:	RCN24-02-16

1. Summary / Te Tuhinga Whakarāpoto

1.1 As this is my first report for 2024, I would like to welcome our elected members and staff back for what will be a busy year ahead.

1.2 While finalisation of the Long-Term Plan 2024-2034 will be a major focus in the first half of the year, we have a significant amount of other mahi ahead of us including the Māpua Masterplan, the Speed Management Review, the Representation Review, the Joint Nelson-Tasman Regional Transport and Nelson Tasman Joint Regional Public Transportation Plans, and Dog Control, Cat Management and Public Places Bylaws.

1.3 With the change of government in late 2023, we are now waiting on central government direction on the way forward for resource management law reform, three waters management (water, stormwater, and wastewater) and the future of local government.

1.4 Nelson City Council Mayor, Nick Smith and I met with the Minister of Local Government, Simeon Brown in Wellington last month. Our discussions focused on roading and transport, housing, and economic development projects in the Nelson-Tasman region that could be included in the Government’s City and Regional Deals programme. While the Minister acknowledged our ideas for the region, he made it clear that there is still a lot of policy work to be done around the details for any central government funding that may be available to our region.

1.5 I was invited to speak at the recent funeral of local businessman, Heath Wilkins. Heath founded Golden Bay Fruit and was instrumental in driving the company’s growth in export tonnages of apples and kiwifruit. A very large crowd (nearly 1500 people) attended to honour Heath who, at just 54, packed a huge amount of mahi into his lifetime and earned the respect of both the local and international communities.

1.6 It was great to see the Waimea Community Dam finally spillover last month – a fantastic achievement.

1.7 Finally, congratulations to our new Chief Executive Officer, Leonie Rae. I look forward to working with Leonie and the Council staff as we strive to make a difference in our District.

2. Recommendation/s / Ngā Tūtohunga

That the Tasman District Council

1. receives the Mayor's Activity Update report, RCN24-02-16.

3. Mayoral Activity

3.1 The Outstanding Community Awards for Golden Bay were held in Tākaka on 11 December 2023.

3.2 Former Local Government Minister, Kieran McAnulty and our local MP, Rachel Boyack called in on 11 December 2023.

3.3 Mayor Nick Smith, Mayor Nadine Taylor and I met with the eight Te Tauihu iwi Chairs on
12 December 2023 where we all signed the Together Te Tauihu Partnership Agreement – an historic occasion for the Top of the South.

A group of people standing together

Description automatically generated

Iwi Chairs and the Top of the South Mayors

3.4 The Multicultural Picnic and Christmas celebration was held at Washbourn Gardens on
16 December 2023.

3.5 The Black Caps versus Bangladesh cricket match was a winner for the Black Caps on
20 December 2023. Unfortunately, it was all downhill for the Black Caps for their next games against Bangladesh.

3.6 The Community Christmas lunch was held on 25 December 2023. This is an enjoyable occasion and a chance to mix and mingle with local residents. A big thank you to the team from the Richmond Anglican Church who organise this special event.

3.7 On New Year’s Eve, I took the opportunity to accompany the local Police team on their patrol of Kaiteriteri Beach. A great crowd was in attendance, and all were well behaved and appreciated the Police presence.

3.8 Councillors Maru and Mackenzie and I attended the Torrent Bay AGM on Tuesday,
2 January 2024. A big thank you to our new Harbourmaster, Peter Renshaw and Deputy Harbourmaster, Paul Appleby who ferried us over to the Bay on Sentinel.

3.9 The Kaiteriteri Recreation Reserve Board met on 9 January 2024.

3.10 The Waimea Water Limited Shareholders met on 15 January 2024.

3.11 A meeting was held with Ministry of Social Development Regional Manager, Craig Churchill on 18 January 2024.

3.12 The annual Golden Bay A&P Show was held on 20 January 2024 – once again a fantastic event.

3.13 Nelson City Councillors invited me to speak at their strategic planning day on
25 January 2024. I took the opportunity to talk about the many “shared services” opportunities available to both councils.

3.14 It was great to see the large turnout of staff, iwi and guests who farewelled Janine Dowding at the Headingly Centre on 25 January 2024.

3.15 The LGNZ Regional Sector meeting was held on 30 January 2024.

3.16 I represented Nelson and Tasman at the Waitangi Day celebrations at Whakatū Marae on
6 February 2024.

4. Attachments / Tuhinga tāpiri

Nil

Mayor	Mayor T King
Deputy Mayor	Deputy Mayor S Bryant
Councillors	Councillor C Butler	Councillor M Kininmonth
	Councillor G Daikee	Councillor C Mackenzie
	Councillor B Dowler	Councillor K Maling
	Councillor J Ellis	Councillor B Maru
	Councillor M Greening	Councillor D Shallcrass
	Councillor C Hill	Councillor T Walker