Performance, Policy and Partnerships Committee - Public

A3420633

NOTICE OF MEETING

Notice is hereby given of the Meeting of the

Performance, Policy and Partnerships Committee

to be held in the Council Chamber,

First Floor, Civic Administration Building,

101 Esk Street, Invercargill on

Tuesday 8 June 2021 at 3.00 pm

Cr D J Ludlow (Chair)Cr R R Amundsen (Deputy Chair)His Worship the Mayor, Sir T R Shadbolt Cr R L AbbottCr A J ArnoldCr W S ClarkCr A H CrackettCr P W KettCr G D LewisCr M LushCr I R PottingerCr N D SkeltCr L F Soper

CLARE HADLEYCHIEF EXECUTIVE

Performance, Policy and Partnerships Committee - Public - Tuesday 8 June 2021

1

Performance, Policy and Partnerships Committee -Public08 June 2021 03:00 PM

Agenda Topic Page

1. Apologies

2. Public Forum

2.1 Update from South Alive

3. Report From the Invercargill Youth Council (A3430295) 5

4. Minutes of the Extraordinary Meeting of the Performance, Policy and Partnerships Committee Held on 11 May 2021 (A3406373)

7

5. Minutes of the Performance, Policy and Partnerships Committee Meeting Held on 11 May 2021 (A3406973)

27

6. Minutes of the Extraordinary Meeting of the Performance, Policy and Partnerships Committee Held on 18 May 2021 (A3415346)

32

7. Proposed Right of Way Name in Relation to the Subdivision of 266 Bay Road (A3418728) 43

8. Bluff Maritime Museum Trust Statement of Intent 2022 (A3410854) 46

8.1 Appendix 1 - Bluff Maritime Museum Trust Statement of Intent for the Financial Year Ending 30 June 2022 (A3410857)

48

9. Hearings for the Draft Environmental Reserves Omnibus Plan 2021-2031 (A3427171) 55

10. 2021/2022 Fees and Charges (A3406606) 57

10.1 Appendix 1 - Submissions Received to the 2021/2022 Fees and Charges (A3406609)

63

10.2 Appendix 2 - Fees and Charges (A3419973) 66

11. Adoption of Liability Management Policy (A3406611) 126

11.1 Appendix 1 - Liability Management Policy (A3411478) 128

12. Adoption of Investment Policy (A3406612) 135

12.1 Appendix 1 - Investment Policy (A3420180) 139

13. Adoption of Significance and Engagement Policy (A3406610) 148

Performance, Policy and Partnerships Committee - Public - Agenda

2

13.1 Appendix 1 - Significance and Engagement Policy (A3418918) 152

14. Confirmation of Revenue and Finance Policy (A3417919) 172

14.1 Appendix 1 - Revenue and Financing Policy (A3275564) 176

14.2 Appendix 2 - Submission from Southland Federated Farmers (A3403176) 183

14.3 Appendix 3 - Submission from Social Credit New Zealand (A3402054) 189

15. Confirmation of Rating Policy (A3417914) 192

15.1 Appendix 1 - Draft Rating Policy (A3427787) 198

16. Adoption of the Remission and Postponement of Rates on Māori Freehold Land Policy (A3417705)

207

16.1 Appendix 1 - Remission and Postponement of Rates on Māori Freehold Land Policy (A3426618)

212

17. Draft Development Contributions Policy (A3248626) 215

17.1 Appendix 1 - Development Contributions Policy (A3417789) 218

18. Confirmation of the Financial Strategy and Infrastructure Strategy (A3420167) 219

18.1 Appendix 1 - Long Term Plan 2021-31 Draft Financial Strategy (A3352000) 228

18.2 Appendix 2 - Infrastructure Strategy: 2021 - 2051 (A3009110) 245

18.3 Appendix 3 - Long-Term Plan Assumptions (A3248620) 293

19. Submission to Environment Southland Long-Term Plan (A3430861) 307

19.1 Submission to Environment Southland Long -Term Plan (A3425171). 309

20. Activity Report (A3417649) 311

21. Quarterly Financial Report - 31 March 2021 (A3429331) 318

21.1 Appendix 1 - Invercargill City Council Quarterly Report to 31 March 2021 (A3429360) 320

22. Council Representation at LGNZ AGM (A3404784) 349

23. Public Excluded Session

Performance, Policy and Partnerships Committee - Public - Agenda

3

A3420633

Public Excluded Session

Moved, seconded that the public be excluded from the following parts of the proceedings of this meeting; with the exception of the external appointees, Mr Jeff Grant and Mr Lindsay McKenzie, namely,

(a) Confirmation of Minutes of the Public Excluded Session of the Performance, Policy and Partnerships Committee meeting held on 11 May 2021

(b) Confirmation of Minutes of the Public Excluded Session of the Extraordinary Meeting of the Performance, Policy and Partnerships Committee held on 18 May 2021

The general subject of each matter to be considered while the public is excluded, the reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter, and the specific grounds under section 48(1) of the local government official information and meetings act 1987 for the passing of this resolution are as follows:

General subject of each matter to be considered

Reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter

Ground(s) under Section 48(1) for the passing of this resolution

(a) Confirmation of Minutes of the Public Excluded Session of the Performance, Policy and Partnerships Committee meeting held on 11 May 2021

Section 7(2)(i)Enable any local authority holding the information to carry on, without prejudice or disadvantage,negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiations)

Section 48(1)(a)That the publicconduct of this itemwould be likely toresult in the disclosureof information forwhich good reason forwithholding wouldexist under Section 7

(b) Confirmation of Minutes of the Public Excluded Session of the Extraordinary Meeting of the Performance, Policy and Partnerships Committee held on 18 May 2021

Section 7(2)(i)Enable any local authority holding the information to carry on, without prejudice or disadvantage, negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiations)


Performance, Policy and Partnerships Committee - Public - Public Excluded Reasons

4

A3430295

TO: PERFORMANCE, POLICY AND PARTNERSHIPSCOMMITTEE

FROM: OLIVER MORTENSEN AND GEMMA CRAWFORD –YOUTH COUNCIL COORDINATORS

MEETING DATE: TUESDAY 8 JUNE 2021

INVERCARGILL YOUTH COUNCIL

SUMMARY

The Invercargill City Youth Council will have representatives at the meeting. They will give a summary of their Community and Council engagement to date.

RECOMMENDATION

That the Performance, Policy and Partnerships Committee receive the report “Invercargill Youth Council”.

IMPLICATIONS

1. Has this been provided for in the Long Term Plan/Annual Plan?

Yes

2. Is a budget amendment required?

No

3. Is this matter significant in terms of Council’s Policy on Significance?

No

4. Implications in terms of other Council Strategic Documents or Council Policy?

N/A

5. Have the views of affected or interested persons been obtained and is any further public consultation required?

N/A

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

No implications.

YOUTH COUNCIL UPDATE

The Youth Council has now had its fifth meeting of the year. The change from fortnightly meetings to monthly meetings has proved to be positive and has not limited the engagement opportunities for members.

Performance, Policy and Partnerships Committee - Public - Report From the Invercargill Youth Council (A3430295)

5

A3430295

The Youth Council has been involved in the following activities:

Activate 2021One member, Nazia attended the Activate 2021, a South Island Youth Council forum in Christchurch. Nazia said she found this forum to be informative and she has been able to bring back many ideas to help the Youth Council better engage with youth including, bi-culturalism, good governance, ethics and being politically neutral.

Representation ReviewMichael Morris attended Youth Council on 5 May to speak about local government voting systems and the Representation Review.

CommitteesThe Leadership Committee are hosting the United Nations Youth Leadership Forum which will be held on Saturday 19 June at the Federated Farmers Building.

The Youth Week Committee were kindly donated vouchers from Stadium Southland Clip n Climb as prizes for Youth Week. These will be given out at the Leadership Event in June.

External CommitteesMembers have been involved external committees and these are seen as a great learning experience for members as well as providing a youth voice in the community.

Members have attended the Creative Communities and Active Communities Funding Committees. They have reported that this has been a valuable experience for them.

Also two Youth Council members are now Invercargill Library Ambassadors. Volunteens meetings take place on the first Sunday of the month at the Library.

Two Youth Council members have shown an interest in joining the Council Roopū, which is a group set up to inform the protocols of Te Ao Māori and Te Reo Māori within Council.

Council BusinessTwo Youth Council Chairpersons and Cr Alex Crackett will be attending the Festival of the Future Youth Development Forum on the weekend of 30 July – 1 August.

Long Term Plan feedback was shared with the young people at the last meeting.

Alexander Black represented the Youth Council at the opening of the new Hyrdoslides.

Council WaiataAs alerted to in the last report, Youth Council have been opening their combined meetings with the Council Waiata. We are pleased to share a recording of this with Councillors.

Performance, Policy and Partnerships Committee - Public - Report From the Invercargill Youth Council (A3430295)

6

A3406373

MINUTES OF THE EXTRAORDINARY MEETING OF THE PERFORMANCE, POLICY AND PARTNERSHIPS COMMITTEE HELD IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBER, FIRST FLOOR,

CIVIC ADMINISTRATION BUILDING, 101 ESK STREET, INVERCARGILL ON TUESDAY 11 MAY AT 9.00 PM

PRESENT: Cr D J Ludlow (Chair)Cr R R Amundsen (Deputy Chair)His Worship the Mayor, Sir T R ShadboltCr R L AbbottCr A J ArnoldCr W S ClarkCr A H CrackettCr P W Kett Cr G D LewisCr M LushCr I R PottingerCr N D Skelt Cr L F Soper

IN ATTENDANCE: Mrs C Hadley – Chief ExecutiveMr M Day – Group Manager – Finance and AssuranceMs E Moogan – Group Manager – InfrastructureMr S Gibling – Group Manager – Leisure and RecreationMr D Edwards – Group Manager – Customer and EnvironmentMr P Thompson– Executive Manager – Office of the Chief ExecutiveMrs R Suter – Strategy and Policy ManagerMs G Woodward – Corporate PlannerMs A Schuberth – Engagement CoordinatorMs K Davidson – Digital Content CreatorMs G Bragg – Design and Marketing SpecialistMs M Tupara – Governance Operational AdministratorMrs T Amarasingha – Governance AdvisorMs M Sievwright – Governance OfficerMs M Cassiere – Executive Governance Officer

2. APOLOGIES

Nil.

3. INTEREST REGISTER A2279220

Nil.

4. HEARINGS FOR THE 2021-2031 LONG TERM PLANA3393613

It was noted that 541 submissions were received for the Long – Term Consultation Plan. Staff were thanked for their hard work and efforts in putting together the Long –Term Plan Hearings agenda.

Performance, Policy and Partnerships Committee - Public - Minutes of the Extraordinary Meeting of the Performance, Policy and Partnership...

7

A3406373

It was also noted that apart from the late submissions mentioned in the recommendations, three additional late submissions were received and tabled.

Moved Cr Soper, seconded Cr Aboott that the Performance, Policy and Partnerships Committee;

Receive the following additional late submissions:∑ Wendy Baker∑ Bronwyn Cordell∑ Linda Bell∑ Colin Anderson∑ Darellle Jenkins

Moved Cr Abbott, seconded Cr Lewis that the Performance, Policy and Partnerships Committee;

1. Receive the report “Hearings for the 2021 – 2031 Long-term Plan”.

2. Receive and consider the submissions to the 2021 – 2031 Long-term Plan(A259249).

3. Agree to receive and consider late submissions received after the closing of submissions:∑ Ryan Harvey∑ Timothy Fletcher∑ Nathan Surendran∑ Kevin Wall

4. Note the summary of submissions (A3405290).

5. Note the social media report (A3401518).

6. Note the timetable for hearings (A3405264).

The motion, now put, was RESOLVED in the affirmative.

5. SUBMISSIONS TO BE HEARD

5.1. Submission 406 - Joseph Mclean

In addition to the written submission, the submitter took the meeting through the main points in his submission. He thanked the Councillors for their service to the city and said that he noted the Long-Term Plan was conservative with debt which was appreciated and the upgrade was great.

He said that developers should be supported to develop green spaces to make it a great place to raise a family. He also stated that money should not be wasted in redoing the museum.

In response to questions, the following answers were given:

∑ Current location and the current pyramid style of building is best for the museum.

∑ The suggestion is not to downsize the museum building but to go for a better design.


8

A3406373

The Chair thanked the submitter for taking the time to present to Council.

5.2. Submission 531 - Gordon Crombie - Waihopai Association Football

In addition to the written submission, the submitter took the meeting through the main points in his submission. He said that the association is based at Surrey Park with club rooms at the grandstand.

He requests delay in future plans of the grandstand due to lack of specific details in the Surrey Park development plan, and also ring fence the current budgeted 1.5 million dollars for future development.


∑ Delay future decisions until feedback and recommendations with other user groups have taken place.

∑ Move the location of the grandstand towards Ascot Community School.∑ Delay requested for earlier than the next three years.


5.3. Submission 387 - Mark Young

In addition to the written submission, the submitter took the meeting through the main points in his submission. He said that the decisions taken by the Council on the Long – Term Plan needed to be transformational in a top – down approach and not in a bottom – up approach. A suitable area for large gatherings, activities and events to draw people to the CBD would be relevant.


∑ Retailers to have set times for goods to be delivered.∑ Disabled parking to be created at both ends of the street.


5.4. Submission 424 - Chris Knight - Athletics Southland

In addition to the written submission, the submitter took the meeting through the main points in his submission. He requests delay in future plans of the grandstand due to lack of specific details in the Surrey Park development plan. He said that the Athletics Southland has storage rooms at the grandstand of Surrey Park and also owns the track. He requests to the current budgeted 1.5 million dollars for future developmentbe ring – fenced till further discussions take place.

The proposal of a 300 seat grandstand is a significant downsize for Athletics Southland. An ideal opportunity to collaborate with Council and other user groups of Surrey Park to build a purpose-built grandstand. It should be investigated if the grandstand should be moved closer to St. Paul or to build a purpose-built facility.


∑ Christchurch accommodates 300 people in the grandstand which is an open –ended design.



9

A3406373

5.5. Submission 493 - Dr Marcin Lipski

In addition to the written submission, the submitter took the meeting through the main points in his submission. He suggested a health and wellness center in the squash courts at Bluff, and have professionals from the health and wellness industry. This would provide people the benefit of choosing from different sport and recreation options.


∑ Perhaps, community funding through Council could invest in the upfront costs.∑ Environment South are regional Council shareholders.


5.6. Submission 461 - Gaire Thompson

In addition to the written submission, the submitter took the meeting through the main points in his submission. He said that a lot care needs to be considered when closing off streets. As a provincial town, Invercargill is reliant on people from other areas to shop in town who would use private transport. He noted that the umbrella on Don Street was contributed by people from the community and is proposed to be taken away.

Museum should have been reassessed and the necessary work done instead of closing it. Money should be spent on Anderson House which can be used as a venue for weddings and other events. Money should be spent on Ruby Park as it can also be used for other events apart from rugby.


∑ Strengthening the museum to a minimum level and keeping it operative and available would be best. Reassess it again at another time.


Note: The Hearing adjourned at 10.11 am and reconvened at 10.15 am.

5.7. Submission 421 - Brian MacPherson

In addition to the written submission, the submitter took the meeting through the main points in his submission. He said that the limitation of lot-sizes or lot-size regulation should be abolished. He tabled two pictures of developments which included a property built on a lot size of 605 square metres with four units and a property built on a lot size of 577square metres with three units.

He noted that these types of builds were not high density development and were moderate density development. He said that currently, anything less than 750 lot sizes cannot be subdivided in the city.


∑ The two examples provided show that it is possible to build in a smaller lot –size while being compliant with rules and regulations.

∑ Slightly high density or moderate density housing could be developed which are closer to popular shopping centers.


10

A3406373

∑ These types of house can be sold to retired people and provided with individual titles.



5.8. Submission 407 - Hugh McGaveston

In addition to the written submission, the submitter took the meeting through the main points in his submission. He said this was a very good document to read and easy to follow and he thanked the staff for the work they had put into it. He suggested the area to the north of Queens Drive needed to be explored for housing opportunities. The national narrative around the CBD needed to change.


∑ People don’t understand Invercargill which was in part due to perception and media. Southlanders were conservative when it came to promoting themselves and that needed to change.


5.9. Submission 278 - Jinnette Pickford

In addition to the written submission, the submitter took the meeting through the main points in her submission around the Bluff Living Wage and the inequity of this. There were numerous other city councils which included the living wage in their governance.


∑ Council has a responsibility to look after those that are on a lower wage.∑ We note that a quarter of the workforce is on the minimum wage.


5.10. Submission 389 - Linzi Turner

In addition to the written submission, the submitter took the meeting through the main points in her submission. She was concerned how rates were being spent. Council kept asking ratepayers for more money and as much as she agreed with the CBD plan, ratepayers only had so much money they could give.


5.11. Submission 575 – Janice Burton and Lynn Grace - Public Health Centre

In addition to the written submission, the submitter took the meeting through the main points in their submission.


∑ South City is an area which has become a hub and does align with the principles of the CBD. There are other areas which could be looked at also for liquor ban areas.



11

A3406373

5.12. Submission 426 - Yvonne McClelland

In addition to the written submission, the submitter took the meeting through the main points in her submission. $52 million dollars to fix a building to 67% earthquake proof was not good enough, and she asked how much it would cost to get to 100%.


∑ Council owned the land in Queens Park so the museum should be in this area, and the art gallery should be included so two different blocks of land were not used. It did not have to be an extravagant design, it just had to be usable.

∑ Object to having the museum in Lower Esk Street as it was not accessible for visitors. Everyone knows where Queens Park is. There is no parking for buses for the museum at Don Street which excluded people due to access.

∑ Council committed to the Mall. Someone pulled out and Council had to put in extra funding. There have been a lot of buildings which had not been future proofed as they were not fit for purpose, i.e. not enough seating.


5.13. Submission 71 - Anna Clarke

In addition to the written submission, the submitter took the meeting through the main points in her submission. Anything designed needed to be designed with environmental and sustainability in mind.


∑ Believe in higher costs for a lower operating cost in the future.∑ The basic formula is to take a strategic approach and what is the most cost

effective way to make the biggest change. Predominately the biggest things are fossil fuels and whatever Council can do to encourage cycling is good. In terms of the wastewater system there is a potential to use for energy.


5.14. Submission 233 - Richard Kyte

In addition to the written submission, the submitter took the meeting through the main points in his submission. He spoke about mitigating the leaching of toxic waste from the previous dump into New River Estuary.


∑ No costings had been undertaken in regards to a stop bank. We had been looking at beautification but the issue is if the leaching continues and needs to be remediated, we need to know where this could happen before beautification. Investigation needed to be undertaken first.

∑ We had predominately focused on the dump because this goes into the estuary. ∑ This is 20-30 years of refuse so this would need to be looked at for removal. ∑ There is leachate coming out and my understanding of the consent is that it is

an old consent so it doesn’t look at the areas it needs to, so I am unaware of any poisons going into the water for fish. The toxins which accumulate in the fish in the estuary is a concern however we do not have the data for this.

∑ There is a tidal flood in this area.



12

A3406373

Note: The Hearing adjourned at 11.43 am and reconvened at 1.20 pm.

5.15. Submission 499 - Noel Peterson

In addition to the written submission, the submitter took the meeting through the main points in his submission. He said it was a responsibility of Council to look after the Bluff Pool rather than passing it on to a committee.


∑ A targeted rate for this could be discussed but it would keep a critical asset open in Bluff. If Council was going to invest in Bluff, whether it be through a loan, then the pool was a good investment. There were more elderly people using the pool and a new generation of kids who needed to learn to swim, particularly around a port town.

∑ A key entry to the pool could increase the usage.


5.16. Submission 462 - Geoff Folster

In addition to the written submission, the submitter took the meeting through the main points in his submission. He said the Bluff pool was a strong part of the community and it was important for the kids and locals. Bluff was out of the ILT zone so free swimming lessons were not available for school kids.


∑ There was a cost for buses to get to the Invercargill pool and it also took away learning time as it was a whole afternoon.

∑ It was the parents rather than swimming instructors who taught the kids.∑ Bluff was not able to access ILT swim coaching because they were not in the

area.∑ There would also be health and safety issues with handing out keys.


5.17. Submission 443 - Carolyn Vi (via phone)

In addition to the written submission, the submitter took the meeting through the main points in her submission. She said the Bluff pool was a great asset and it was good for the community. It was important to also have the pool open all year round.


∑ It would not be fair for this to be a target rate as Bluff did fall under the Invercargill City Council.


5.18. Submission 498 - Michelle Rogers-Hoff and Jamie Lemalie

In addition to the written submission, the submitter took the meeting through the main points in her submission. They requested the Invercargill City Council continue to provide funding for the Bluff Pool as it was a critical asset to the community. For many of the Bluff community it was not feasible to travel to Invercargill for swimming lessons.


13

A3406373


∑ Key access would need to have rules around access and adult supervision. This would also allow the community to use the pool outside of current hours.


5.19. Submission 425 – Ian Sutherland, Bluff Community Pool Trust

In addition to the written submission, the submitter took the meeting through the main points in their submission. He said the children were the greatest reason for keeping the pool as it was critical as Bluff was a port town. Both schools in Bluff used the pool and was a way to keep kids active. Confirmation of the operating funds wererequested so they could request funding from other funders.


∑ Heating is one of the major costs with an electric boiler being used. This needs to be replaced now, so a new system would be more efficient.

∑ There would be no loss in patronage due to the hydroslide in Invercargill as it was a different client base and no opportunity for children to go into Invercargill.


5.20. Submission 423 – John Collins, Omaui Community

In addition to the written submission, the submitter took the meeting through the main points in their submission. This submission included a petition from 40 Omaui residents asking for the Omaui and Mokomoko roads to be sealed. Omaui was changing, more people were visiting and new housing was being built.


∑ There are about 40 houses in the village. The road was 4 kilometres which would cost about $1 million to seal.

∑ There was a group of people who did not want the road sealed however 85% of residents did want this.


5.21. Submission 132 - Christine Henderson

In addition to the written submission, the submitter took the meeting through the main points in her submission.


∑ We can’t talk money for the museum yet, we need to talk about options.∑ The pyramid is an iconic design. It has to be practical but there is a desire to

keep the current shape.


5.22. Submission 437 - Gloria Henderson - Bluff Community Board

In addition to the written submission, the submitter took the meeting through the main points in her submission.


14

A3406373


Note: The meeting adjourned at 2.34 pm and would resume on Wednesday 12 May 2021 at 9.00 am.

Note: The meeting resumed at 9.10 am on Wednesday 12 May 2021.

PRESENT: Cr D J Ludlow (Chair)Cr R R Amundsen (Deputy Chair) His Worship the Mayor, Sir T R ShadboltCr R L Abbott Cr A J Arnold Cr W S ClarkCr A H Crackett Cr P W Kett Cr G D LewisCr M LushCr I R Pottinger Cr N D Skelt Cr L F Soper

IN ATTENDANCE: Mr N Peterson – Bluff Community BoardMrs C Hadley – Chief ExecutiveMr M Day – Group Manager – Finance and AssuranceMs E Moogan – Group Manager – InfrastructureMr S Gibling – Group Manager – Leisure and RecreationMrs R Suter – Strategy and Policy ManagerMs G Woodward – Corporate PlannerMs A Schuberth – Engagement CoordinatorMs K Davidson – Digital Content CreatorMrs T Amarasingha – Governance AdvisorMs M Tupara – Governance Operational AdministratorMs M Sievwright – Governance OfficerMs M Cassiere – Executive Governance Officer

6. APOLOGIES

Nil.

7. SUBMISSIONS TO BE HEARD

7.1. Submission 524 – Angela Newell - Arts Murihiku

In addition to the written submission, the submitter took the meeting through the main points in her submission. She requested that Council use the regional arts strategy commissioned by Arts Murihiku for guidance and information towards arts and culture.

In response to questions, the following answers were given:∑ During Covid, arts seemed to be welcomed by people and had greater focus.∑ Arts and culture does not have to be in one building.∑ Arts Muhihiku is not involved with murals around the city; however, she

encouraged Council to support murals as long as they were managed correctly and had artistic excellence.


15

A3406373


7.2. Submission 591 – Wendy Joy Baker

In addition to the written submission, the submitter took the meeting through the main points in her submission. She commended the Council for the Long – Term Plan and for the City with a Heart motto. In her submission, she noted that she was happy with the Council’s preferred option for SMAG and expressed appreciation for Council’s encouragement of art and for the Art Gallery. She also expressed appreciation for the street art around the CBD. She noted the new signage about dog control around the city. She also noted that people are not following the rules regarding dog control in the city.


7.3. Submission 472 - Forest and Bird, Jenny Campbell

In addition to the written submission, the submitter took the meeting through the main points in her submission. She commended the Council on the positive aspects of the Long – Term Plan and noted that the Long – Term Plan needed to ensure all Council policies were seen through the lens of climate change. She said that stopping the carbon emissions must be the top priority of this Council.


7.4. Submission 508 - Kim Reilly - Southland Federated Farmers

In addition to the written submission, the submitters took the meeting through the main points in her submission. She said that the farmers oppose the proposed changes to the rating system as they are unfair and disproportionately increases the burden on rural ratepayers. Rural properties that have not faced increases in capital value yet have faced an increase of 17.8% in rates, while residential properties which have faced increases in capital value, have faced only 3% increase in rates. She noted that they oppose the proposal to move away from targeted rates and also oppose further reductions to the farming differentials. She said that they would like to see the Councilretain the current rating system.


∑ Rural farmers are being asked to pay a disproportionate share as opposed to the urban ratepayers towards utilisation of services in the city.

∑ They support targeted rates rather than general rates.


7.5. Submission 003 - June Trotter

In addition to the written submission, the submitter provided an amendment to her submission. The submitter took the meeting through the main points in her submission. She said that she had initially opposed the Don Street upgrade and spoke with staff member, Mr R. Pearson about her concerns, who provided her the information to allay her concerns. She requested that the I-Site be brought back.


∑ I-Site could probably be brought back and located in both the CBD and Gala Street.


16

A3406373

The Chair thanked the submitter for taking the time to present to Council.7.6. Submission 152 - Henry James Tudor

In addition to the written submission, the submitter took the meeting through the main points in his submission. His concern was that the Long – Term Plan should be a 15 year plan instead of 10 year plan as it may help the ratepayers. His concern with rates where that people in the city relied on fixed incomes such as superannuation. He also mentioned the plans in the roadmap which included the museum, Anderson’s Park, arts and creativity, Surrey Park with parking and access issues. He asked whether the Civic Theatre was being used enough.


∑ Winton people come into town to work every day but they do not pay for the public amenities, however Otarara residents are asked to contribute.


Note: The Hearing adjourned at 9.55 am and reconvened at 10.07 am

7.7. Submission 433 - Anke Hapgood

In addition to the written submission, the submitter took the meeting through the main points in her submission. She said that the reopening of the museum and art gallery should be completed urgently and not delay as per the Long – Term Plan. She also noted that safe cycling tracks be connected to existing cycle ways with smaller roads. Extend the Waihopai flood bank track to Mill Road North, create a cycle lane along North Bainfield Road, McIver Road connecting back into the flood bank track as well as Donovan Park, extending track along Otepuni towards Mill Road South and a cycle lane along Mill Road South to begin a cycle ring around Invercargill, extending Kingswell track along Boxall Street towards Rockdale Road.


∑ Museum renovation should be prioritised.∑ Cycle track trail around the innovation street from Deveron Street linking up to

other trails. Council to look at existing cycle tracks and looking at linking them.



7.8. Submission 44 - Janette Bradshaw

In addition to the written submission, the submitter took the meeting through the main points in her submission. A majority of people worked at Tiwai and the Freezing Works and she was concerned many could not afford the rates rise, particularly with the Tiwai closing soon. She would also like something done for the youth of Invercargill.


∑ If one project would be picked, the priority would be the urban Don Street.



17

A3406373

7.9. Submission 441 - Bridgit Forsyth - Cancer Society

In addition to the written submission, the submitter took the meeting through the main points in her submission. She supported the preferred options but would like water stations and shade incorporated in the designs as Southern region had the highest rate of melanoma in New Zealand. She also wanted smoke-free signs more visible which included vape free. She urged Council to submit on the government’s smoke-free action policy.


∑ Vitamin D is very important. We have a vitamin D position statement which could be referred to. The science on this is still evolving. The further South we are the less sun we get so someone should take supplements.

∑ We do want to prevent skin cancer but are not advocating staying completing in the shade, just shade options.

∑ Generally in cities smoking seems to be lower. Part of it will be having rural populations where there are no smoke cessation options readily available.

∑ There is a lot of research happening with vaping but we know that it will not be harmless so we are concerned about those that are vaping.


7.10. Submission 128 - Jared Cappie and Stella O’Connor

In addition to the written submission, the submitter took the meeting through the main points in their submission. He spoke about needing places for whanau and youth to go to in the city centre including meeting places and play facilities which were intergenerational. The museum was a community hub which encouraged education and this should connect to the CBD.


∑ The main thing is the community have mentioned how much they miss the museum and it was about being future focused so we need to think about that.

∑ There should be one anchor point where families can come to but there are other options which caters for everyone.

∑ Youth are meeting in car parks at the moment which is not a great place.


7.11. Submission 86 - Brendon McDermott, Sport Southland

In addition to the written submission, the submitter took the meeting through the main points in his submission. It was important to invest in wellbeing, and maximise the use of the spaces available. To ensure the Regional Spaces and Places Plan, he was looking for Council to assist with the funding of $40,000 per year.

Note: Cr Crackett declared a conflict and did not take part in the discussion of this submission.


∑ There needs to be work done for new and existing users of Surrey Park. We can make this happen quicker if we have the resources.

∑ It is going to come down to a mind-set shift in that it is not just a rugby stadium. We are opening the space so other users feel that they can use it as well. It


18

A3406373

doesn’t have to be something Council does on its own, it is a collaborate approach. The cost is not a barrier, it is the mind-set.


7.12. Submission 450 - David Kennedy - Southern Farmers Market

In addition to the written submission, the submitter took the meeting through the main points in his submission. The Southern Farmers Market were a non-profit organisation so the stall holders could operate at a low cost. A multipurpose public space was lacking in the city centre and he was keen to see this included.


∑ The racecourse operates well but there is little street visibility, so when we operate in the centre of the city we attract new customers.


7.13. Submission 136 – Linley Irvine – Invercargill Public Art Gallery

In addition to the written submission, the submitter took the meeting through the main points in her submission. She would like to see a new museum and art gallery and the building should be built at the higher earthquake standard.


Note: Cr Soper, Cr Lewis and Cr Kett declared a conflict and did not take part in the discussion of this submission.

∑ Should be future proofing the museum going forward.


7.14. Submission 146 - Selwyn Steedman

In addition to the written submission, the submitter took the meeting through the main points in his submission. He said if the Council went to a ward system it could cut the Council down to eight Councillors and one Mayor. This would give greater representation to Invercargill. A lot of money had been spent in the city centre and this development need to be completed before more big ticket items were considered. Maintenance was key. The community was struggling and Council needed to listen to them with regard to rates rises. The Water Tower and Anderson Park had been spoken about for a long time and needed to be done.


∑ If it is a ward system, eight would be better.∑ The Water Tower and Anderson Park would be the two which could be done

fairly quickly.



19

A3406373

7.15. Submission 142 - Valerie Dearman, CCS Disability Action Southland

In addition to the written submission, the submitter took the meeting through the main points in her submission. The biggest issues was accessibility and inclusiveness. More consultation with young people on community issues would be good.


∑ Consider playgrounds for everyone, adults, disabled, kids.


7.16. Submission 428 – Winsome-Aroha, Social Credit New Zealand

In addition to the written submission, the submitter took the meeting through the main points in her submission. She was concerned about the ability to pay for all of the items in the Plan. It was wrong to borrow from overseas, as rates were being used to pay for the interest. Maori did not borrow to live, and it was the mokopuna which would be paying for the future debt.


Note: The Hearing adjourned at 12.07 pm and resumed at 1.10 pm.

7.17. Submission 445 – Chris Cole – Learning Differences Aotearoa Trust

In addition to the written submission, the submitter took the meeting through the main points in her submission. She said that they agree with the urban play areas but would like to add value with neurodiversity areas. She noted that coordinating with all groups in Southland to provide a voice of accessibility to all. Incorporate visual aids to all the signage in the City’s designs.


∑ No one is looking at future planning with neurodiversity in New Zealand.


7.18. Submission 471 - Janette Malcom - Invercargill Community Connection

In addition to the written submission, the submitter took the meeting through the main points in her submission. She said a feasibility study shows a strong need for a dedicated space for the youth, the arts, physical activity and events as well as a hosted community lounge. The feasibility involved with Mana from Evolved gym, Mikel from Zumba, Red Cross Refugee Programme, Grey Power, and the arts who need studio space.


∑ Private partnership expressed by Vodaphone as well as others although they do not want to go public with their names as yet.

∑ South Alive was part of the research and feasibility of the project and they strongly support the need for the project. They do not have the scope and resources to take on this project themselves. Other centers have been looked into only on the design aspect however not on other aspects.

∑ City already has a museum so doesn’t make any sense to incorporate that into the community center.


20

A3406373

∑ Plan on calling public meeting and invite various organisations to partner and perhaps a research organisation can be a part of it.


7.19. Submission 036 - Roger Landsborough Hodgkinson

In addition to the written submission, the submitter took the meeting through the main points in his submission. He said that attention should be given towards making the city and province fit for purpose for a green and circular economy. Southland should be driving ecological change and putting into the economy and commercial aspects for marketing advantage and practical reasons. An updated copy of his submission would be circulated among the Councillors.


7.20. Submission 001 - Marion Miller – Anderson House

In addition to the written submission, the submitter took the meeting through the main points in her submission. She said that figures presented since the 2018 LTP were inconsistent for the upgrade Anderson House. The current figure of $900,000 would only cover earthquake strengthening and basic maintenance, while the remaining $300,000 would not cover that work and queried about the budget for additional work.


∑ Several purposes have been identified by Anderson House which have not been considered by the Council.

∑ At the 2018 Long – Term Plan it was agreed that facilities were to be upgraded which has not been done. Expect Council to commit to upgrading the facilities as agreed in the 2018 Long – Term Plan.


7.21. Submission 494 - Marcus Roy – Southland Mountain Bike Club

In addition to the written submission, the submitter took the meeting through the main points in his submission. He said the submission focused solely on the parks and reserves activity. Although Queens Park is widely used by many people, other areas within the ICC jurisdiction were not fully utilised. He suggested that Bluff had a lot of potential and a targeted set of activities would help unlock a wide ranging opportunities. He also stated that a masterplan designed by Southland Mountain Bike Club would facilitate cultural, social, environmental, and economic opportunities and look towards Council for support.


∑ Unsure of how many people use these trails currently as we don’t have track counters however, perhaps thousands use some of these tracks.

∑ Suggested mountain biking trail would be through private land and the owner would be happy to work towards establishing this trail.



21

A3406373

7.22. Submission 513 – Lilianne Tudor - St Pauls

In addition to the written submission, the submitter took the meeting through the main points in her submission. She said she represented the St Pauls Harrier and Amateur Athletic Club. She noted that they supported Southland Athletic Club’s submission for delay of upgrade of Surrey Park grandstand and to ring-fence $1.5 million currently allocated. St Paul agrees with other users to defer the decision on grandstand until feedback is obtained from the other users.


∑ User group were consulted however there was only one speaker.∑ If Grandstand can be moved closer to the finish line it would be good.∑ The rooms are used by a reasonably widely used.∑ It would be good to get an increase in the parking area.


7.23. Submission 449 - Craig Macalister - Anderson House Trust

In addition to the written submission, the submitter took the meeting through the main points in his submission. He said that the 2018 LTP budgeted $1.7 million for Anderson House although he was fine with the current figure of $1.2 million. However he noted that there was more work to be done on Anderson House apart from earthquake strengthening and weather tightness. He wondered about the $500,000 which had dropped from the 2018 LTP. He asked where Anderson House sat when considering preserving Invercargill’s heritage character.


∑ Anderson House can be used for various events like weddings, conferences, etc. However, irrespective of its uses, the House will have to be brought up to scale.

∑ The downstairs can be upgraded but the upstairs will require a considerable amount of work.

∑ I am asking for Council to take a leap of faith and get the work started on Anderson House.


7.24. Submission 584 - Peter David Swain

In addition to the written submission, the submitter took the meeting through the main points in his submission. He said that there were several areas of concern including sporting venues and the rates. He said that he considered the Surrey Park grandstand work be prioritised. He noted that the Rugby Park grandstand upgrade be considered as there are fewer games being played in recent years. He noted that the exterior of Anderson House be upgraded. He said he was pleased with the plan for Esk Street however he said that the main street should not be reduced from four lanes to two lanes. He said that the pressure of rates not be increased on the ratepayers as some of them were pensioners. He said that the Bluff request for a swimming pool be approved.



22

A3406373

7.25. Submission 160 - Adrian Butson

In addition to the written submission, the submitter took the meeting through the main points in his submission. He said he is a member of the Southland Referees Association however he was speaking at the hearings in a personal capacity. He said the Association had a room at the Rugby Park grandstand and he would like to see the work in the plan go ahead.


∑ Council involvement means involvement by the wider public group at Rugby Park.

∑ When it’s your team involved and people who are associated with their teams will bring people to the games.

∑ Having everyone involved in rugby from the players, to the coaches and referees included in one room would be helpful for development and training. The current location is very good.


7.26. Submission 510 - Stella O' Connor - Murihiku Kai Collective

In addition to the written submission, the submitter took the meeting through the mainpoints in her submission. She said that there were pockets in the community who lacked access to quality and nutritious food. She asked the Council to lead in the space of supporting a local regenerative system and support self-sustainability for food security and food sovereignty, to help co-design and adopt a Murihiku Food Resilience Plan.


∑ Short and long-term ideas have been tabled and initially look for Council’s policy team to come on-board and look at where the food system lies in the annual strategies.

∑ The Council website could have gardening tips and advice.


7.27. Submission 490 - Louise O'Callaghan

In addition to the written submission, the submitter took the meeting through the main points in her submission. She said that the priority would be museum development and the CBD. The passion is for the museum in its current site and complexity of timelines. She said that Rugby Park would not be a multi – event venue. She noted that Invercargill ratepayers are not in a financial position to undertake improvement in Rugby Park.


∑ Council should defer and consider using existing assets instead of spending more on Rugby Park. Rugby Park purchase by Council was not prudent.

∑ For the museum, the effective use of money in terms of a smaller sized new build instead of refurbishing the current structure would be better.



23

A3406373

7.28. Submission 460 – Rick Zwaan – Forest and Bird

In addition to the written submission, the submitter took the meeting through the main points in his submission. He said that they would encourage Council to recognise the importance of nature and that we are living in a bio-diversity and climate crises. Currently 4000 species face endangerment. Encourage focus on the area of recognising significant natural areas and to set aside funding for bio-diversity groups to replant areas with indigenous plants.


∑ Zealandia has been an incredible asset for New Zealand and is a protected area. He was not aware of particular predator-free zones for the birds in other areas.

∑ He wasn’t aware of the Council’s park team programme to plant around 40,000 to 50,000 native trees.

The Chair thanked the submitter for taking the time to present to Council

7.29. Submission 058 - Steve Mitchell – Rugby Southland

In addition to the written submission, the submitter took the meeting through the main points in his submission. He said that rugby has been an important part of the fabric of New Zealand society and has been the highest participation sport in Southland. He said that it was disappointing that remedial action has not taken place about the deterioration of the rooms at Rugby Park. He voiced concerns about the current timelines of remedial plans. He noted that they were contributing power and lease costs although they did not use the rooms due to their condition. Suggested that temporary rooms for staff be arranged until the rooms at Rugby Park are upgraded and deemed safe. He provided a summary of plan A and B as suggested by Rugby Southland.


∑ A copy of plan A and B which are not included in his submission would be provided to the Councillors.


Note: The Hearing adjourned at 3.20 pm and resumed at 3.40 pm.

7.30. Submission 59 - Wayne Harpur

In addition to the written submission, the submitter took the meeting through the main points in his submission. He was concerned about the amount of money proposed to be spent on a new museum. He believed Invercargill City Council paid more for regional facilities compared to other local authorities.


∑ Hadn’t considered lobbying to Regional Council but would around the funding of regional facilities.

∑ Lower Esk Street for the museum as it is close to the library and archives. It would be close to the Wachner Place toilets, the buses, hotels. It fit in with the plan.

∑ The $10,000 per m2 did factor in demolition costs as well as building cost.


24

A3406373

∑ He commended the improvements to the building consent process and thanked the staff for their work.


7.31. Submission 561 - Holly Stade

In addition to the written submission, the submitter took the meeting through the main points in her submission. She would like to see more playgrounds and quiet spaces in the city centre. She would like the museum open in the current place with a bigger café.


∑ It would be good to get a skatepark or the museum done first.∑ It would be good to have more fun things in the museum, interactive, science

museum, like Discovery World in Dunedin.


7.32. Submission 130 - Vicky Henry

In addition to the written submission, the submitter took the meeting through the main points in her submission. She said there was a lack of a clear climate change policy. This was too big an issue to not have a plan already.


∑ In today’s world it is hard to make a decision without falling over ethics. Is therea difference between how electric and petrol cars are made?


7.33. Submission 56 – Colin Anderson

In addition to the written submission, the submitter took the meeting through the main points in his submission. He opposed the cost of the museum as it seemed to be a patch up of an old building rather than a new building. He suggested building a new building beside the old one, with the old building used as storage. He spoke of options which could be included in the museum. He suggested that someone else could own the museum building which Council leased.


7.34. Submission 88 - Peter Downing and Gerry Ward, Southland Cricket Association

In addition to the written submission, the submitter took the meeting through the main points in his submission. The submitter spoke about the drainage issues to the grounds and the need for funding to help with this, and the desire for a new electronic score board.


∑ The groundworks is something the Parks Department is looking at but moving the trees is around $15,000, the ground work could be around $15,000 and the scoreboard is $20,000.

∑ We haven’t looked at Active Communities yet.


25

A3406373

∑ Would like a mobile scoreboard but they don’t travel well. We would love to see one for the entire city which could be used by other organisations.


7.35. Submission 448 - Courtney Ellison - South Alive

In addition to the written submission, the submitter took the meeting through the main points in her submission. She said they advocated towards equitable investment across the city in the suburbs. She said improvements to Russel square including having fencing at the playground and having public toilets at the playground. Better information about accessibility for elderly people with walkers and wheelchairs for walks. The deprivation level in South Invercargill is quite high and financial help in that area would be appreciated.


Note: Cr Abbott declared a conflict and did not take part in the discussion.

∑ The fence for Russell Square was something to create a barrier so children could not just run out into the roads.

∑ Feedback received has been that a space for youth is required.


Note: Cr Skelt and Cr Arnold left the meeting at 4.41 pm.

There being no further business, the meeting finished at 4.57 pm.


26

A3406973

MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE PERFORMANCE, POLICY AND PARTNERSHIPSHELD IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBER, FIRST FLOOR, CIVIC ADMINISTRATION

BUILDING, 101 ESK STREET, INVERCARGILL ON TUESDAY 11 MAY 2021 AT 3.00 PM

PRESENT: Cr D J Ludlow (Chair)Cr R R Amundsen (Deputy Chair)His Worship the Mayor, Sir T R ShadboltCr R L AbbottCr A J ArnoldCr W S ClarkCr A H CrackettCr P W Kett Cr G D LewisCr M LushCr I R PottingerCr N D Skelt Cr L F Soper Mr J Grant – External Appointee

IN ATTENDANCE: Mr N Peterson – Bluff Community BoardMs E Moogan – Group Manager – Infrastructure Mr M Day – Group Manager – Finance and AssuranceMr S Gibling – Group Manager – Leisure and RecreationMr D Edwards – Group Manager – Customer and EnvironmentMr M Morris – Legal Counsel / Deputy Electoral OfficerMr R Pearson – Manager – RoadingMr J Shaw – Manager – Planning and Building ServicesMr G Fisher – Senior Policy PlannerMs H McLeod – Communications AdvisorMs L Devery – Team Leader – PlanningMs S Baxter – Planner – Heritage and Urban DesignMs G Bragg – Design and Marketing SpecialistMs K Davidson – Digital Content CreatorMr A Eng – Digital and Communications AdvisorMrs T Amarasingha – Governance AdvisorMs M Cassiere – Executive Governance Officer

1. APOLOGIES

Nil.

2. PUBLIC FORUM

Nil.


Nil.

Performance, Policy and Partnerships Committee - Public - Minutes of the Performance, Policy and Partnerships Committee Meeting Held on...

27

A3406973

4. MINUTES OF THE COMMUNITY WELLBEING FUND COMMITTEE MEETING HELD ON 17 FEBRUARY 2021A3360977

Moved Cr Lewis, seconded Cr Pottinger that the minutes of the Community Wellbeing Fund Committee meeting held on 17 February 2021 be received.

Cr Lewis thanked the staff for their hard work and noted that the interviews were conducted professionally.


5. MINUTES OF THE PERFORMANCE, POLICY AND PARTNERSHIPS COMMITTEE MEETING HELD ON 13 APRIL 2021A3380993

Moved Cr Ludlow, seconded Cr Soper and RESOLVED that the minutes of the Performance, Policy and Partnerships Committee meeting held on 13 April 2021 be confirmed.

6. NATIONAL POLICY STATEMENT ON URBAN DEVELOPMENT – REMOVAL OF CAR PARKING RATES FROM THE INVERCARGILL CITY DISTRICT PLANA3324642

Moved Cr Soper, seconded Cr Abbott and RESOLVED that the Performance, Policy and Partnerships Committee:

1. Receive the report “National Policy Statement on Urban Development: Removal of Minimum Car Parking Rates from the Invercargill City District Plan.”

2. Approves Option 1 (The Preferred Option) to:

Remove all minimum on-site parking provisions from the Invercargill City District Plan, including rules, assessment criteria, policies, or objectives that have the effect of setting minimum car parking provisions, and consequential amendments, in accordance with s.55 of the Resource Management Act.


7. INVERCARGILL CITY DISTRICT PLAN: TE PUAWAI DEVELOPMENTS LIMITED PRIVATE PLAN CHANGE REQUESTA3324553

It was noted that Council received a request for a private plan change for a site located at the South Eastern end of Invercargill, presently zoned as a rural zone. This area was identified in the District Plan as an area for urban development to occur in the future, subject to a plan change application.

The proposal was for most of the site to be rezoned as zone 1 as a standard residential zone, along with a small commercial development area surrounded by medium residential density zone.


28

A3406973

Moved Cr Skelt, seconded Cr Soper that the Performance, Policy and Partnerships Committee:

1. Receive the report “Invercargill City District Plan: Te Puawai Developments Limited Private Plan Change Request.”

2. Adopts Option 1 (The Preferred Option) to:

Adopt the proposed plan change request in accordance with Clause 25(2)(a) of Schedule 1 of the Resource Management Act 1991.

3. Publicly notify the request in accordance with Clause 5 of Schedule 1 of the Resource Management Act 1991.


Staff responded in the affirmative to a query about whether the preferred option was that of the developer.

8. RESULTS OF INVERCARGILL CITY COUNCIL’S BUILDING CONSENT AUTHORITY STRATEGIC REVIEWA3389431

Moved Cr Ludlow, seconded Cr Pottinger that the Performance, Policy and Partnerships Committee:

1. Receive the report “results of Invercargill City Council’s Building Consent Authority Strategic Review.”

2. Notes the significant improvement in performance over the last 12 months, to the point where we are now achieving full compliance with the statutory requirements in relation to the issuing of building consents.

Cr Amundsen and Cr Soper thanked the hard work done by staff.


Cr Ludlow recognised and thanked Mr D Edwards for his role at the Invercargill City Council.

9. LOCAL GOVERNMENT ELECTIONS 2022 – MAORI WARDA3389435

A discussion took place around the recommendation for preparation of a report on mana whenua seats on Council Committees /Full Council. The Community Panel for the Representative Review received clear feedback that Māori sought greater voice in the Council, through mana whenua seats on Council Committees/ in Full Council.

It was noted that greater engagement with Māori was required and the role of Māori in the development of the mana whenua process would be integral. The request for the preparation of a report on mana whenua seats was considered as important and relevant.

It was also noted that any potential change in Council Committees at the next election would have to be considered in the preparation of the report on mana whenua seats on Council Committees /Full Council.


29

A3406973

Moved Cr Amundsen, seconded Cr Ludlow that the Performance, Policy and Partnerships Committee:

1. Receive the report “Local Government Elections 2022 - Māori Ward”; and

2. Determine not to establish a Māori ward; however request a report be prepared on mana whenua seats on Council Committees/Full Council.


Note: Cr Clark and Cr Kett voted against the motion.

10. ACTIVITY REPORTA3389537

It was noted that Covid-19 continues to have an impact on attendance at venues and budgets.

Moved Cr Pottinger, seconded Cr Arnold that the Performance, Policy and Partnerships Committee:

Receives the report “Activity Report”.


11. URGENT BUSINESS

Nil

Note: It was noted that the Performance, Policy and Partnerships Committee meeting would adjourn to allow for an Extraordinary Meeting of the Infrastructural Services Committee to take place.

The Public Excluded Session of the Performance, Policy and Partnerships Committee would take place after the Extraordinary Meeting of the Infrastructural Services Committee.

12. PUBLIC EXCLUDED SESSION

Moved Cr Ludlow, seconded Cr Soper and RESOLVED that the public be excluded from the following parts of the proceedings of this meeting, with the exception of the External Advisors, Mr Jeff Grant and Mr Lindsay McKenzie; namely:

(a) Receiving of the minutes of the Public Excluded Session of the Community Wellbeing Fund Committee Meeting held on 15 January 2021

(b) Receiving of the minutes of the Public Excluded Session of the Community Wellbeing Fund Committee Meeting held on 17 February 2021

(c) Receiving of the minutes of the Public Excluded Session of the Community Wellbeing Fund Committee Meeting held on 18 February 2021


30

A3406973

(d) Confirmation of the minutes of the Public Excluded Session of the Performance, Policy and Partnerships Committee Meeting held on 13April 2021

The general subject of each matter to be considered while the public is excluded, the reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter, and the specific grounds under Section 48(1) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 for the passing of this resolution are as follows:




(a) Receiving of the minutes of the Public Excluded Session of the CommunityWellbeing Fund Committee Meeting held on 15 January 2021



(b) Receiving of the minutes of the Public Excluded Session of the CommunityWellbeing Fund Committee Meeting held on 17February 2021



(c) Receiving of the minutes of the Public Excluded Session of the CommunityWellbeing Fund Committee Meeting held on 18February 2021



(d) Confirmation of the minutes of the Public Excluded Session of the Performance, Policy and Partnerships Committee Meeting held on 13 April 2021



There being no further business, the meeting finished at 5.25 pm.


31

A3415346

MINUTES OF THE EXTRAORDINARY MEETING OF THE PERFORMANCE, POLICY AND PARTNERSHIPS COMMITTEE HELD IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBER, FIRST FLOOR,

CIVIC ADMINISTRATION BUILDING, 101 ESK STREET, INVERCARGILL ON TUESDAY 18 MAY 2021 AT 9.00 AM

PRESENT: Cr D J Ludlow (Chair)Cr R R Amundsen (Deputy Chair)Cr A J Arnold (via zoom)Cr W S Clark Cr A H Crackett Cr P W Kett Cr G D Lewis Cr M Lush Cr I R Pottinger Cr N D Skelt Cr L F Soper Mr J Grant – External Appointee

IN ATTENDANCE: Mr N Peterson – Bluff Community Board MemberMrs C Hadley – Chief ExecutiveMr M Day – Group Manager – Finance and AssuranceMr S Gibling – Group Manager – Leisure and Recreation Ms E Moogan – Group Manager – InfrastructureMr P Thompson – Executive Manager – Office of the Chief ExecutiveMs R Suter – Manager – Strategy and PolicyMr R Pearson – Manager - RoadingMs C Rain - Manager - Parks and RecreationMs L McCoy - Manager - Parks PlanningMr W Marriott - Manager – Museum and Heritage ServicesMr P Horner - Manager - Building AssetsMs G Woodward – Corporate PlannerMs A Schuberth – Engagement CoordinatorMs H McLeod – Communications Advisor Ms K Davidson – Digital Content CreatorMrs T Amarasingha – Governance AdvisorMs M Cassiere – Executive Governance Officer

1. APOLOGIES

His Worship the Mayor, Sir T R Shadbolt and Mr L McKenzie for lateness.

Moved Cr Soper, seconded Cr Abbott and RESOLVED that the apologies be accepted.


Nil.


32

A3415346

3. Public Excluded Session

Moved Cr Ludlow, seconded Cr Kett that the public be excluded from the following parts of the proceedings of this meeting; with the exception of the External Appointees, Mr Jeff Grant and Mr Lindsay McKenzie, namely,

(a)Anticipated Funding Request – Invercargill Central Limited

The general subject of each matter to be considered while the public is excluded, the reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter, and the specific grounds under Section 48(1) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 for the passing of this resolution are as follows:




(a) Anticipated Funding Request –Invercargill Central Limited



4. 2021 - 2031 LONG-TERM PLAN DELIBERATIONSA3411810

Staff spoke to the report and noted that the report touched upon eight issues as outlined in the Long -Term Plan Consultation Document which included;

∑ Issue 1: City Centre and Urban Play ∑ Issue 2: Southland Museum and Art Gallery ∑ Issue 3: Rugby Park ∑ Issue 4: Projects related to Roadmap to Renewal∑ Issue 5: Other activities linked to the Infrastructure strategy∑ Issue 6: Feedback on plans for finances and revenue plans∑ Issue 7: Proposals to change the way we rate∑ Issue 8: Other matters – Requests for External funding or support

Following deliberations, officers will take the decisions of the Performance, Policy and Partnerships Committee and finalise the budgets, producing the final draft version of the plan for review by Audit New Zealand. The final version of the plan will be provided to Council for adoption, with the striking of the rates on 30 June 2021. The timeframes for the capital works programmes were also highlighted.

Moved Cr Pottinger, seconded Cr Soper that the Performance, Policy and Partnerships Committee:

1. Receive the report “2021 – 2031 Long-term Plan Deliberations.”2. Note the information provided on Quarter Four reforecasting as additional

information on changes to the operational environment (Appendix A: A3411842).


33

A3415346

3. Note the summary of submissions with officer comments (Appendix C: A3411516)


A discussion took place with regard to the words ‘dispersed play’ used in point 4.1.b. An amendment to the words was requested and the words ‘dispersed play’ weresubsequently removed.

Moved Cr Pottinger, seconded Cr Soper that the Performance, Policy and Partnerships Committee:

4. Adopt the following decisions in preparation of the 2021 – 2031 Long-term Plan:

4.1.a Confirm the preferred option to allocate $18.6million to the streetscapes and an additional $4.9 million for urban play, resulting in a total $23.6 million of a $27.4 million project.

4.1.b Request officers to further develop the scoping for urban play.

4.1.c Determine to consult on allocating additional funding for Stage Two of the streetscapes work, once detailed design and reforecast budgets are completed.


A discussion took place with regard to the words ‘reopen and refurbish the museum’ in point 4.2. a. An amendment to the words was requested and the words replaced with ‘open an Invercargill museum’.

It was noted that the change to the words could potentially mean a new build of the museum. Staff noted that the $52.5 million budget may not be possible to deliver a new build from the capital programme point of view and could have an impact to the cash outflow for the next four years from the financial point of view.

Note: The meeting adjourned at 10.00 am and reconvened at 10.05 am

Moved Cr Pottinger, seconded Cr Amundsen that the Performance, Policy and Partnerships Committee:

4.2. a. Confirm the preferred option to invest $39.4 million of a $52.5 million project to open an Invercargill museum.


It was noted that the words ‘and an amount of $60,000 be allocated for this work’ be added to point 4.2.c.

Moved Cr Ludlow, seconded Cr Soper that the Performance, Policy and Partnerships Committee:

4.2. b. Confirm its preferred location for the museum remains Queens Park.

4.2. c. Request preparation of advice on a governance group for guiding the process of reimagining the offering of the museum to be


34

A3415346

reported to the Performance, Policy and Partnerships Committee on 25 June 2021, and an amount of $60,000 be allocated for this work.


It was noted that the words ‘no more than’ to be added to point 4.2.d.

Moved Cr Soper, seconded Cr Amundsen that the Performance, Policy and Partnerships Committee:

4.2.d. Confirm delivery no more than one year later in 2026/2027 in order to allow for time to reimagine the offering of the museum when it is reopened.


Note: Cr Clark voted againt the motion.

Moved Cr Amundsen seconded Cr Abbott that the Performance, Policy and Partnerships Committee:

4.2. e. Note concerns of submitters that children of the city will not have a museum/ arts and culture space for a significant number of years; that He Waka Tuia may not be meeting all the needs of the submitters; and that further consideration needs to be made of the place of art within the museum.

4.2.f. Request officers to consider interim provision for arts, culture and heritage until the museum reopens, including through mechanisms such as dispersed offerings, holiday programmes and/or partnerships with other providers.

4.2.g. Confirm the following allocations made prior to consultation (See Appendix 2), on the condition that both organisations deliver art and artefact outreach activities, with the programme to be agreed by the GM for Leisure and Recreation:

4.2.g.i. He Waka Tuia (Awhi Rito) – Increased funding allocation from $250,000 to $380,000.

4.2.g.ii. Invercargill Public Art Gallery Trust – Increased funding allocation from $220,000 to $314,000.


Moved Cr Soper, seconded Cr Skelt that the Performance, Policy and Partnerships Committee:

4.3.a. Confirm Another Option - $4.9 million to make Rugby Park structurally sound (Stage One only).

4.3.b. Request officers to undertake further engagement with current and future users through the design process of Stage One, with a view to identifying long-term options for this venue, alongside Invercargill and the region’s other venues.



35

A3415346

Note: Cr Clark voted against the motionNote: Cr Kett declared a conflict of interest and abstained from participation.

Moved Cr Skelt, seconded Cr Soper that the Performance, Policy and Partnerships Committee:

4.4.a. Confirm increasing the budget for Anderson House from $900,000 to $1.4 million with delivery in 2022/2023, noting that this will deliver weather-tightness and earthquake strengthening only; public access to the House would be limited.

4.4.b. Confirm no increase to the budget for Anderson House for any other works at this time, noting that this may be reconsidered if an agreed future use is found for the House and that community consultation would be required.


Note: The meeting adjourned at 10.27 am and reconvened at 10.42 am.

A discussion took place about point 4.4.c. and it was noted that the water tower work be pushed back to another year since the budget had increased from $1.4 million to $4.1 million. Staff noted that some work had already gone in to the design work and requested that a further $100,000 be retained to complete the design work.

Moved Cr Amundsen, seconded Cr Abbott that the Performance, Policy and Partnerships Committee:

4.4.c Confirm an increase in the budget from $1.4 million to $4.1 million to make the Water Tower earthquake safe and extend the project into 2022/2023; retain $100,000 in 2021/22 to complete detailed design work with remaining $3.8 million in 2026/27.


Moved Cr Amundsen, seconded Cr Soper that the Performance, Policy and Partnerships Committee:

4.4.d. Confirm that the funding allocation for the Active Recreation Precinct remains for the carpark and the wider project at $527,000 in 2023/2024 and $610,000 in 2025/2026.

4.4.e. Request officers continue collaborating with the Mountain Bike Club to look for opportunities for achieving success in the Active Recreation Precinct project.


It was noted that the words ‘Surrey Park’ be added to point 4.4. f.


36

A3415346

Moved Cr Soper, seconded Cr Skelt that the Performance, Policy and Partnerships Committee:

4.4.f. Retain $1.5 million in the budget for Surrey Park and defer this project two years to 2023/2024, in order to undertake further consultation and scoping with directly impacted groups.


With regard to point 4.4.g., it was noted that although only few submissions were received for Arts and Creativity Invercargill for the 2021 – 2031 LTP, a significant number of submissions were received in the 2018 – 2028 LTP. Future LTP documents should include information about the submissions received from previous LTP submissions to provide greater clarity for deliberations.

Moved Cr Soper, seconded Cr Amundsen that the Performance, Policy and Partnerships Committee:

4.4. g. Retain the Arts and Creativity Invercargill project in the Roadmap to Renewal, noting that it is in later years of the plans and there will be opportunity to review this project again in light of progressed planning on the Museum in the 2024 – 2034 Plan.


Moved Cr Abbott, seconded Cr Lewis that the Performance, Policy and Partnerships Committee:

4.4.h. Retain the Additional Pool at the same level of funding ($8.2 million) and same years in the Plan (2029 – 2031), noting that Council willexplore opportunities for external funding in the future.


Moved Cr Soper, seconded Cr Pottinger that the Performance, Policy and Partnerships Committee:

4.5.a Request officers to report back on progress of the dialogue on New River Estuary at the time of the 2022/2023 Annual Plan.


With regard to point 4.4.b., it was noted that the safety aspect of the Omaui Road required consideration. With regard to point 4.4.c., a query was asked about the current speed limited on gravel roads and the answer was 100 kilometres per hour.

In response to a query about the recommendation on the current speed on gravel roads, it was noted that the current speed limit on gravel roads was the same across New Zealand and that drivers would need to drive to the conditions.

Moved Cr Lewis, seconded Cr Kett that the Performance, Policy and Partnerships Committee:

4.5.b. Confirm not to extend sealing of the Omaui Road in this Long-term Plan, but to include it for consideration as part of the development of the 2024 – 2034 Long-term Plan.


37

A3415346

4.5.c. Include Omaui and Mokomoko Roads within the speed review planned for late 2021/ early 2022.


Moved Cr Amundsen, seconded Cr Abbott that the Performance, Policy and Partnerships Committee:

4.5.d. Review the need for a dump station in Bluff as part of the development 2024 – 2034 Long-term Plan.

4.5.e. Confirm no increase in the budget allowance for an additional public toilet in Bluff, but direct officers to reconsider this location against other priorities.


Moved Cr Soper, seconded Cr Lewis that the Performance, Policy and Partnerships Committee:

4.5.f. Request officers continue to engage with the Southland Cricket Association to support effective use of the cricket ground at Queens Park.

4.5.g. Decline the request for $20,000 funding for an electronic scoreboard as part of the Long-term Plan, but remind the Southland Cricket Association of the opportunities for funding from both the Community Wellbeing Fund and the Active Communities Fund.


Moved Cr Soper, seconded Cr Abbott that the Performance, Policy and Partnerships Committee:

4.5.h. Request officers to collaborate with Southland Football and Sport Southland to understand needs for car parking at Turnbull Thompson Park, within the context of priorities of other reserves’ car parks.


Moved Cr Amundsen, seconded Cr Lewis that the Performance, Policy and Partnerships Committee:

4.5.i. Note that Russell Square is the first playground in the Parks programme for 2021/2022 and consideration is being given to fencing.

4.5.j. Request officers to undertake initial vision and feasibility assessment for a joined up cycling network in preparation for the 2024 – 2034 Long-term Plan.



38

A3415346

In response to a query about the scope of the working group for point 4.5.k., it was noted that the focus of the group would be to prepare the process for development of the next Long – Term Plan. The strategy would first focus on core infrastructure and then all other activities of Council, and would work in alignment with Environment Southland. The strategy would be informed through risk assessment and risk mitigation.

Moved Cr Soper, seconded Cr Amundsen that the Performance, Policy and Partnerships Committee

4.5.k. Note the establishment of an internal working group on climate change which has been formed and will commence work in June 2021, bringing recommendations to Council as part of the development process for the 2024 – 2034 Long-term Plan.


Moved Cr Amundsen, seconded Cr Abbott that the Performance, Policy and Partnerships Committee

4.6.a. Note and confirm all the changes required to the budget as a result of changes to the operating environment.

4.6.b. Lower the delivery forecast for the infrastructure programme from 75%-85% to 70%-75%, noting that this is still an ambitious target and more accurately reflects the constraints within the construction sector in the post-Covid environment.

4.6.c. Note that the changes to plans for finances and rates will be reflected in updated versions of the financial strategy and related policies which will be brought back to the Performance, Policy and Partnerships Committee before adoption by Council with the Long-term Plan.


Moved Cr Soper, seconded Cr Clark that the Performance, Policy and Partnerships Committee;

4.7. a. Confirm the proposed changes to the rating approach with the following amendments as a result of consultation:

4.7.a.i. Confirm the introduction of two new targeted rates detailed in Table 1.0:

Table 1.0. Private Stormwater Drainage Service Contribution75% Portion of the Stormwater service targeted to those with direct access

to the drainage network component of this servicePrivate Transportation Service Contribution

50% Portion of the Transportation service targeted to those with direct access to the use of this service

4.7.a.ii. Confirm the changes to the Transportation Boundary detailed in Map 1.0:

Note Map 1.0 will be tabled at the meeting.


39

A3415346

4.7.a.iii. Confirm changes to the rating differentials outlined in Table 2.0:

Table 2.0. UAGC & Differential

Consultation document proposal

Revised proposal

UAGC $180 $180Farming Differential 50% 54%Lifestyle Differential 88% 97%Commercial Differential 100% 100%Industrial Differential 100% 100%

4.7.a.iv. Note the impact of recommendations on average rate per property type outlined in Table 3.0:

Table 3.0. Sector Consultation document –Estimated average property rates

Revised proposal -Estimated average property rates

Lower Value Residential

3.7% 3.9%

Higher Value Residential

5.7% 6.0%

Lifestyle 4.9% 5.7%Commercial/Industrial 5.6% 5.1%Farming* 6.9% 3.4%

4.7.b. Note that the changes to the proposals to the rating approach will be reflected in updated versions of the rating and revenue and finance policies which will be brought back to the Performance, Policy and Partnerships Committee before adoption by Council with the Long-term Plan.


Moved Cr Skelt, seconded Cr Kett that the Performance, Policy and Partnerships Committee

4.8.a. Confirm that funding for operational support of the Bluff Pool continue, at the revised level of $110,000 operating grant and $10,000 capital grant from 2022/2023, in line with the new operating model discussed between the Trust and Council.

4.8.b. Request officers to renegotiate a new operating agreement with the Bluff Pool Trust.


Moved Cr Abbott, seconded Cr Lewis that the Performance, Policy and Partnerships Committee:

4.8.c. Confirm that the funding request for the Buff Bluff Health andWellbeing Centre is declined, noting the group may apply to the Community Wellbeing Fund for support.

4.8.d. Request officers to open dialogue in relation to the Buff Bluff Health and Wellbeing Centre, regarding opportunities for alignment with the


40

A3415346

proposed outcomes of this project as part of the planning for the Active Recreation Precinct.


Moved Cr Pottinger, seconded Cr Amundsen that the Performance, Policy and Partnerships Committee:

4.8.e. Regretfully decline for support for the Food Resilience Strategic Plan on the basis that staff resources for community engagement activities are fully allocated.

4.8.f. Confirm support for the Spaces and Places Strategy role for three years to an amount of up to $40,000 annually, conditional on funding being secured from partner agencies and other Territorial Local Authorities.


Note: Cr Crackett declared conflict of interest for point 4.8.f and abstained from voting.


4.8.g. Confirm that Safe in the South is not allocated funding and that Council’s support for the programme concludes at the end of June 2021. Engagement should continue with community stakeholders to explore other options for enabling coordinated activity while noting that engagement resources are fully allocated at this time.


With regard to point 4.8.h., a potential to allocate $100,000 towards IC2 was discussed along with the nature and timeline for disbursement of funds.

Note: The meeting was adjourned at 11.29 am and reconvened at 11.30 am.

It was noted that the three recommendations from staff be replaced with a new recommendation which would read as ‘That Council allocate $100,000 for officers to work alongside IC2 Trust to shape a grant for delivery of youth and community services; and request a report back to PPP at its July meeting around appropriate conditions on that funding’.

Moved Cr Amundsen, seconded Cr Soper that the Performance, Policy and Partnerships Committee:

4.8.h. That Council allocate $100,000 for officers to work alongside IC2 Trust to shape a grant for delivery of youth and community services; and request a report back to PPP at its July meeting around appropriate conditions on that funding.


Note: Cr Ludlow declared an interest in IC2 Charitable Trust and abstained from voting.


41

A3415346

It was noted that the words ‘Waka Kotahi’ be added to point 4.8.k.


4.8.i. Note that Council has a funding request with NZTA for a continuation of the Waka Kotahi role and allocation within the roading budget. A further update will be provided following feedback from NZTA.

Note: Cr Crackett declared conflict of interest for point 4.8.g and abstained from voting.


Moved Cr Soper, seconded Cr Lewis that the Performance, Policy and Partnerships Committee:

4.8.j. Note the increased funding requested by both Invercargill Public Art Gallery (from $220,000 to $314,000) and He Waka Tuia (from $250,000 to $380,000), and included in the budgets at the time of consultation

4.8.k. Note that the storage of items owned by the Invercargill Public Art Gallery is a matter under discussion as part of the preparations for transitional storage for the Southland Museum and Art Gallery.


Moved Cr Abbott, seconded Cr Pottinger that the Performance, Policy and Partnerships Committee:

5. Note the provisional allocations made for funding for external bodies in December (Appendix B: A3271884) and confirm all those funding allocations not dealt with separately under Recommendation 2.



6. Request officers to implement the resolutions passed and incorporate them within the final draft of the Long-term Plan for the audit process, to be brought to Council for adoption on 30 June.


It was noted that this Long – Term Plan Consultation process had been the most open and engaged process and the staff were thanked for their hard work. Members of the public were also acknowledged and thanked for their engagement in theprocess.

There being no further business, the meeting finished at 11.43 am.


42

A3418728

TO: PERFORMANCE, POLICY AND PARTNERSHIPS COMMITTEE

FROM: CHRISTINE NORTH – PROPERTY DATABASE OFFICER

AUTHORISED BY: MICHAEL DAY – GM FINANCE AND ASSURANCE


PROPOSED RIGHT OF WAY NAME IN RELATION TO THE SUBDIVISION OF266 BAY ROAD

RECOMMENDATION

That the Performance, Policy and Partnerships Committee:

1. Receive the report “Proposed Right of Way Name in Relation to the Subdivision of 266 Bay Road”; and

2. Agree that the proposed Right of Way be named Maimai Way as it is the developer’s preferred name and meets Council’s naming convention

IMPLICATIONS

1. Implications in terms of the Long Term Council Community Plan/Annual Plan?

N/A.


N/A.


N/A.


N/A.


N/A.

REQUEST FOR ROAD NAME

The Invercargill City Council is responsible for the allocation of road names and numbers within the City. This is an important function because it allows residents, visitors and emergency services to locate properties with the minimum of inconvenience. In issuing rural and urban road names and numbers, Council is guided by the Australian/New Zealand Standard (AS/NZS 4819:2011) Rural and Urban Addressing.

Performance, Policy and Partnerships Committee - Public - Proposed Right of Way Name in Relation to the Subdivision of 266 Bay Road (A3...

43

A3418728

Council’s operational procedure is to allow road names that are short (25 characters or less), single word names, which are readily pronounced and spelt. Road names that closely resemble other names in either spelling or pronunciation should be avoided, as there is the potential for confusion for emergency services. There is also a desire to avoid the same name for a road and an area.

Council uses Road Type ‘Way’ for naming of Right of Ways

Option 1: Maimai Way

Option 2: Putakitaki Way

Option 3: Bekhuis Way

SUBMITTERS REASON FOR NAMES:

∑ Maimai - there has been a maimai on the site for many years∑ Putakitaki Way - Paradise Ducks (Shelduck) are in abundance in this area.∑ Bekhuis Way – the Bekhuis family have lived in Invercargill and Southland for

generations.

A diagram below shows the proposed development and the road names.


44

A3418728

Proposed Right of Way Name

Invercargill City CouncilPerformance, Policy and Partnerships Committee

Adopted on: …………………………….

Right of Way Easement A, B, C, & D to be created by the subdivision of Lot 1 DP 8860, Lot 1 DP 11221, Sec 1 SO 11742, Lot 1 DP 9936, Lot 2 DP 9936 – 266 Bay Road

RMA/2021/50

Developer: Jeremy Richard John Bekhuis and Lena Katrin Bekhuis

Name of Right of Way

Names Submitted by Developer:

1. Maimai Way – there has been a maimai on the site for many years.∑ Maimai or mai-mai, a type of blind or hide used for wildfowl hunting in New Zealand -

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maimai∑ mai mai New Zealand a duck-shooter's shelter; hide – Word origin probably from -

https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/mai-mai∑ maimai - https://fishandgame.org.nz/game-bird-hunting-in-new-zealand/hunting-

resources/game-bird-hunting-code-of-conduct/2. Putakitaki Way - Paradise Ducks (Shelduck) in abundance in this area.

https://www.doc.govt.nz/nature/native-animals/birds/birds-a-z/paradise-duck-putakitaki/3. Bekhuis Way – the Bekhuis family have lived in Invercargill and Southland for generations.


45

https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/shelter

https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/hide

https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/mai-mai

A3410854


FROM: THILINI AMARASINGHA – GOVERNANCE SUPPORT ADVISOR

AUTHORISED BY: PETER THOMPSON – EXECUTIVE MANAGER


BLUFF MARITIME MUSEUM TRUST STATEMENT OF INTENT 2022

SUMMARY

The Statement of Intent for the financial year ending 30 June 2022 has been received from Bluff Maritime Museum.

RECOMMENDATIONS

That the Performance, Policy and Partnerships Committee

1. Receive the report “Bluff Maritime Museum Trust Statement of Intent 2022”.

2. Requests Bluff Maritime Museum to provide supporting information around the intended use of current investments.

IMPLICATIONS


Yes


No


No


No


No

BACKGROUND

Each Council Controlled Organisation is required to prepare a Statement of Intent (SOI) which meets the requirements of the Local Government Act 2002. The SOI is an annual requirement and must cover the three years commencing on 1 July of the year it is prepared.

Performance, Policy and Partnerships Committee - Public - Bluff Maritime Museum Trust Statement of Intent 2022 (A3410854)

46

A3410854

The board of a Council Controlled Organisation must deliver the final SOI to the shareholders at the commencement of the financial year to which it relates.

ANALYSIS

The SOI of the Bluff Maritime Museum 2022 (refer to Appendix 1) addresses the requirements for the content of SOI under Part 2 of the Schedule 8 of the Local Government Act 2002.

Appendix 1 – Bluff Maritime Museum Trust Statement of Intent for the financial year ending 30 June 2022 (A3410857)


47

A3410857

BLUFF MARITIMEMUSEUM TRUST

STATEMENT OF INTENT

FOR THE FINANCIAL YEAR ENDING30 June 2022


48

A3410857

The purpose of this Statement of Intent is to:

ÿ State publicly the activities and intentions of this Council Controlled Organisation for the year and the objectives to which those activities will contribute; and

ÿ Provide an opportunity for shareholders to influence the direction of the organisation; and

ÿ Provide a basis for the accountability of the board to their stakeholders for the performance of the organisation.

This Statement of Intent covers the year 1 July 2021 to 30 June 2022.

1.0 VISION, MISSION, STRATEGIC OBJECTIVES AND THE THREE YEAR PLANNING PERIOD

1.1 Vision Statement

That the Bluff Maritime Museum becomes a must see attraction for residents and visitors.

1.2 Mission Statement

To ensure that the Bluff Maritime Museum maintains its position as one of New Zealand’s principal Maritime Museums by:

ÿ Professionally managing and developing the collection so that it builds on its existing strengths.

ÿ Recognising the cultural identity and the place of the tangata whenua in our area.ÿ Maintaining a strong customer focus in its marketing and promotional activities and

through Museum commercial trading.ÿ Building an awareness of the collections so that the Bluff Maritime Museum

becomes an integral part of all marketing and promotion of Southland.

1.3 Key Priorities

Through its activities the Bluff Maritime Museum Trust Board will:

ÿ Focus the Museum as a regional facility in the community through the provision of exhibitions – local, national and international.

ÿ Offer a variety of experiences to the people of Southland to which they would not otherwise have access.

ÿ Continue to organise and support events that will grow visitor numbers.

The principal activities, which contribute to the achievement of the objectives, are categorised into three areas:

1. The Collections – Caring for, developing, and researching collections.2. The Experience – Providing access to the collections and telling the Story of

Motupohue and the Te Ara a Kewa area.3. The Community – Engaging communities, including iwi/Maori, in exploring the

maritime heritage of Southland.


49

A3410857

1.4 Financial Planning Assumptions

The Bluff Maritime Museum Trust Board receives an annual grant from the SouthlandRegional Heritage Committee, Environment Southland, Invercargill City Council and the Bluff Community Board. Income is also generated from the Museum shop, donations and entry fees, interest on deposits and income derived from the Waddel Charitable Trust which is administered by the Public Trust office.

The Bluff Maritime Museum Trust owns the Museum building and collections. The museum is situated on land owned by South Port New Zealand Limited.

2.0 STATEMENT ON THE BOARD’S APPROACH TO GOVERNANCE

2.1 Role of the Board

The Board is responsible for the governance of the Trust. The Board is responsible for setting the strategic direction for the Trust, approving the Statement of Intent and monitoring organisational performance.

2.2 Board Membership

The Bluff Maritime Museum Trust Board is a Council Controlled Organisation with eight members. The Board also has the authority to appoint additional members whose skills and experiences benefit the Trust and its functions. None of the appointees will be members of the Board and will not have voting rights. They may be invited to attend meetings and speak at such meetings.

Invercargill City Council Environment SouthlandMrs C Hadley (CEO) Mr R Phillips (CEO) His Worship Mayor Cr N Cook (Delegate) clause 4.1.2 Trust DeedTim Shadbolt Cr L Esler

Bluff Community Board Southland Museum and Art Gallery Trust

Mr R Fife (Chairperson) Wayne Marriott (Manager, Museum and Mrs G Henderson Heritage Services)(Deputy Chairperson)

Bluff Community Representative Appointed Secretary / TreasurerVacant Mrs P Birch

2.3 Management of the Bluff Maritime Museum

The Bluff Maritime Museum Trust Board employs a Curator to oversee the day to day operation of the museum facility. A part time employee is employed for weekend openings.

2.4 Alignment with Community Outcomes

The Bluff Maritime Museum Trust contributes towards the achievement of Invercargill City’s community outcomes.


50

A3410857

Community Outcome Intermediate Outcomes Activity’s Contribution

Healthy lifestyles in a healthy environment.

Provide or promote the provision of a diverse range of excellent quality and safe indoor and outdoor recreational facilities, both natural and man-made.

Provision of a facility that enables the collections, which focus on the Bluff and Foveaux Strait area, to be stored, maintained and exhibited in conditions that ensure their long term preservation; while providing a quality visitor experience.

A city that is a great place to live in and to visit.

Promote Invercargill actively as a great place to live, work, play and visit.

Provide and promote a range of events that create vibrancy and build community.

Provision of a facility that inspires and informsvisitors of the Bluff and Foveaux Strait area’s heritage and culture.

3.0 MEASURING PERFORMANCE

3.1 Explanation

The Trust has two performance measures by which performance against its objectives can be monitored.

One of these performance measures will be included in the Council Long Term Plan and is shown in bold italics below.

The other measure is an internal performance measures and of a more technical nature.


51

A3410857

3.2 The Collections

Objective Goal

Target Levels of

Performance

2020/21

Target Levels of

Performance 2021/22

Target Levels of

Performance 2022/23

Collections are managed and preserved in accordance with established standards and cultural requirements.

The collections are developed to enable the Museum to document, illustrate and explore the Bluff and Foveaux Strait area’s unique maritime heritage.

Collections are maintained in optimal conditions for their long term preservation.

No irreparable loss or damage is caused to collections or objects on loan.



3.3 The Experience

Objective Goal

Target Levels of

Performance

2020/21

Target Levels of

Performance 2021/22

Target Levels of

Performance 2022/23

To provide inspiring, informed and rich exhibits and learning opportunities.

Develop and deliver inspiring educational visits for all audiences.

Maintain and grow visitor numbers. (Baseline –4,458 visitors in 2012/13)

Maintain and grow visitor numbers.

Maintain and grow visitor numbers.

80% of visitors regard the Museum as “Useful” or “Very Useful”.




52

A3410857

3.4 The Community

Objective Goal Target Levels of

Performance

2020/21

Target Levels of

Performance 2021/22

Target Levels of

Performance 2022/23

To recognise the Museum as a place where our maritimeheritage is valued and promoted.

Maintain strong community relationships over issues relating to the collections.

The museum is open for a minimum of six and a half hours each day during the summer months and five and a half hours Monday to Friday during the winter months.



4.0 FINANCIAL FORECASTS

Year Ending 30 June 2021 ($’000)



Grants 66,413 69,849 69,849Other Income 53,000 53,000 53,000

119,413 122,849 122,849

Expenditure 78,000 88,000 78,000Net Surplus 41,413 34,849 44,849

Equity 742,074 776,923 821,772

4.1 Commercial Value of Investment

The Trustees estimate that the commercial value of the investment at 1 July is represented by Equity.

5.0 REPORTING TO THE SHAREHOLDERS

5.1 The following information will be available based on an annual balance date of 30 June.

5.2 Draft Statement of Intent

On or before 1 March each year, the Trustees will deliver a Draft Statement of Intent that fulfils the requirements of Section 64 of the Local Government Act 2002.


53

A3410857

5.3 Completed Statement of Intent

On or before 30 June each year the Trustees shall deliver a completed Statement of Intent which fulfils the requirements of Section 64 of the Local Government Act 2002.

5.4 Half Yearly Report

Within two months after the end of the first half of each financial year, the Trustees shall deliver an unaudited report containing the following information as a minimum in respect of the half-year under review:

∑ A revenue statement disclosing actual revenue and expenditure, with comparativefigures from the previous half yearly report.

∑ A statement of financial position at the end of the half year.∑ A statement of cash flows.

6.0 ANNUAL REPORT

6.1 Within three months after the end of each financial year, the Trustees shall deliver an annual report and audited financial statements in respect of that financial year, containing the following information as a minimum:

∑ A Trustees report including a summary of the financial results, a review of operations, a comparison of performance in relation to objectives and any recommendation as to dividend.

∑ A revenue statement disclosing actual revenue and expenditure, and comparative figures.

∑ A statement of financial position at the end of the year.∑ A statement of cash flows.∑ An Auditor’s report on the above statements and on the measurement of

performance in relation to objectives.

7.0 DIVIDEND POLICY

7.1 The Trustees have agreed to keep all earnings to continue operating the Museum and not pay any dividend.


54

A3427171


FROM: CASSIE HORTON – PARKS AND RECREATION PLANNER

AUTHORISED BY: STEVE GIBLING, GM – LEISURE AND RECREATION


HEARINGS FOR THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL RESERVES OMNIBUS PLAN2021-2031

SUMMARY

This report details the hearing process and requests nominations for the Hearings panel to the draft Environmental Reserves Omnibus Plan.

RECOMMENDATIONS


1. Receive the report “Hearings for the Environmental Reserves Omnibus Plan.”

2. Nominate three Councillors, including the Chair of the Performance, Policy and Partnerships Committee to form a Hearing panel for the Environmental Reserves Omnibus Plan.

3. Note that a date has yet to be confirmed for the Hearings, that this will be undertaken once the Councillors have nominated.

IMPLICATIONS


N/A


N/A


Yes


N/A

Performance, Policy and Partnerships Committee - Public - Hearings for the Draft Environmental Reserves Omnibus Plan 2021-2031 (A3427...

55

A3427171


Public Consultation has been carried out through the Management Plan process and submissions have been received.


None.

BACKGROUND

The Performance, Policy and Partnerships Committee received a report outlining the process for development and consultation on the draft Environmental Reserves Omnibus Plan 2021-2031 on 9 February 2021.

This plan sets out the strategic and operational management considerations for 34 of Invercargill City Council’s Environmental Reserves.

HEARINGS

Under Section 41 of the Reserves Act 1977 a Management Plan is required for reserves administered by the Local Authority. Public Notice for no less than two months is required to invite persons and organisations interested to send written suggestions on the proposed plan within the time specified.

Section 41 (6) (d) states “before approving the management plan, or, as the case may require, recommending the management plan to the Minister for his or her approval, give every person or organisation who or which, in lodging any objection or making any comments under paragraph (a) or paragraph (b), asked to be heard in support of his or her or its objection or comments, a reasonable opportunity of appearing before the administering body or a committee thereof or a person nominated by the administering body in support of his or her or its objection or comments.”

Submissions were received over a two month period as per the management plan process, closing 30 April 2021.

16 submissions were received, with seven submitters wishing to be heard at the time of writing this report.

Once submitters are heard, the draft plan will go to the Performance, Policy and Partnerships Committee with attached draft and submissions for adoption on 13 July 2021.

CONCLUSION

This report outlines the proposed hearing process and asks Council to nominate three Councillors to form a Hearing panel for the draft Environmental Reserves Management Plan 2021-2031.

Performance, Policy and Partnerships Committee - Public - Hearings for the Draft Environmental Reserves Omnibus Plan 2021-2031 (A3427...

56

A3406606


FROM: RHIANNON SUTER, MANAGER – STRATEGY AND POLICY

AUTHORISED BY: MICHAEL DAY, GM – FINANCE AND ASSURANCE

MEETING DATE: TUESDAY 8 JUNE

2021/2022 FEES AND CHARGES

SUMMARY

The 2021/2022 Fees and Charges are appended for adoption following consultation.

RECOMMENDATIONS


1. Receive the report “2021/2022 Fees and Charges”.

2. Note the errors and omissions which are recommended for correction.

3. Note the submissions received during consultation (A3406609) and that no changes are recommended as a result.

4. Adopt the 2021/2022 Fees and Charges (A3419973).

IMPLICATIONS


Yes


No


Yes


Aligns with the proposed 2021 – 2031 Long-term Plan


Yes. No further consultation is required.

Performance, Policy and Partnerships Committee - Public - 2021/2022 Fees and Charges (A3406606)

57

A3406606


Aligns with the budget for the 2021 – 2031 proposed Long-term Plan.

BACKGROUND

The fees and charges for the 2021/2022 period were consulted on alongside the 2021 –2031 Long-term Plan between 30 March and 3 May 2021.

14 submissions were received on the fees and charges – Of these, seven related more closely to other aspects of the Long-term Plan, primarily the proposed changes to the way we rate. Four submissions contained specific areas of feedback, the rest were more generic. This compares to 8 submissions received on fees and charges in 2020.

CONSULTATION FEEDBACK AND OFFICER ADVICE

Specific feedback has been received on four areas, each from an individual submitter.

Regulatory - Animal Control

- Request to retain “Return to home” fees- Request to reduce the increase in the late registration fee- Review all animal fees in light of the surplus in this area of the business- Federated Farmers submitted on the fees and charges for working dogs, in that they

wanted the fee to remain at $35.00. The figure that went out for consultation ($135) was an error. This has now been corrected and the fee for registering working dogs will remain at $35.

The wandering/found dog return home (1st and 2nd Offence) have been removed as this process has not been working. The ACO's will return dogs home on their first offence if it is their very first offence for wandering/found but not if they have been involved in other incidents.

Dog owners know their dog(s) need to be registered by the 30 June every year. Dog registration letters are sent out in June once the fees have been set giving them till 1 July to have their dogs registered. However Council gives people until August to pay the fee before we add the penalty.

Revenue from fees raised are only be used for dog control purposes, including for investing in the Animal Care Facilities exercise area.

Council plans to review all fees and charges for 2022/2023.

Parks and Reserves - Cemeteries

- Request to reduce Saturday fee increase in recognition of the impact this has on whanau at a very difficult time

Council recognises the difficult time this is for whanau, however there are additional costs incurred on Saturdays for both staff and contractors which need to be met. As a result no changes are recommended.


58

A3406606

Pools – Hydroslide fees

- Request to remove hydroslide fees as submitter feels general pool fees are already too high.

The new Hydroslides were approved to be built on the basis that there would be a user pays model. The price of the hydroslide facility in addition to pool entry is consistent with other Hydroslide attractions throughout New Zealand. Council will review the operation of the new facility to determine the balance is right for our community. No change is recommended.

Solid Waste

- Request to reduce fees to avoid fly-tipping. - Request to waive fees for not-for-profit second hand shops

As the submitter notes, much of the fee increase in the solid waste area is driven by increases in Government regulatory costs.

A full review of solid waste fees and charges is planned for the 2022/2023 year and it is recommended that these issues be considered at this time. No change is recommended now as full analysis of this service needs to be completed.

OMISSIONS AND CORRECTIONS

Please note the following updates which are recommended to be made as a result of omissions or errors:

∑ Animal control. The error in the registration fee for working dogs which read $150 rather than $35 was corrected prior to consultation.

∑ Parks and reserves. An 8% discount for early payment for funeral directors has been agreed and should have been included in the fees and charges. This is a minor omission impacting only a few organisations and is recommended to be included.

∑ Regulatory. o Resource management Hearings Panel fee. The second part of the wording was

included in the previous year but was omitted for 2021/2022 “630/hour after the first two hours”

o Council document signing fee. The second part of the wording of the fee which was included for the previous year was omitted for 2021/2022 “470 plus associated legal fees”

∑ Solid waste. The charge for additional bins has historically been included in the rates resolution but is now included in fees and charges for completeness. There is no change from the previous year.

CONCLUSION

Consultation has been completed and the 2021/2022 Fees and Charges are appended for adoption.


59

A3406606

Appendix: Submissions Received on the Fees and Charges

Henry James Tudor

I think the cloth needs a trim and this current wish list should be for 15 years.

Unnamed

Agreeable to it

Quinton Holland-King

Make it fair and do it

Shane

Unsustainable, targeted to areas outside of city centre to pay more.

Linzi Turner

I think we need new people in the council that do actually care abut the city instead of just looking it as a job until retirement. Did we not do a LTP abut two years ago? Is that not good enough now? Of course you all charge too much - for what- a lot of holes in the ground "shovel ready".

Jamie Bulling

Not bothered

Matt Couldrey

More investment in upfront Climate Change mitigation - not just patch-up jobs once it happens.

Kirsten Diack

I don't think charging for the hydroslides is fair. The current price for the pools is extremely high compared to other pools across NZ and I think should cover the hydroslides use. I think the 5% increase over all the other services is a reasonable amount to charge

Greg Weake

Have no problem with the proposed rates changes, it looks realistic.

Unnamed

I don't have a solution, however the cemetery charges just keep putting pressure on whanau at the worst times. We know Saturdays are hard on staff and contractors and I acknowledge their great work but extra fees again for Saturdays where sometimes they are the only way for whanau to attend a service is again squeezing the wrong groups at the worst time. There has to be better models?

Mike Grantham

Opposing the Rate increase fees and charges in the Kennington area


60

A3406606

Jayne Scarlet

Needs to be a whole lot more consultation in regards to project work and rates increases

Kylie Fowler

I ask that ICC very seriously reconsider raising tip fees. I am aware of government'sridiculous increases but feel this will create more fly dumping. I wish I had the skills toimprove the recycling opportunities in Southland as I believe we could be leaders in recycling and reuse if we had a more holistic approach (I know that sounds airy-fairy etc but as the overseers of the rubbish removal in Invercargill, ICC could effect PROPER change). The old Griffin's factory in Lower Hutt received gov funding to recycle plastic(Flight Plastics). The Redvale Landfill and Energy Park in Auckland uses rubbish to create power. Even if the bottle recycling scheme does not pass government, why can't ICC use Waste Minimisation Levy to enact one here? Feel free to contact regarding recycling. Happy to have more input on this issue;-)

I would like to request that ICC consider some sort of tip fee waiver to Not for Profit second hand shops that have to deal with unwanted donations (people dumping junk on them). I would also support ICC promoting better ways to deal with fabric waste (second biggest polluting industry in the world).

Rodney Tribe

Animal control; (1)I would like to see council retain the “return to home” fees that appear to have beenremoved from the proposed fees and charges schedule(2)I do not support council increasing it’s late fee to 50% of the cost of registration, while I accept the ACT allows for such a level (as a maximum), I believe council would be betterworking with late payers than simply increasing penalty levels as this is a rather blunt tool that potentially won’t solve a root cause.

If people are struggling to meet the cost of registration in a lump sum, perhaps Council could consider putting in place the ability for those who do find it difficult to make payments against the registration costs, either leading into the registration year or during.I believe the previous 25% late fee is sufficient.

I do note that it has been raised that the 50% late fee is in line with the SDC and GDC’s,although I am not sure what relevance this has to what ICC should be doing, given both of these authorities also have fee reductions that ICC do not have which also reduces the level of fees paid and any subsequent late penalties.

(3)I would also like council to consider a review of its registration fees going forward, while I do not expect council will reduce these for the coming year giving a short time frame foradoption, I do wish to raise that the dog control ACT allows for “reasonable fee setting ”to cover the cost of registration and control of dogs in the area. Council last year ran a surplus of $370+K in its Animal control function, such a surplus over around 10,000 dogs would raise the question of if the fees are “reasonable”. Again I note that the report on fees states theyalign with what other authorities charge, again what one authority charges should have no bearing on another’s charges given there could well be totally different cost and servicing structures across the various authorities, as it eluded to within the fee structure section of the Dog control act.


61

A3406606

(4) I would also like council to consider what it is doing with “surpluses” from Animal control, I have been advised that last years surplus has gone into Regulatory reserves and this concerns me. The Dog Control ACT is specific that revenue obtained under the ACT can only be expending for purposes authorized by the ACT. As such I would rather see, as has been in the past, “Surpluses” placed within a specific Animal Control reserve so that these funds, taken under the ACT are not used for other purposes.

Federated Farmers

Federated Farmers supports the proposal to not increase Dog registration fees, and supports the current working dog fee being at $35 and the cap on the maximum number of dogs charged remaining at 5.

RecommendationThat the Council maintain the Dog Registration fee for working dogs at $35 and the maximum number of dogs charged remains at 5.


62

A3406609

Submissions received to the 2021 – 2022 Fees and Charges Schedule

Rodney Tribe

Animal control;

(1) I would like to see council retain the “return to home” fees that appear to have been removed from the proposed fees and charges schedule

(2) I do not support council increasing it’s late fee to 50% of the cost of registration, while I accept the ACT allows for such a level (as a maximum), I believe council would be better working with late payers than simply increasing penalty levels as this is a rather blunt tool that potentially won’t solve a root cause.

If people are struggling to meet the cost of registration in a lump sum, perhaps Council could consider putting in place the ability for those who do find it difficult to make payments against the registration costs, either leading into the registration year or during. I believe the previous 25% late fee is sufficient.

I do note that it has been raised that the 50% late fee is in line with the SDC and GDC’s, although I am not sure what relevance this has to what ICC should be doing, given both of these authorities also have fee reductions that ICC do not have which also reduces the level of fees paid and any subsequent late penalties.

(3) I would also like council to consider a review of its registration fees going forward, while I do not expect council will reduce these for the coming year giving a short time frame for adoption, I do wish to raise that the dog control ACT allows for “reasonable fee setting” to cover the cost of registration and control of dogs in the area. Council last year ran a surplus of $370+K in its Animal control function, such a surplus over around 10,000 dogs would raise the question of if the fees are “reasonable”. Again I note that the report on fees states they align with what other authorities charge, again what one authority charges should have no bearing on another’s charges given there could well be totally different cost and servicing structures across the various authorities, as it eluded to within the fee structure section of the Dog control act.

(4) I would also like council to consider what it is doing with “surpluses” from Animal control, I have been advised that last years surplus has gone into Regulatory reserves and this concerns me. The Dog Control ACT is specific that revenue obtained under the ACT can only be expending for purposes authorized by the ACT. As such I would rather see, as has been in the past, “Surpluses” placed within a specific Animal Control reserve so that these funds, taken under the ACT are not used for other purposes.

Kylie Fowler

∑ I ask that ICC very seriously reconsider raising tip fees. I am aware of government'sridiculous increases but feel this will create more fly dumping. I wish I had the skills toimprove the recycling opportunities in Southland as I believe we could be leaders inrecycling and reuse if we had a more holistic approach (I know that sounds airy-fairy etc but as the overseers of the rubbish removal in Invercargill, ICC could effect PROPER change). The old Griffin's factory in Lower Hutt received gov funding to recycle plastic(Flight Plastics). The Redvale Landfill and Energy Park in Auckland uses rubbish to create power. Even if the bottle recycling scheme does not pass


63

A3406609

government, why can't ICC use Waste Minimisation Levy to enact one here? Feel free to contact regarding recycling. Happy to have more input on this issue;-)

∑ I would like to request that ICC consider some sort of tip fee waiver to Not for Profitsecond hand shops that have to deal with unwanted donations (people dumping junk on them). I would also support ICC promoting better ways to deal with fabric waste (second biggest polluting industry in the world).

Unnamed

I don't have a solution, however the cemetery charges just keep putting pressure on whanau at the worst times. We know Saturdays are hard on staff and contractors and I acknowledge their great work but extra fees again for Saturdays where sometimes they are the only way for whanau to attend a service is again squeezing the wrong groups at the worst time. There has to be better models?

Kirsten Diack

I don't think charging for the hydroslides is fair. The current price for the pools is extremely high compared to other pools across NZ and I think should cover the hydroslides use. I think the 5% increase over all the other services is a reasonable amount to charge.

Henry James Tudor

I think the cloth needs a trim and this current wish list should be for 15 years.

Linzi Turner

I think we need new people in the council that do actually care abut the city instead of just looking it as a job until retirement. Did we not do a LTP abut two years ago? Is that not good enough now? Of course you all charge too much - for what- a lot of holes in the ground "shovel ready".


Make it fair and do it

Matt Couldrey


Jayne Scarlet

Needs to be a whole lot more consultation in regards to project work and rates increases

Jamie Bulling

Not bothered


64

A3406609

Shane

Unsustainable, targeted to areas outside of city centre to pay more.

Mike Grantham

opposing the Rate increase fees and charges in the kennington area

Unnamed

Agreeable to it

Wade Devine

Couldn't find this page!

Greg Weake

Have no problem with the proposed rates changes, it looks realistic.


65

tttt

Fees and charges 2021-2022 11

t

2021/2031

2021/2022

He Ngākau Aroha - Our City with Heart

Fees and charges

A3419973


66

2


67

t

t

t

t


ContentsRārangi upoko

t

t

t

Fees and Charges - 2021/20223

Alcohol Licensing 5

Animal Services 6

Building Services 12

Compliance 22

Environmental Health 25

Housing Care 27

Venue and Events Services 28

Library and Archives 30

Miscellaneous 32

Parks and Reserves 33

Public Transport 42

Pools 43

Public Toilets 44

Resource Management 45

Roading 49

Sewerage 52

Solid Waste 53

Southland Museum and Art Gallery 55

Water 57


68

4

Fees and chargesNgā utu

CORPORATE FEES 2020/2021 $

2021/2022 $

Executive Staff 230.00 240.00

Managers and team leaders 190.00 200.00

Professional and technical staff 145.00 158.00

Administrative staff 90.00 94.00

Photocopying

· A4 0.20 0.20

· A3 0.40 0.40

· A0 & A1 5.00 5.00

Travel per Km 0.75 0.80

Fees and charges for Council activities, Council Controlled Organisations and Council Organisations are set under sections 12, 103 and 150 of the Local Government Acts 2002 and 1974. Fees and charges are effective from 1 July 2020.

All fees and charges are inclusive of GST unless otherwise stated.

Any updates will be included on the Council’s website www.icc.govt.nz

Note:These rental fees have been determined by Council on 2 March 2021 following a separate consultation process. They are included here for information only.


69

t

t

t

t


Alcohol LicensingRaihara hoko Waipiro

ALCOHOL LICENSING FEES Set by Sale and Supply of Alcohol (Fees) Regulations 2013

Premises Licence (on-licence, off-licence and club licence)

2020/2021 $

2020/2021 $

2021/2022 $

2021/2022 $

CATEGORY (RISK RATING) ANNUAL FEE APPLICATION FEE ANNUAL FEE APPLICATION FEE

Very low (0 – 2) 161.00 368.00 161.00 368.00

Low (3 – 5) 391.00 609.50 391.00 609.50

Medium (6 – 15) 632.50 816.50 632.50 816.50

High (16 – 25) 1035.00 1023.50 1035.00 1023.50

Very High (26+) 1437.50 1207.50 1437.50 1207.50

SPECIAL LICENCE

LICENCE CLASS EVENTS ANNUAL FEE EVENTS ANNUAL FEE

Class 1

1 large event: More than 3 medium

events: more than 12 small events

575.00

1 large event: More than 3 medium

events: more than 12 small events

575.00

Class 2 3 to 12 small events 1 to 3 medium events 207.00 3 to 12 small events

1 to 3 medium events 207.00

Class 3 1 or 2 small events 63.25 1 or 2 small events 63.25

OTHER ALCOHOL LICENSES 2020/2021 $

2021/2022 $

FEES FEES

Manager’s certificate (application/ renewal) 316.25 316.25

Temporary authority 296.70 296.70

Temporary license 296.70 296.70

Permanent Club Charters 632.50 632.50


70

6

Animal ServicesRatonga kararehe

DOG CONTROL FEES Registration

2020/2021 $

2021/2022 $

Responsible Ownership Fee – Not Desexed 70.00 70.00

Responsible Ownership Fee – Desexed 50.00 50.00

Menacing/Dangerous Dog 150.00 150.00

Standard Fee - Not Desexed 100.00 100.00

Standard Fee - Desexed 85.00 85.00

Working Dog 35.00 35.00

Registration Fee for a Probationary Owner Apply fee applicable to their classification

Apply fee applicable to their classification

Multiple Dog Fee (Five Dogs or More) 310.00 for responsible dog owners and for working dogs

310.00 for responsible dog owners and for working dogs

Responsible Menacing Dog (Breed only)* 85.00 85.00


71

t

t

t

t


PRO-RATE REGISTRATION FEES

Use the fees below when registering a new dog. This could be: 1. A puppy’s first registration; or 2. When a person is a new owner of a dog. As a guide to what refund may be given in the case of a dog that has died, take the fee for that month after the refund application is received.

REGISTRATION MADE WITHIN

RESPONSIBLE OWNER - NOT DE-SEXED

DOG RESPONSIBLE OWNER - DE-SEXED

DANGEROUS AND MENACING DOG

STANDARD DOG – NOT DE-SEXED

STANDARD DOG – DE-SEXED WORKING DOG

MENACING DOG RESPONSIBLE (BREED ONLY APPLIES)

July 64.17 45.83 137.50 91.67 77.92 32.08 77.92

August 58.33 41.66 125.00 83.34 70.80 29.16 70.80

September 52.50 37.49 112.50 75.01 63.74 26.24 63.74

October 46.67 33.32 100.00 66.68 56.67 23.32 56.67

November 40.83 29.15 87.50 58.35 49.58 20.40 49.58

December 35.00 24.98 75.00 50.02 42.50 17.48 42.50

Jan 29.17 20.81 62.50 41.69 35.42 14.56 35.42

Feb 23.33 16.64 50.00 33.36 28.33 11.64 28.33

March 17.50 12.47 37.50 25.03 21.25 8.72 21.25

April 11.67 8.30 25.00 16.70 14.17 5.80 14.17

May 5.83 4.13 12.50 8.37 7.08 2.88 7.08

June 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

t

t

t

t


72

8

Animal Services continuedRatonga kararehe

OTHER FEES 2020/2021 $

2021/2022 $

Application for Responsible Ownership (inc property inspection) 40.00 40.00

Additional property inspections 20.00 40.00

Microchip Implanting 25.00 25.00

Replacement Tags 6.00 6.00

Additional late fee after 1 September After 1 November 25% of registration 50% of registration

Dog Hearing Lodgment Fee 750.00 750.00

Application Fee (keeping of more than 2 dogs) 40.00 40.00

DOG CONTROL INFRINGEMENTS Set by Dog Control Act 1996 (per offence)

Willful obstruction of a Dog Control Officer or Ranger 750.00 750.00

Failure or refusal to supply information or willfully providing false particulars 750.00 750.00

Failure to supply information or willfully providing false particulars about dog 750.00 750.00

Failure to comply with any Bylaw authorized by the section 750.00 750.00

Failure to undertake dog education programme of dog obedience course (or both) 300.00 300.00

Failure to comply with obligations of a probationary owner 750.00 750.00

Failure to comply with the effects of disqualification 750.00 750.00

Failure to comply with effects of classification of dog as “dangerous dog” 300.00 300.00


73

t

t

t

t


DOG CONTROL INFRINGEMENTS Set by Dog Control Act 1996 (per offence)

2020/2021 $

2021/2022 $

Failure to comply with effects of classification of dog as “menacing dog” 300.00 300.00

Fraudulent sale or transfer of dangerous dog 500.00 500.00

Failure to advise person of muzzle and leashing requirements 100.00 100.00

Failure to implant microchip transponder in dog 300.00 300.00

False statement relating to dog registration 750.00 750.00

Falsely notifying of death of dog 750.00 750.00

Failure to register dog 300.00 300.00

Fraudulent procurement to procure replacement tag 500.00 500.00

Failure to advise change of dog ownership 100.00 100.00

Failure to advise change of address 100.00 100.00

Removal or swapping of registration tags 500.00 500.00

Failure to keep dog controlled or confined 200.00 200.00

Failure to keep dog under control 200.00 200.00

Failure to provide proper care and attention, food, water, shelter 300.00 300.00

Failure to carry leash in public 100.00 100.00

Failure to comply with barking dog abatement notice 200.00 200.00

Allowing a dangerous dog to be at large unleashed or unmuzzled 300.00 300.00

Releasing dog from custody 750.00 750.00

Failure to advise of muzzle and leashing requirements 100.00 100.00

t

t

t

t


74

10

Animal Services continuedRatonga kararehe

DOG IMPOUNDMENT FEES 2020/2021 $

2021/2022 $

First Impoundment 80.00 100.00

Second and subsequent Impoundment ($150 from then on plus infringement fee after 3rd impoundment) 120.00 150.00

Sustenance – per day (Daily care fee) 20.00 20.00

Long Term Stay ( Greater than one month) Monthly Fee Note: Where a dog is impounded and is awaiting the outcome of a Court Hearing or similar a monthly fee will be applied and monthly invoices will be issued to the owner.

300.00 300.00

After Hours Release (Minimum of one hour staff time) (By prior arrangement & proof required) 180.00/hour 158.00/hour

Surrender fee 75.00 120.00

STOCK IMPOUNDING CHARGES

Large animals including but not limited to, Horses, Asses, Mules, Cattle and Deer

First Impounding (first animal)

Poundage – each 100.00 100.00


Second or Subsequent impounding (first animal)




75

t

t

t

t


STOCK IMPOUNDING CHARGES 2020/2021 $

2021/2022 $

Additional animal impounding



Small animals including but not limited to, Sheep, Goats, Pigs and Poultry

Impounding (first animal)- each 30.00 30.00

Impounding additional animals- each 3.00 3.00

Sustenance - per day (Daily care fee)per animal 3.00 3.00

Droving, leading or conveying charges 150.00 150.00

After Hours Release (Minimum of one hour staff time) (By prior arrangement & proof required) 180/hour 158/hour

Impound after hours/call out fee (by prior arrangement & proof required) 180/hour 158/hour

OTHER FEES

Vet charges at cost

Stock call out $80.00 per hour or part there of ($50.00 minimum charge)


76

12

Building ServicesRatonga Hangatanga

BUILDING CONSENT APPLICATION

"All application based on square metre rates are subject to a minimum $500 and a maximum $22,000 fee, except any construction project with an estimated construction value greater than $3,000,000 that will be charged a flat rate of 0.5% of the construction value.

Fees are based on the floor area affected, for example if a wall is removed the areas of the rooms on both sides of the demolished wall are used to calculate the fee."

HEALTHY HOMES Council offers a 25% subsidy off the following fees as part of our commitment to the Government’s Warm Up New Zealand: Healthy Homes Programme

2020/2021 $

2021/2022 $

Solid Fuel Heater: Freestanding 275.00 – 25% = 206.25 290.00-25%=217.50

Solid Fuel Heater: Inbuilt/Wetbacks 410.00 – 25% = 307.50 435.00-25%=326.25

Insulation 410.00 – 25% = 307.50 435.00-25%=326.25

Earthquake prone buildings

Earthquake Strengthening 1,000.00 deposit plus time and/or inspection fees

(A) RESIDENTIAL

New Dwellings Single/Semi-Detached/Additions (Includes plumbing and drainage) 22.75/m2 23.90/m2

Residential interior alterations 18.75/m2 19.70/m2

Building placed on site/foundation only 12.50/m2 13.15/m2

Multi-Residential (includes plumbing and drainage) 23.25/m2 24.40/m2

Conservatories/Verandahs 510.00 flat rate 535.5 flat rate

Re-roof/reclad 510.00 flat rate 535.50 flat rate

Amendment 155.00 flat rate plus time costs and/or additional inspections

160 flat rate plus time costs and/or additonal inspections

(a) Fast Track Foundation Amendment 255.00 flat rate To be removed

(b) Waiver / Modification Amendment 205.00 flat rate 215.00 flat rate


77

t

t

t

t



(A) RESIDENTIAL 2020/2021 $

2021/2022 $

Solid Fuel Heater

• Freestanding 275.00 flat rate 288.75 flat rate

• Diesel Freestanding 410.00 flat rate 430.50 flat rate

• Inbuilt / Wetbacks 410.00 flat rate 430.50 flat rate

• Boilers - oil and diesel fired 410.00 flat rate 430.50 flat rate

Bathroom alteration including wet area shower 510.00 flat rate 535.50 flat rate

Plumbing – Solar Heating 410.00 flat rate 430.50 flat rate

Fences/timber deck 305.00 flat rate 320.25 flat rate

Swimming pools 220.00 flat rate 230 flat rate

Swimming pool registration (three yearly) 205.00 flat rate 215.25 flat rate

Swimming pool exemption request 205.00 flat rate 215.25 flat rate

Accessory Buildings (unlined) 17.50/m2 capped at 1,025.00

18.35/m2 capped at 1,075.00

Accessory Buildings (lined) 20.75/m2 capped at 1,025.00

21.78/m2 capped at 1,075.00

Accessory Buildings Extension 17.25/m2 (minimum fee 305.00)

18.10/m2 (minimum fee 320.00)

t

t

t

t


78

14

Building Services continuedRatonga Hangatanga


(B) COMMERCIAL 2020/2021 $

2021/2022 $

New Commercial / Additions (General) 25.75/m2 $27.00/m2

Foundation / Slab / Bridge Only 410.00 430.50

New Office / Additions 22.75/m2 34.10/m2

Shell only (internal unfinished) 17.75/m2 18.60/m2

Commercial interior alterations 17.75/m2 18.60/m2

Minor Work 10.50/m2 11.00/m2

Re-roof / reclad 615.00 flat rate 645.75 flat rate

Amendments 150.00 flat rate plus time costs and/or additional inspections

157.50 flat rate plus time costs and/or additonal inspections

(b) Waiver / Modification Amendment 205.00 flat rate 215.00 flat rate

(C) INDUSTRIAL

New Industrial/Additions 15.50/m2 16.30/m2

Industrial interior alterations 15.50/m2 16.30/m2

Farm Buildings (unlined) (bonafide farm use) 10.50/m2 11/m2

Amendment 150.00 flat rate plus time costs and/or additional inspections

157.50 flat rate plus time costs and/or additional inspections

(b) Waiver/Modification Amendment 205.00 flat rate 215 flat rate


79

t

t

t

t


The Invercargill City Council is chosen by the Invercargill public in elections held every three years. The last election was held in October 2019; the next will be in 2022.


(D) PLUMBING 2020/2021 $

2021/2022 $

Interior Plumbing and Drainage 410.00 flat rate 430.50 flat rate

Site Servicing/Ext Drainage/Road Openers (min $300.00) 15.50/lin m 16.30/lineal metre

Hot water cylinder replacement (same location) 205.00 flat rate 215.00 flat rate

Connection to Kennington Sewerage Scheme 7,000.00 plus 300.00 building consent fee

7,000.00 plus 300.00 building consent fee

Connection to North Road extension 5,377.00 flat rate 5,377.00 flat rate

(E) MECHANICAL

HVAC (affected area) (min. of $300.00) 1.75/m2 No change

Sprinkler System (affected area) (min of $300.00) 1.00/m2 1.05/m2

Fire Alarm, Auto-Doors, Other Specified System 305.00 flat rate 320.25 flat rate

(F) DEMOLITION

Residential 360.00 flat rate 378.00 flat rate

Commercial / Industrial 510.00 flat rate 535.50 flat rate

CERTIFICATE OF ACCEPTANCE

Certificate of Acceptance Building (Plus DBH, BRANZ and Accreditation levies if applicable) Consent fee x 2 Consent fee x 2

t

t

t

t


80

16


OFFICER CHARGE OUT RATES 2020/2021 $

2021/2022 $

Processing - additional time Third review of application will be charged an additional processing fee 180.00 per hour 189.00 per hour

Inspection - additional time Third inspection per stage will be charged additional fee 180.00 per hour 189.00 per hour

PROJECT INFORMATION MEMORANDUM

PIM – residential 305.00 flat rate 320.25 flat rate

PIM – commercial / industrial 410.00 flat rate 430.50 flat rate

LAND INFORMATION MEMORANDUM

Residential - Single Property:

• 5 working days (electronic) 460.00 flat rate 483.00 flat rate


Other: Includes Rural/Multi Residential/Commercial and Industrial


Note: The set fee for a Land Information Memorandum is for an electronic copy. Should you require a hard copy version; a further $10.00 charge will apply. 10.00 per copy 10.50 per copy

ANNUAL BUILDING WARRANT OF FITNESS

New Compliance Schedule 305.00 flat rate 320.25

Building Warrant of Fitness Renewal 155.00 flat rate 162.75

Building Warrant of Fitness audit inspection (including file note) 150.00 flat rate plus time costs and/or additional inspections 157.50


81

t

t

t

t


ANNUAL BUILDING WARRANT OF FITNESS 2020/2021 $

2021/2022 $

Amendment to Compliance Schedule 205.00 flat rate 215.25

Building statistics report (per month) 30.00 30.00

Property File Retrieval 10.00 00.00

Record of Title 15.00 15.75

Copying charges:

• Per A4 or A3 page (Plus Administrative Charge) 0.20 per page 0.20 per page

• Per A1 or A0 page (Plus Administrative Charge) 5.00 per page 5.25 per page

Scanning of property files 90.00 per hour capped at 275.00

94.50 per hour capped at 290.00

Administrative Charge 90.00 per hour capped at 275.00

94.50 per hour capped at 290.00

MISCELLANEOUS

Signs/Retaining Walls 360.00 flat rate 378.00 flat rate

Playground Equipment ($300.00 min.) 5.00/m2 5.25m2

Tents / Marquees 305.00 flat rate 320.25 flat rate

Certificate of Public Use

• First six months 350.00 flat rate 367.50 flat rate

• Second six months 700.00 flat rate 735.00 flat rate

• Third and subsequent six months 2,000.00 flat rate 2,100.00 flat rate

Notice to Fix / Dangerous / Insanitary / EQ Prone 500.00 flat rate 525.00 flat rate

Minor variation acceptance 150.00 flat rate 157.50 flat rate

Alternate Solution Assessment 205.00 flat rate 215.25 flat rate


82

18


MISCELLANEOUS 2020/2021 $

2021/2022 $

Schedule 1 paperwork acceptance 110.00 flat rate 115.50 flat rate

Schedule 1 Exemption 2 410.00 flat rate 430.50 flat rate

Peer Review/Consultant Cost plus 10% Cost plus 10%

Permit inspection (Consent Prior to 1993) 205.00 flat rate 215.25 flat rate

Dangerous / Insanitary / Earthquake Prone Consultation / Engaging consultants Cost plus 10% Cost plus 10%

Change of Use notification/acceptance 200.00 flat rate 210.00 flat rate

PSA Registration Maintenance fee 150.00 for a three year registration Not required

LEGAL PROCESSES

Drain in Common fee (Applicant to engage surveyor to draw up plan and provide to Council for lodging with Land Information New Zealand.) 550.00 plus any solicitors costs 577.50 plus any solicitors costs

Section 75 of the Building Act 350.00 flat rate 367.50 flat rate

Section 73 of the Building Act 350.00 plus any solicitors costs 367.50 plus any solicitors costs

Section 37 of the Building Act 110.00 flat rate 115.50 flat rate

BRANZ Levy1.00 per 1,000.00 of

GST inclusive work for all applications of 20,000 or more

1.00 per 1,000.00

DBH Levy 1.75 per 1,000 of GST inclusive

work for all applications of $20,444 or more.

1.75 per 1,000.00

Accreditation Levy

1.00 per 1,000.00 of GST inclusive work for all

applications of 5,000.00 or more

1.00 per 1,000.00 of GST inclusive work for all

applications of 5,000 or more


83

t

t

t

t


The following Infringement Fees are set by the Building Act 2004. Please note – the fine increases if Court proceedings are undertaken.

GENERAL BUILDING OFFENCES

s40 - Failing to comply with the requirement that building work must be carried out in accordance with a building consent. 1,000.00 1,000.00

s101 - Failing to comply with requirement to obtain a compliance schedule 250.00 250.00

s108(5)(a) - Failing to display a building warrant of fitness required to be displayed. 250.00 250.00

S108(5)(aa) Failing to supply territorial authority with a building warrant of fitness 250.00 250.00

s108(5)(b) - Displaying a false or misleading building warrant of fitness. 1,000.00 1,000.00

s108(5)(c) - Displaying a building warrant of fitness other than in accordance with section 108. 1,000.00 1,000.00

LEGAL PROCESSES

s116B(1)(a) - Using, or knowingly permitting the use of, a building for a use for which it is not safe or not sanitary. 1,500.00 1,500.00

s116B(1)(b) - Using, or knowingly permitting the use of, a building that has inadequate means of escape from fire. 2,000.00 2,000.00

s124 - Failing to comply with a notice, within the time stated in the notice, requiring work to be carried out on a dangerous, earthquake-prone, or insanitary building. 1,000.00 1,000.00

s128 - Using or occupying a building, or permitting another person to do so, contrary to a territorial authority’s hoarding, fence, or notice. 2,000.00 2,000.00

S128A(2) Using or occupying a building, or permitting another person to do so, contrary to a territorial authority’s hoarding, fence, or notice. 2,000.00 2,000.00

s168 - Failing to comply with a notice to fix. 1,000.00 1,000.00

s362D(4) Failing to provide prescribed disclosure information 500.00 500.00

Failing to provide prescribed checklist 500.00 500.00

s362F(4) Failing to have a written contract as prescribed 500.00 500.00

S362T(4) Failing to provide prescribed information or documentation to specified persons 500.00 500.00

s363 - Using, or permitting use of building having no consent or code compliance certificate or certificate for public use for premises for public use 1,500.00 1,500.00


84

20


LEGAL PROCESSES 2020/2021 $

2021/2022 $

s367 - Wilfully obstructing, hindering, or resisting a person executing powers conferred under the Act or its regulations. 500.00 500.00

s368 - Wilfully removing or defacing a notice published under the Act or inciting another person to do so. 500.00 500.00

RESTRICTED BUILDING WORK

s85(1) - Person who is not licensed building practitioner carrying out restricted building work without supervision of licensed building practitioner with appropriate licence. 750.00 750.00

s85(2)(a) - Licensed building practitioner carrying out restricted building work without appropriate licence. 500.00 500.00

s85(2)(b) - Licensed building practitioner supervising restricted building work without appropriate licence. 500.00 500.00

s314(1) - Person holding himself or herself out as being licensed to do or supervise building work or building inspection work while not being so licensed. 500.00 500.00

DAM SAFETY OFFENCES 2020/2021 $

2021/2022 $

s134C - Dam owner failing to classify dam. 500.00 500.00

s138 - Dam owner failing to comply with a direction from a regional authority to have a classification re-audited and submitted. 250.00 250.00

s140 - Dam owner failing to prepare, or arrange the preparation of, a dam safety assurance programme and submit it for audit. 500.00 500.00


85

t

t

t

t


t

t

t

t

DAM SAFETY OFFENCES 2020/2021 $

2021/2022 $

s145 - Dam owner failing to comply with a direction from a regional authority to have a dam safety assurance programme re-audited and submitted. 250.00 250.00

s150(4)(a) - Dam owner knowingly failing to display a dam compliance certificate required to be displayed. 250.00 250.00

s150(4)(b) - Dam owner displaying a false or misleading dam compliance certificate. 1,000.00 1,000.00

s150(4)(c) - Dam owner displaying a dam compliance certificate other than in accordance with section 150. 1,000.00 1,000.00

s154 - Dam owner failing to comply with a notice, within the time stated in the notice, requiring work to be carried out on a dangerous dam. 2,000.00 2,000.00


86

22

PARKING COMPLIANCE FEES 2020/2021 $

2021/2022 $

Pursuant to: • Land Transport Act 1998 • Invercargill City Council Bylaws • Transport (towage fees) Notice 2004

Any parking offence involving parking on a road in breach of a Local Authority Bylaw, in excess of a period fixed by a meter or otherwise, where the excess time is:

• Not more than 30 minutes 12.00 12.00

• More than 30 minutes but not more than one hour 15.00 15.00

• More than one hour but not more than two hours 21.00 21.00

• More than two hours but not more than four hours 30.00 30.00

• More than four hours but not more than six hours 42.00 42.00

• More than six hours 57.00 57.00

Offence: Other Infringements

Parked within six metres of an intersection 60.00 60.00

Parked near corner, bend, rise or intersection 40.00 40.00

Parked on or near a pedestrian crossing 60.00 60.00

Parked in a prohibited area 40.00 40.00

Parked on broken yellow line 60.00 60.00

Parked in area reserved for hire or reward vehicles 40.00 40.00

Parked within six metres of an indicated bus stop 40.00 40.00

ComplianceTūtohunga


87

t

t

t

t



2021/2022 $

Parked obstructing a vehicle entrance 40.00 40.00

Parked within 500mm of a fire hydrant 40.00 40.00

Double parked 60.00 60.00

Incorrect kerb parking 40.00 40.00

Parked on a footpath 40.00 40.00

Parked a trailer on a road over seven days 40.00 40.00

Inconsiderate parking 60.00 60.00

Parked in a (non GSV) loading zone - over the time limit 40.00 40.00

Incorrect angle parking 40.00 40.00

Parked facing wrong way 40.00 40.00

Parked on a level crossing 150.00 150.00

Parked near a level crossing 150.00 150.00

Operated vehicle with a damaged tyre 150.00 150.00

Operated vehicle with a smooth tyre 150.00 150.00

Parked in area reserved for disabled persons 150.00 150.00

Failed to park entirely in marked parking area 40.00 40.00

Failed to pay for parking at carparks using pay and display, pay by space or pay by plate method 40.00 40.00

Parked at an expired meter 12.00 12.00


88

24


2021/2022 $

Parked in parking space exceeding time paid for at a pay and display, pay by space or pay by plate method Between 12.00- 57.00 as above

Between 12.00- 57.00 as above

Operated an unlicensed vehicle 200.00 200.00

Obscured or indistinguishable registration label 200.00 200.00

Obscured or indistinguishable registration plate 200.00 200.00

Used a vehicle with exemption from continuous licensing 200.00 200.00

Failed to display registration plates 200.00 200.00

Displayed other than appropriate label 200.00 200.00

Used unauthorised registration plate (not on registry) 200.00 200.00

Failed to display current Warrant of Fitness 200.00 200.00

No Certificate of Fitness - commercial vehicle 600.00 600.00

Towage Fee 52.50 52.50

Abandoned vehicle towage fee including storage Actual Cost Actual Cost

LITTER

Litter fine 400.00 400.00

Compliance continuedTūtohunga


89

t

t

t

t


t

t

t

t

FOOD BUSINESSES OPERATING UNDER THE FOOD ACT 2014 2020/2021 $

2021/2022 $

Registration and Verification Under the Food Act 2014

1. Registration 180.00 190.00

New Business or Initial Registration Fee for a Food Control Plan or National Programme 180.00 190.00

Multi-Site Business - in addition to above – Additional fee per site 62.00 65.00

Renewal of a Food Control Plan or National Programme Registration

Food Control Plan - Minimum Registration Period - 12 months 130.00 135.00

National Programme 3 – Minimum Registration Period - 2 Years 130.00 135.00

Registration National Programme 1 - Minimum Registration Period - 2 Years 130.00 135.00

Registration National Programme 2 - Minimum Registration Period - 2 Years 130.00 135.00

Multi-Site Business - in addition to above – Additional fee per site 42.00 50.00

Amendment to a Food Control Plan or National Programme Registration 47.00 50.00

2. Verification, Compliance and Monitoring

Verification Fee for Food Control Plans and National Programmes (including follow ups)

Hourly fee of $145.00 PLUS disbursements which includes

mileage outside the City boundary

Hourly fee of $158.00 PLUS disbursements which includes

mileage outside the City boundry

Travel time for staff outside of City BoundaryHalf the hourly rate 75.50

charged to the nearest half hour

Half the hourly rate $79.00 charged to the nearest

half hour

Milage $0.75/kilometre $0.75/kilometre

Environmental HealthHauora ā-Taiao


90

26

OTHER HEALTH LICENCES 2020/2021 $

2021/2022 $

Camping Grounds 465.00 465.00

Hairdressers 260.00 260.00

Funeral Directors 260.00 260.00

Offensive Trades 260.00 260.00

Change of ownership 47.00 50.00

Late Fee charges 77.00 80.00

BYLAW FEES

Health and Hygiene Bylaw registration fee 260.00 270.00

Environmental Health Bylaw Mobile Trading 90.00 95.00

Environmental Health Bylaw Untidy Buildings, Sections and Abandoned Vehicles 145/hour and actual contractor costs

158/hour and actual contractor costs

Environmental Health Bylaw investigation fee 145.00 per hour 158.00 per hour

HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES ( HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES AND NEW ORGANISM ACT 1996)

Inspection and/or Report under HSNO - per hour or part thereof 145.00 per hour 158.00 per hour

Clean up, sampling, testing, seizure or removal of material / disposal or transfer to holding site/other agency Actual and reasonable costs Actual and reasonable costs

GAMBLING VENUE CONSENT (GAMBLING ACT 2003)

Venue consent application 515.00 515.00

Hearings lodgment fee payable on lodgment of application (for hearings that last up to 2 hours) 1,540.00 1,540.00

Monitoring of venue premises (per hour or part thereof) 145.00 per hour 158.00 per hour

Environmental Health continuedHauora ā-Taiao


91

t

t

t

t


t

t

t

t

HOUSING CARE GST NOT APPLICABLE 2020/2021 $

2021/2022 $

Studio units (per week) Up to 120.00 Up to 141.00

One bedroom units (per week) Up to 140.00 Up to 165.00

One bedroom units with carport (per week) Up to 146.00 Up to 172.00

Two bedroom special needs unit (per week) Up to 185.00 Up to 217.00

Housing CareNgā whare

Note:

These rental fees have been determined by Council on 2 March 2021 following a separate consultation process. They are included here for information only.


92

28

CIVIC THEATRE COMPLEX 2020/2021 $

2021/2022 $

Civic Theatre (seating capacity 1,015)

Hire charge per performance 3,065.00 3065.00

Second performance 2,025.00 2,025.00

Matinee or rehearsals with an audience 2,025.00 2,025.00

Dark days pack in/out rehearsals 1,250.00 1,250.00

Security deposit per performance 600.00 600.00

Specialist services are also available at an additional charge

Function Rooms

Weddings – basic hire for a day Price by negotiation Price by negotiation

Drawing Room

Day booking 250.00 250.00

Half day booking (maximum four hours) 135.00 135.00

Day/night 375.00 375.00

Down Day charge 90.00 90.00

Venues and Events ServicesNgā wāhi ratonga


93

t

t

t

t


t

t

t

t

CIVIC THEATRE COMPLEX 2020/2021 $

2021/2022 $

Victoria Room – whole room



Day/night 580.00 580.00


Victoria Room – Venue 1 or Venue 2



Day/night 375.00 375.00


RUGBY PARK

Venue Hire Price by negotiation Price by negotiation

SCOTTISH HALL

Venue Hire

Hall (full complex) 370.00 370.00

Supper Room 90.00 90.00

Kitchen 90.00 90.00


Alteration of Fees Fees and charges may be refunded, remitted or waived by the Manager, Invercargill Venue and Events Management Limited. The fees and charges listed were correct at the time of going to print. The Council reserves the right to alter fees and charges during the year. Any changes will be publicly notified for submissions. All fees and charges are GST inclusive unless otherwise stated.


94

30

2020/2021 $

2021/2022 $

3D Print Price on request 0.40 per gram

Book Bag 2.00 2.00

Book Covering 5.00 5.00

Book mending/book repair (minimum) 10.00 20.00

Digital image (minimum) - apply to Archives 10.00 25.00

Disc Resurfacing 2.50 2.50

DVD (including Bluray) (Note: These are Free for Children) 1.00 0.00

Holds – (Note: These are Free for Children) 0.60 1.00

Hot Pick Books/Magazines/DVDs 2.50 3.00

Interloans (minimum) 5.00 5.00

Interloans (urgent) 25.00 25.00

Internet/Wi-Fi - public accss provided through APNK. 0.00 0.00

Library Card replacement 2.00 2.00

Meeting Room Hire – Hourly by Arrangement

Non - Commercial Rate 0.00 0.00

Libraries and ArchivesNgā whare pukapuka me ngā puranga


95

t

t

t

t


2020/2021 $

2021/2022 $

Commercial Rate

Meeting Room Half day 70.00 75.00

Meeting Room Full day 125.00 130.00

Overdues non-chargeable items (per day) (Note: these are free for children) 0.20 0.30

Overdues chargeable items (per day) (Note: these are free for children) 0.50 0.30

Printing (per copy)

A4 Black and white 0.20 0.20


A4 Colour 0.50 0.50

A3 Colour 1.00 1.00

Research (first 30 minutes free) Price on request 25.00 per half hour

Scanning – staff assistance (Council also provides a free option using APNK) 2.50 2.50

USB stick (8GB) 10.00 10.00

Videogames (PS / Xbox / Wii) 2.50 3.00


96

32

BANK FEES AND CHARGES 2020/2021 $

2021/2022 $

Credit card and electronic transfer charges Actual charge Actual charge

OFFICIAL INFORMATION REQUESTS AND COMPLIANCE INVESTIGATIONS

Executive Staff (per hour) 230.00 240.00

Managers and Team Leaders (per hour) 190.00 200.00

Professional and Technical Staff (per hour) 145.00 158.00

Administrative Staff (per hour) 90.00 94.00

RATES POSTPONEMENT POLICY FEES

Administration fee 160.00 165.00

Interest rate 5% 2.5%

REQUEST FOR ESTABLISHING A NEW RATING AREA

Request for establishing a new Rating Area 7,187.50 Remove

SERVICES PROVIDED TO OTHER LOCAL AUTHORITIES

Charge for services provided to other Local Authorities (per hour) 155.00 158.00

STREET BANNERS

Street Banners 125.00 130.00

Miscellaneous


97

t

t

t

t


GENERAL CASUAL USE PARK CHARGE (PLUS ANY SPECIAL REQUIREMENT CHARGES) 2020/2021 $

2021/2022 $

Any area of any park or reserve for a wedding, picnic or non-commercial event 25.75 0.00

SPECIAL LOCATIONS (PLUS ANY SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS)

Queens Park Band Rotunda (includes power) 51.50 54.10

Queens Park Feldwick Gates (includes power) 52.30

Queens Park Winter Gardens 87.55 91.90

Queens Park Tennis Pavilion (includes power) 61.80 64.90

Anderson Park Pavilion/Kitchen (includes power) 61.80 95.90

Anderson Park Pavilion/Kitchen and BBQ (includes power) 92.70 97.30

Anderson Park Second Picnic Area 41.20 43.30

Otepuni Gardens Band Rotunda (includes power) 51.50 54.10

Sandy Point Oreti Sands Golf Building plus $250 bond 103.00 150.00

Otatara Scenic Reserve (ex Guide Camp Area) 41.20 43.30

Makarewa Domain Community Building (ex Bowling Club) plus $250 bond 103.00 150.00

SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS

Queens Park

Gates – to have gates opened for official vehicles 103.00 108.20

Anderson Park

Marquee site – includes use of pavilion and kitchen From 412.00 432.60

Parks and ReservesNgā papa rēhia me ngā whenua tāpui


98

34

SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS 2020/2021 $

2021/2022 $

Gala Street Reserve

Fair, Carnival, Circus and Commercial Events (non performing and performing days) As determined by the Parks Manager based on size, duration, location and nature of event From 303.85 From 319.00

Power – Fair, Carnival and Circus Area and Commercial EventsConnection fee PLUS cost of power used based on actual reading - organised by hirer

Connection fee PLUS cost of power used based on actual reading - organised by hirer

General Reserves

Other reserves and activities (including concerts or similar) Final cost to be determined by the Parks Manager based on size, duration, location and nature of event From 128.75 From 135.20

Power – where available 25.75 27.00

Access to reserves through gates and barriers (key fee) 103.00 108.20

Park access after dusk 200.85 210.90

Commercial concession350.00 - 500.00 pa

Dependent upon number of days of week used

350.00 - 500.00 pa Dependent upon number of

days of week used

Bonds

Marquee site From 556.20 584.00

Commercial activities (including fairs and carnivals) From 556.20 584.00

Circuses From 1,179.35 From 1,238.30

Where not defined above, bond to be determined by Parks Manager

SPORTS CLUBS OCCUPYING COUNCIL RESERVES (BUILDINGS CHARGED AS EXTRA)

Bowling Green 427.45 448.80

Croquet Greens 396.55 416.40

Parks and Reserves continuedNgā papa rēhia me ngā whenua tāpui


99

t

t

t

t


SPORTS CLUBS OCCUPYING COUNCIL RESERVES (BUILDINGS CHARGED AS EXTRA) 2020/2021 $

2021/2022 $

Dog Obedience Club 334.75 351.50

Model Engineers 607.70 638.10

SURREY PARK GRANDSTAND AND ATHLETICS TRACK

School sports (50% paid to Athletics Southland)

Year 7 and over 571.65 600.20

Years 1 to 6 (inclusive) 461.44 484.50

Athletics – use of sports area, per season (enclosure) 963.05 1,011.20

SPORTSFIELD AND PARK FACILITY CHARGES (PER FIELD)

Summer Sports

Touch Rugby 267.80 281.20

5-a-side Soccer 267.80 281.20

Cricket (per wicket)

Prepared wicket (per season) Price on application Price on application

Artificial wicket

Per season 448.05 470.50

Per day 66.95 70.30

Unprepared wicket (evenings only)

Per season 159.65 167.60

Per evening/day/game 46.35 48.70

Softball

Enclosure (per year) 963.05 1,011.20

Grass diamond

Per season 448.05 470.50

Per evening/day/game 46.35 48.70


100

36


SPORTSFIELD AND PARK FACILITY CHARGES (PER FIELD) 2020/2021 $

2021/2022 $

Practice area

Per season 339.90 356.90

Tennis – court per season 175.10 183.90

Marching (reservations of practice area) per season, per team 87.55 91.90

WINTER SPORTS - NOTE: EFFECTIVE APRIL 1

Field rent (per field)

Rugby, football and rugby league

Per season 813.70 854.40

Single game 77.25 81.10

Practice field 550.00 577.50

Netball Court rental (per court)

Per season 170.00 178.50

Hockey – artificial turf (enclosure) 935.00 981.80

Football – artificial turf (enclosure) 935.00 981.80

SANDY POINT DOMAIN

Clubs occupying Sandy Point Domain

Club buildings 420.00 441.00

Grounds

Container 40 foot (per) 100.00


101

t

t

t

t


SANDY POINT DOMAIN 2020/2021 $

2021/2022 $

Annual charge to be assessed on the area of land occupied per hectare or part thereof, minimum charge 1 ha. Where a building is also on the site, the charge shall be the land area plus the building rate. 195.00 204.80

Crib sites Sandy Point Domain – per annum 815.00 Market Appraisal per m2

BUILDINGS OTHER THAN SANDY POINT

Buildings other than Sandy Point Current market value Current market value

FENCING CONTRIBUTION

For reserves boundary fences

Half cost of materials, up to a yearly set fee per lineal meter As per Fencing Act Requirements

As per Fencing Act Requirements

MISCELLANEOUS CHARGES - APPLICATIONS REQUIRING MANAGEMENT PLAN CHANGE

Associated costs of application including but not limited to advertising, Minister of Conservation fee, survey fees, legal fees etc.

Recovery of actual cost incurred by Council

Recovery of actual cost incurred by Council

PARKS AND SERVICES - CEMETERIES AND CREMATORIUM

BURIAL FEES

Monday to Saturday, excluding Sundays and public holidays, including pre-purchase of right of burial. Hours 8am to 4pm weekdays (summer months); 8am to 3.30pm weekdays (winter months); 8am to 12pm Saturdays.

Person over five years of age 896.10 1573.58

Child five years of age or under (children’s burial area) 535.60 562.40

Stillborn and child up to one year 319.30 335.27

Breaking concrete Actual time taken Actual time taken

Second burials – and subsequent burial/s 1,050.60 1,103.10


102

38


PARKS AND SERVICES - CEMETERIES AND CREMATORIUM 2020/2021 $

2021/2022 $

Handfill

- Using existing material No charge No charge

- Using new material brought in 100.00 200.00

Burial of ashes

Burial of ashes (not applicable to stillborn and up to five years) and Maintenance fee on each burial of ashes133.90

394.75242.05

Recording fee for scattered ashes 45.00 47.30

EX-SERVICEMEN’S BURIAL IN SERVICEMEN’S AREA OF CEMETERY

For burials

Monday to Saturday 896.10 940.90

Maintenance Fee - on spouse burial 611.60

Ash burial fee 133.90 140.60

SATURDAY BURIALS

Out of hours fee 9am -12 pm, subject to special approval, in addition to normal fees 345.05 362.30

Out of hours fee 12pm -3.30 pm, subject to special approval, in addition to normal fees 550.30

PURCHASE OF ALLOTMENTS (INCLUDING PERMIT AND RECORDING FEES)

(Including pre-purchase of neighbouring allotment for right of burial)

Single one burials 803.40 843.60

Children’s plot, 1.8m x 0.75m 406.85 427.20

Standard width plot (2 capacity), 2.75m x 1.2m 927.00 973.40


103

t

t

t

t


PURCHASE OF ALLOTMENTS (INCLUDING PERMIT AND RECORDING FEES) 2020/2021 $

2021/2022 $

Double width plot (4 capacity), 2.75m x 2.4m 1,854.00 1,946.70

Family plots – fee to be determined by size of plot requested (based on multiples of two-capacity plots) Fee based on size of plot Fee based on size of plot

Plot for burial of ashes (60cm x 60cm) 293.55 308.20

OTHER FEES

Memorial beam (including lost Seamen)

Permit and monumental fee 46.35 125.50

Beam and maintenance 46.35 292.70

Free ground plaques 46.35 48.70

Beam 46.35 292.70

Memorial Grove 735.00 771.80

Discount for early payment of Funeral Director fees - 8%

MISCELLANEOUS

Permit fee for the installation of memorials

Prior to installation, inlcudes monumental fee 46.35 48.70

Non-notified 77.25 156.80

Genealogical search fee

Search (correspondence including email - minimum) 15.45 First hour free. $45 per hour thereafter

Disinterment and Reinterment

Disinterment fee, adult over five years old 2,461.70 2,584.80

Disinterment fee, child under five years old 1,174.20 1,232.90

Reinterment fee (same plot) 556.20 909.50

Disinterment of ashes 133.90 185.90

Reinterment of ashes 133.90 135.90


104

40


PARKS AND SERVICES - CEMETERIES AND CREMATORIUM 2020/2021 $

2021/2022 $

FOR CREMATIONS (INCLUDING PRE-PURCHASE)

Monday to Saturday, excluding Sundays and public holidays, including pre-purchase of right of burial. Hours 8am to 4pm weekdays (summer months); 8am to 3.30pm weekdays (winter months); 8am to 12pm Saturdays.

Persons over 10 years of age 824.00 865.20

Child 1 to 10 years of age 494.40 519.10

Stillborn and child up to one year old 236.90 248.70

Under 20 weeks gestation 51.50 54.10

Additional Fees

Out of hours fee 9am -12 pm, subject to special approval, in addition to normal fees339.90

345.00

Out of hours fee 12pm -3.30 pm, subject to special approval, in addition to normal fees 545.00

Use of chapel for funeral service; committal prior to cremation; or memorial service where no cremation is involved (minimum booking 3 hours) 288.40 395.00

Storage of ashes more than 14 days after cremation, per calendar month or part thereof 51.50 55.00

CREMATORIUM

PURCHASE OF ALLOTMENTS

Kerb plot 169.95 178.40

Garden of Memorial 169.95 178.40

Garden of Roses 169.95 997.27

Garden of Rest 391.40 411.00

Children’s Garden 169.95 178.40

Avenue of Tranquility 391.40 411.00


105

t

t

t

t


MISCELLANEOUS 2020/2021 $

2021/2022 $

Maintenance

Book of Remembrance 15.00 per line 15.25 per line

BLUFF BOAT RAMP

Bluff Boat Ramp Fees

Annual Permit per year (per boat under 6m) 125.00

Annual Permit per year (per boat 6m and over) 175.00

Joining Fee (one off) 50.00

Casual Use (per use) 20.00

Commerical Use (per use) 300.00

Admin Recovery Fee (if not paid within 7 days via an online payment) 30.00


106

42

PASSENGER TRANSPORT FEES FROM 1 FEBRUARY 2020 $

FROM 1 FEBRUARY 2022 $

Travel including Adults, Child, School or Tertiary Student, Senior Citizen – Per Trip - All times and All trips (to Hub) Paid by Paid By

A trip completed by a Tag Off Bee Card $2.00 Bee Card $2.10

A trip not completed by a Tag Off Bee Card $3.00 Bee Card $3.00

Any other trip Cash Payment $3.00 Cash Payment $3.00

Transfer within 30 minutes of trip finish when paying with Bus Smart Card only (no cash trip transfers) $0.00 $0.00

Under Five Years Old – All travel times Free Free

Super Gold Travel Trip (The Bee Card must be registered ( including the MSD connection to the card) to access the concession for free travel between 8.55 am and 3.00 pm, and all trips on Saturdays)

$0.00 $0.00

Bee Card (Off Bus purchase, including online) $5.00 $5.00

Bee Card (On Bus purchase including $5.00 top up) $10.00 $10.00

Minimum Bee Card On Bus Top Up $5.00 $5.00

Passenger TransportNgā waka

Notes:• Terms and Conditions will apply to the Bee card and can be accessed via www.bee.co.nz or via Councils website.

• A trip is inclusive of travel which can start anywhere within a route but concludes at the CBD Hub.

• Payments made by Bee cards are a specific fare type and are not considered as a discount fare as it does not require cash handling or driver assistance costs within the fare.

• A tag off action is defined within the RITS Implementation Schema as having completed a Tag On when entering the bus and also a Tag Off (swipe) when leaving the bus. Council may select not to exercise the fare option if the tag off does not occur.

• Maximum fares shown. Council may select not to implement this level of fare if other strategies are agreed. Actual fares will be confirmed on Council’s website.

• There are no peak or off peak times and fares are a flat fare per trip as shown above.

• Supergold card holders must register and validate their Bee card via the Bee website to be eligible for the travel concession fare (free 9am to 3pm , inc all saturdays) and must also complete a Tag Off on concluding the trip. Failure to complete the Tag Off may result in the suspension of the card being eligible for that fare. The registration process will require entering the card holders Ministry of Social Development Number (MSD) for validating the concession.

• Supergold travel is between the hours shown above unless amended by NZTA and travel must be compliant with the rules set by Council to be eligible for the fare.


107

t

t

t

t


SPLASH PALACE FEES 2020/2021 $

2021/2022 $

Adult 6.50 6.80

Senior (60 years or over) 4.90 4.90

Student (Full time tertiary) 4.90 4.90

Child 4.90 4.90

Lane Space (peak time) (20/25m lane space per hour plus entry) 20.00 20.00

Lane Space (off peak) (20/25m lane space booking fee plus entry)3.10 per lane per hour for 1 - 4

lanes 9.00 per lane per hour for the 5th lane plus thereafter

3.10 per lane per hour for 1 - 4 lanes 9.00 per lane per hour for

the 5th lane plus thereafter

Hydroslide single For the past year where there was no hydroslide 6.50

Hydroslide Family group 1+1 For the past year where there was no hydroslide 10.40

Hydroslide Family group 2+1 For the past year where there was no hydroslide 15.60

Hydroslide Family group 2+2 or 3+1 For the past year where there was no hydroslide 19.50

Hydroslide additional child For the past year where there was no hydroslide 4.90

Hydroslide group booking 6 or more up to 19 For the past year where there was no hydroslide 4.90

Hydroslide group booking 19 or more For the past year where there was no hydroslide 3.90

PoolsNgā puna kaukau


108

44

FEES AND CHARGES 2020/2021 $

2021/2022 $

Wachner Place Public Toilets

Showers 3.00 3.00

Soap / shampoo 1.00 1.00

Towels 8.00 8.00

Locker 2.00 + 1.00 per each additional day

2.00 + 1.00 per each additional day

Public ToiletsWharepaku Tūmatanui


109

t

t

t

t


APPLICATIONS* 2020/2021 $

2021/2022 $

Non-notified:

Land Use 900.00 945.00

Deemed Permitted Boundary Activity 500.00 525.00

Demolition (Rule DERE-R2) 500.00 525.00

Subdivision 1,250.00 1,310.00

Combined landuse and subdivision 1,750.00 1,835.00

Limited notified 3,000.00 3,150.00

Notified 5,000.00 5,250.00

Outline Plans:

Application 1,000.00 1,050.00

Request to waive requirement for application 700.00 735.00

Other applications (Amendment or change or cancellation of resource consent conditions, requests for extensions of time and objections to fees charged.) 700.00 735.00

HEARING FEES

Deposit to be paid prior to a hearing date being set 1,500.00 1,500.00

Commissioner Fees Actual cost Actual Cost

Hearings Panel 600.00/hour after the first two hours

630.00/hour after the first two hours

Resource ManagementPenapena rawa* These fees relate to the minimum charge only as an initial fixed deposit. Actual fee payable includes the cost of time taken to process each application, memorandum,

consent, notice, certificate or schedule. Actual fees for external professionals or $158/hour for staff.


110

46

Resource Management continuedPenapena rawa

DESIGNATIONS, HERITAGE ORDERS AND PLAN CHANGES 2020/2021 $

2021/2022 $

Designation and Heritage Order 6,500.00 6,800.00

Alteration or removal of Designation or Heritage Order 1,000.00 1,050.00

Plan Change (Deposit may be negotiated, depending on complexity) 15,000.00 15,000.00

OTHER SERVICES

Monitoring 145.00/hour 158.00/hour

Peer review of decision to return an application Actual fee if Council's decision is upheld.

Actual fee if Council's decision is upheld

Council document signing/sealing fee 450.00 plus associated legal fees

470.00 plus associated legal fees

Section 139A Existing Use Certificate 470.00

Section 139 Certificate of Compliance 470.00

Section 348 Right of Way Approval 700.00 735.00

Section 327A Revocation of a building line restriction. 700.00 735.00

Section 100(f) Sale and Supply of Alcohol Act 470.00

SURVEY CERTIFICATION

Section 221 262.50

Section 223 200.00 210.00

Section 224 250.00 plus 180.00 if a bond is requested

262.50, plus 180.00 if a bond is requested to satisfy condition(s) of consent

and agreed on by Council

Combined 223 and 224 350.00 367.50

Section 226 (including certification) 550.00 577.50


111

t

t

t

t


APPLICATIONS BY COUNCIL BUSINESS UNITS, COUNCIL CONTROLLED ORGANISATIONS AND COUNCIL ORGANISATIONS 2020/2021 $

2021/2022 $

All applications

Actual costs for processing, hearing and decision-making, including the cost of Hearings

Commissioners and External Professionals when required

Actual costs for processing, hearing and decision-making, including the cost of Hearings

Commissioners and External Professionals when required

ENGINEERING PLANS

Fee for the lodgment of engineering plans and specifications of subdivision including checking and inspection as required under the Council’s Code of Land Development Bylaw.

1.5% of the estimated cost of the Engineering Works or $1,000.00, whichever is the

greater. (Estimated cost to be acceptable to Council.

1.5% of the estimated cost of the Engineering Works or $1,000.00, whichever is the

greater. (Estimated cost to be acceptable to Council.

Hourly re-inspection fees – additional inspections other than those required by the Code of Practice for Land Development. 160.00 168.00

INFRINGEMENT FEES – RESOURCE MANAGEMENT (INFRINGEMENT OFFENCES) REGULATIONS 1999

Section 338(1)(a) – Contravention of Section 9 (restrictions on use of land) 300.00 300.00

Section 338(1)(c) – Contravention of an abatement notice (other than a notice under 322(1)(c)) 750.00 750.00

Section 338(2)(a) – Contravention of Section 22 (failure to provide certain information to an enforcement officer) 300.00 300.00

Section 338(2)(c) – Contravention of an excessive noise direction under Section 327. 500.00 500.00

Section 338(2)(d) – Contravention of an abatement notice for unreasonable noise under Section 322(1)(c). 750.00 750.00

DISTRICT PLAN

Within Southland 700.00 735.00

Remainder of New Zealand (including postage and packaging) 800.00 840.00


112

48

Resource Management continuedPenapena rawa

RAPID SIGNS AND AERIAL PHOTOS 2020/2021 $

2021/2022 $

RAPID Number Sign Charges

Single Flat Sign 45.00 45.00

Range Sign 55.00 55.00

Right of Way Signs (each) 15.00 15.00

Installation 180.00 180.00

Supply of Aerial Photo

Customised projects (per hour) 160.00 168.00

REQUESTS FOR REMITTANCE OF FEES AND CHARGES

Requests for remittance of fees and charges under Section 36(5) of the Resource Management Act 1991.

Written requests to the Group Manager - Environmental and Planning Services, Invercargill

City Council

Written requests to the Group Manager - Environmental and Planning Services, Invercargill

City Council


113

t

t

t

t


ROADING FEES 2020/2021 $

2021/2022 $

License to occupy road – “Café License” (No Alcohol Permitted) – Annual Charge

Up to 15 square metres 125.00 130.00

Per additional square metre 12.50 13.00

Special designated area of footpath for Alcohol License or similar (Annual Charge) 1,050.00 1,050.00

Metered parking space removal (Annual Charge or pro rata for longer periods) 2,000.00 2,000.00

Restricted use of footpath, e.g. scaffolding permit (monthly fee – also requires CAR permit)

Minimum of 80.00 (for up to 30 days) then 5.00 per calendar day thereafter

Minimum of 80.00 (for up to 30 days) then 5.00 per calendar day thereafter

Overweight permit Set by legislation Set by legislation

Vehicle crossing application per crossing Technical charge based on processing time (minimum 60.00)

Technical charge based on processing time (minimum 60.00)

Corridor Access Request Technical charge based on processing time Technical charge based on processing time

Excavation or Similar (minimum 125.00) (minimum 150.00)

*Urgent Permit Process (minimum 200.00) (minimum 250.00)

Re-inspections (minimum 55.00) (minimum 55.00)

No Dig or minor event or similar approval Technical charge based on processing time (minimum 55.00)


Digging in Road Corridor without an approved Works Access Permit. 300.00 350.00

RoadingNgā rori


114

50

PARKING 2020/2021 $

2021/2022 $

NGA Connections Technical charge based on processing time (minimum 125.00)


Approval for a Roadside Grazing permit or Dust Suppressant application permit or Demolition or Removal of Property or Placing of Shipping Container of Frontage or Approval for use of any Road Space or Investigation for damage of ICC assets( Fault or liability Established).



On street parking meters (per hour) - Meter heads 1.50 1.50

On street parking (per hour) - Parking Equipment ( New Pay by Plate Kiosks - see note below)

First Hour 1.50 First Hour 2.00

Second Hour 2.00 Second Hour 2.00

Third Hour 4.00 Third Hour 4.00

On street Coach parking (Casual per hour) 2.50 2.50

Esk Street Number 1 off street car park (Casual per hour) 1.50 1.50

Esk Street Number 2 off street car park (Casual per hour) 1.50 1.50

Don Street off street car park (Casual per hour) 1.50 1.50

Esk Street Number 2 - off street car park, Reserved Permit Parking ( per month) 70.00 - 80.00 75.00 - 85.00

Esk Street Number 2 off street car park, Early Bird Parking ( per day) 5.00 6.00

Deveron Street off street carpark Reserved Permit Parking ( per month) 75.00 – 100.00 80.00 - 100.00

Permit Parking (where available) at any Carpark not specified ( per month) 80.00 – 150.00 80.00 – 150.00

Roading continuedNgā rori


115

t

t

t

t


Note:

1. Car parking approach changed to include an App, Pay by Plate and On Street kiosk equipment. Variable rate charges may be used within new pay equipment. The parking strategy will enable a range of charges to be used. Lower fees may be used in introduction or to encourage chamges

2. See Councils Website for Terms and Conditions of Parking, including recover of Credit Card payment costs. Conditions may vary during year.

3. New CAR software may require usage and access charges on a cost recovery basis.

4. Recover of cost of repair incurs a 15% surcharge for administration and coordination.

PARKING 2020/2021 $

2021/2022 $

Park Zone Car Park Building (Leven Street)

Casual parking (per hour) 1.50 1.50

Reserved Permit Space ( Red Zone) ( per month) 90.00 95.00

Reserved Space ( Level 7 – Red Zone ) ( per month) (limited numbers) 70.00 75.00

Meter Bags

Per day 15.00 15.00

Per calendar week 65.00 65.00


116

52

SewerageParakaingaki

TRADE WASTE BYLAW FEES 2020/2021 $

2021/2022 $

Reinspection Fee

Volume Charge (CF) 51.30 c/m3 53.9 c/m3

Biochemical Oxygen Demand Charge / Organic Loading (CB) 43.30 c/Kg BOD 45.5 c/Kg BOD

Suspended Solids Charge (CS) 43.50 c/Kg SS 45.70 c/Kg SS

TANKERED WASTE (CLIFTON)

Plant influent (main sewer)

$10.00 /m3 20.60 /m3Digester

Other

CONNECTION FEE

Kennington Connection - Homeowner organised 7,000.00 7,000.00


117

t

t

t

t


Solid WasteTe penapena para tūmārō

KERBSIDE COLLECTION 2020/2021 $

2021/2022 $

Additional Bin 209.58 209.58

INVERCARGILL TRANSFER STATION

Cash minimum 5.00 5.00

Account minimum 10.00 10.00

General waste per tonne 214.00 245.03

Mixed waste > 80% green waste per tonne 214.00 245.03

Mixed waste < 80% green waste per tonne 175.00 175.00

Green waste only per tonne 94.00 82.86

Cleanfill only per tonne 103.00 92.54

Hazardous waste per tonne 103.00 92.54

Car tyres, each (weight charges also apply) 6.00 6.00

Truck tyres, each (weight charges also apply) 11.00 11.00

BLUFF TRANSFER STATION

Rubbish

Car 10.00 11.40

Station wagon 16.00 18.24

Ute/large van 26.00 29.64

Trailer – single axle 41.00 46.74

Trailer – tandem axle 69.00 78.66


118

54

BLUFF TRANSFER STATION 2020/2021 $

2021/2022 $

Tyres – car, each (no bulk loads) 6.00 6.00

Tyres – truck, each (no bulk loads) 11.00 11.00

Greenwaste

Car 5.50 6.27

Station wagon 8.00 9.12

Ute/large van 13.00 14.82

Trailer – single axle 20.50 23.37

Trailer – tandem axle 34.50 39.33

Solid Waste continuedTe penapena para tūmārō

Note:

General waste per tonne, Mixed waste > 80% green waste per tonne, Mixed waste < 80% green waste per tonne, Rubbish (Car, Station Wagon, Ute/large Van, Trailer - Single Axel and Trailer - Tandem Axel) fees and charges changes are a result of changes to Government charges set by the Emission Trading Scheme and Waste Disposal Levy.


119

t

t

t

t


Southland Museum and Art GalleryNiho o te Taniwha

DIGITAL SERVICES 2020/2021 $

2021/2022 $

Photo emailed/printed (personal use) 25.00 25.00

Photo emailed/printed to be published 25.00 + 50.00 (acknowledgement fee)

25.00 + 50.00 (acknowledgement fee)

Request for photo of collection item 55.00 55.00

Photo to be used on front cover To be negotiated To be negotiated

Filming by prior arrangement per hour 250.00 250.00

Other Southland Museums and Historical Societies Cost only Cost only

RESEARCH

Commercial Rate 180.00 per hour First half-hour free 180.00

PHOTOCOPYING


A4 Colour 0.40 0.40


120

56

OFFICIAL INFORMATION REQUESTS (PER HOUR) 2020/2021 $

2021/2022 $

Executive Staff 230.00 158.00

Managers and Team Leaders 190.00 158.00

Professional and Technical Staff 180.00 158.00

Administrative Staff 90.00 158.00

Photocopying

A4 page 0.20 0.20

A3 page 0.40 0.40

Travel per km 0.75 0.80

Alteration of Fees :

Fees and charges may be refunded, remitted or waived by the Manager, Southland Museum and Art Gallery. The fees and charges listed were correct at the time of going to print. The Council reserves the right to alter fees and charges during the year. Any changes will be publicly notified for submissions. All fees and charges are GST inclusive unless otherwise stated.

Southland Museum and Art Gallery continuedNiho o te Taniwha


121

t

t

t

t


Water SupplyTe punawai

SALE OF WATER 2020/2021 $

2021/2022 $

Class A: Excess usage by Easement Grantors (by agreement) m3 0.0254 0.0254

Class C: Extraordinary Consumers off Reticulation (non-residential rating units) Annual Consumption m3:

0 to 249 0 0

250 and above 0.685 0.72

Class D: Southland District Council consumers off Branxholme pipelines m3 1.50 2.50

Class G: Bulk water ex waterworks to tankers etc (minimum $20.00) m3 2.30 2.50

Class H: Supplied per metered standpipe ex hydrants (minimum $20) m3 2.30 2.50

Plus standpipe hire per day 45.00 50.00

Class I: Builders Unmetered Supply Paid with Permit Fees

Dwelling 45.00 50.00

Commercial buildings 90.00 100.00

WATER CONNECTION CHARGES

Ordinary Connections (Invercargill area)

20mm service each 2,000.00 2,100.00

25mm service each 2,350.00 2,470.00

Ordinary connections (Bluff area) Quote Quote

Extraordinary connections Quote Quote

Renewels (20mm diameter) 1,500.00 1,575.00


122

58

WATER CONNECTION CHARGES 2020/2021 $

2021/2022 $

Disconnection Fee

Up to and including 50mm each 1,250.00 1,315.00

Above 50mm Quote Quote

Reconnection fee (up to 50mm diameter) 1,350.00 1,420.00

Service connection flow test each 600.00 815.00

Backflow Preventer Fee

Registration and installation 134.00 140.00

Annual inspection 75.00 80.00

Fire protection water connection annual licence 75.00 80.00

Note:

A broader review of water supply future demand and associated requirements is currently underway. Further amendment to the fees may be required following this review.

Water SupplyTe punawai


123

t

t

t

t


t

t

t

t

Fees and charges 2021-202259


124

60

t

t

t

t

Private Bag 90104, Invercargill 9840, New Zealand - Phone 03 211 1777 - www.icc.govt.nz


125

A3406611





ADOPTION OF LIABILITY MANAGEMENT POLICY

SUMMARY

The Liability Management Policy is appended for adoption following consultation.

RECOMMENDATIONS


1. Receive the report “Adoption of Liability Management Policy”.

2. Note the submissions received.

3. Adopt the Liability Management Policy (A3411478).

IMPLICATIONS


N/A


N/A


Yes


Aligns with the Financial Strategy for the proposed 2021 – 2031 Long-term Plan



Performance, Policy and Partnerships Committee - Public - Adoption of Liability Management Policy (A3406611)

126

A3406611


This policy directs how the Council manages debt and other liabilities and aligns with other key financial policies and the financial strategy which underpins the budget for the Long-term Plan.

BACKGROUND

The Liability Management Policy covers how Council will manage debt. It is a document which is required alongside other financial management policies such as the Revenue and Finance Policy, as well as the Financial Strategy. The Policy is due for review.

FEEDBACK RECEIVED AND OFFICER ADVICE

Three submitters provided feedback. Two were positive and one was a submitter who submitted on every question that more investment was needed for climate change.

Reflecting the current and expected continuing low interest environment the minimum fixed interest rate borrowing limits have been reduced, which while not a significant change we have included for completeness. No other changes are recommended to the Liability Management Policy.

CONCLUSION

Consultation has been completed and the Liability Management Policy is appended for adoption.

Appendix: Submissions received on Liability Management Policy

Qunton Holland-King

Agree

Matt Couldrey


Wade Devine

Seems prudent. Pity it does not apply to capital expenditure!


127

LIABILITY MANAGEMENT POLICYEffective from 9 June 2021

A3311478 1

PurposeCouncil borrows for the following primary purposes:

∑ General debt to fund Council’s capital works primarily on infrastructure assets. The use of debt is seen as an appropriate and efficient mechanism for promoting intergenerational equity between current and future ratepayers in relation to Council’s assets and investments.

∑ Short term debt to manage timing differences between cash inflows and outflows, and to maintain Council’s liquidity.

∑ Specific debt associated with significant “one-off” projects and non-financial investments from time to time.

∑ Borrowing through hire purchase, credit, deferred payment or lease arrangements in the ordinary course of Council business.

Scope

Local Government Act 2002 Requirements

Section 104 of the Local Government Act 2002 provides that the Liability Management Policy required to be adopted under Section 102(1) must state the local authority policies in respect of liability management, including:

(a) Interest rate exposure

(b) Credit exposure

(c) Liquidity

(d) Debt repayment

ObjectivesThe objectives of the Liability Management Policy are consistent with market best practice and will take into account Council’s 10 year plans as set out in the Long-Term Plan. The key Liability Management objectives in relation to borrowings are to:

∑ Prudently manage Council’s borrowing activities to ensure the ongoing funding of Council.

∑ Borrow only under Council approved facilities and as permitted by this policy.∑ Minimise borrowing costs within prudent risk management control limits.


128

A3311478

∑ Manage exposure to adverse interest rate movements.∑ Ensure operational controls and procedures to protect Council against financial loss,

opportunity cost and other inefficiencies are maintained.

Borrowing Management and Internal ControlsCouncil approves policy parameters in relation to borrowing activities.

Council approves, by resolution, the borrowing requirement for each financial year in the Annual Plan or Long-Term Plan or by later resolution during the year.

Council considers the impact on its borrowing limits as well as the size and the economic life of the asset that is being funded and its consistency with Council’s Long-Term Plan.

A resolution of Council is not required for hire purchase, leased, credit or deferred purchase of goods if:

∑ The period of indebtedness is less than 365 days; or∑ The goods or services are obtained in the ordinary course of operations on normal

commercial terms for amounts not exceeding in aggregate $50,000.

Council’s Chief Executive has overall responsibility for the operations of Council.

The Group Manager of Finance and Assurance reviews regular treasury reports to ensure compliance with policies, procedures and risk limits and has overall responsibility for setting risk management strategies in relation to the implementation of this treasury policy. The Group Manager will also oversee the management of Council’s relationship with financial institutions and the negotiation of borrowing facilities with bankers, the appointment of brokers/arrangers/managers.

Council’s borrowing activities are managed centrally through its accounting function. The accounting function is broadly charged with the following responsibilities:

∑ Manage Council’s borrowing programme to ensure funds are readily available at margins and costs favourable to Council.

∑ Raise authorised and appropriate borrowing, in terms of both maturity and interest rate strategies.

∑ Manage the impact of market risks such as interest rate risk and liquidity on Council’s borrowing by undertaking appropriate hedging activity in the financial markets.

∑ Minimise adverse interest rate related increases on ratepayer charges and maintain overall interest costs within budgeted parameters.

∑ Provide timely and accurate reporting of treasury activity and performance.

Council is prohibited from borrowing in a foreign currency by Section 113 of the Local Government Act 2002.


129

A3311478

Interest Rate ExposureInterest rate risk management refers to managing the impact that movements in interest rates can have on Council’s cash flows. This impact can be both favourable and unfavourable. Council’s ongoing borrowing requirement gives rise to direct exposure to interest rate movements.

Fixed / Floating ProfileInterest is incurred on any bank funding facility, issuance of local authority stock and other borrowing arrangements. This policy recognises that the longer the term of borrowing, the greater the interest rate risk. Longer term fixed rate borrowings may be of benefit if market interest rates rise, but equally may not allow the Council to take advantage of periods of low interest rates.

A balance is achieved through having variable terms with regard to interest rate resets.

The Council manages its interest rate exposures by defining minimum and maximum hedging percentages within various time buckets. These parameters are reviewed annually by the Group Manager of Finance and Assurance. Any changes recommended must be approved by the full Council before inception. The table below shows an example of how minimum and maximum hedged or fixed rate exposure requirements within various time buckets are detailed in operational procedure and reporting documentation.

Interest Rate Maturity Profile Limit

Minimum Fixed Rate Maximum Fixed Rate

Zero to two years 40% 100%

Two to five years 25% 80%

Five to ten years 0% 60%

Any hedging outside the determined parameters or for longer than 10 years must be approved by the Council, before initiation.

When managing the interest rate risk of the Council the hedging percentages relate to total core debt. Core debt cannot exceed borrowing projections as per the Long-Term Plan or Annual Plan or as approved by the Council.

Interest Rate Risk Management ContractsInterest rate risk can be managed by using interest rate risk management contracts that allow the re-profiling of the portfolios including the:

∑ Hedging of up to 100% of repricing risk on existing fixed rate debt and issue yield risk on planned new debt within the next 12 month period.

∑ Converting fixed rate borrowing into floating rate or hedged borrowing and floating rate borrowing into fixed or hedged borrowing within the overall parameters of this policy.


130

A3311478

The following interest rate risk management instruments are approved by Council:

∑ Interest Rate Swaps∑ Forward Rate Agreements∑ Interest Rate Options on approved underlying instruments, e.g. on Interest Rate Swaps

or bonds.∑ Interest Rate Collar Strategy, but only where the ratio of the face value and interest rate

exposure on bought to sold legs is 1:1.

Credit ExposureCouncil hedging can only be undertaken with approved New Zealand Registered Banks.

Liquidity and Funding RiskLiquidity management refers to the timely availability of funds to Council when needed, without incurring penalty costs. Funding risk management centres on the ability to re-finance or raise new debt at a future time at the same or more favourable pricing (fees and borrowing margins) and terms of existing facilities. A key factor of funding risk management is to reduce the concentration of risk at any one point in time so that if one-off internal or external negative credit events occur, the overall interest cost is not unnecessarily increased.

The following guidelines have been established to provide Council with appropriate levels of liquidity at all times, as follows:

∑ Cash flow forecasts will be produced to assist in the matching of operational and capital expenditure to revenue streams and borrowing requirements.

∑ Council will maintain its financial investments in liquid instruments.∑ Council will ensure that, where sinking funds or Council created investments are

maintained to repay borrowing, these investments are held for maturities not exceeding the relevant borrowing repayment date.

∑ To minimise the impact of unexpected cash surpluses, the Council will take advantage of the efficiencies of any floating rate loan facility.

The following guidelines have been established to control funding risk:

∑ To avoid concentration of debt maturity dates no more than 50% or $25 million (whichever is the highest) of total debt can be subject to refinancing on a rolling 12 month basis. Total debt is defined as total existing external debt.

Debt RepaymentRepayment of debt (interest and principal) is governed by:

∑ Affordability of debt servicing costs.∑ Intergenerational equity principles (debt will be repaid over the life of the asset or an

appropriate period of time determined by the asset involved, whichever is the lesser).∑ Maintenance of prudent debt levels and borrowing limits.


131

A3311478

∑ Council repays borrowings from general, special funds, the existing specific sinking fund, or operating surpluses allocated to that borrowing.

∑ Where a loan is raised for a specific purpose and the funds are no longer required, the funds will be used to repay existing debt or held in a special fund until the funds can be applied against a future borrowing.

Borrowing MechanismsIn developing strategies for new borrowing (in relation to source, term, size and pricing) Council takes into account the following:

∑ Available and Council approved sources, terms and types of borrowing.∑ Council’s overall debt maturity profile, to ensure concentration of debt is avoided at

reissue/rollover time.∑ Prevailing interest rates, margins and total cost relative to term and nature of the

borrowing.∑ The market’s outlook on future interest rate movements as well as Council’s own.∑ Legal documentation and financial covenants.

GuaranteesCouncil provides guarantees for banks for loans between the bank and non-profit bodies where Council considers the guarantee to be beneficial to the community and in accordance with the following parameters: ∑ The loan must be in the name of a legally constituted body.∑ To qualify for a guarantee, the proposed works should be such as are not available for

normal security when situated on Council reserve.∑ The guarantee must be required by the lender.The organisation must provide the Council with satisfactory evidence of its ability to repay the

loan, on the terms specified for the loan. To that end the organisation shall supply the latest annual accounts and such other information as may be available in support of its application. A three-year projection of the organisation’s financial ability to meet loan repayments should be included.

∑ Where the loan is for an insurable asset, such as a building, it shall be insured in the joint names of the Invercargill City Council and the applicant organisation for full replacement value (not the indemnity value).

∑ The loan shall be subject to personal guarantees, by way of a legal document, from persons acceptable by the Council. Such personal guarantees shall remain in force until the loan is fully paid off and shall not reduce proportionality to repayments.

∑ In consideration of the guarantee, the organisation which will benefit shall pay an annual charge of 1/2% of the amount guaranteed either to form a fund from which any liability of the Council could be met, or for administration purposes. Such a percentage, together with the personal guarantees suggested, will tend to make an application for guarantees more realistic.

∑ In the event of the Council being required to meet a guarantee all the assets of the organisation revert to the Council. To ensure that these assets are kept in good repair the Council shall have the right to inspect assets and request any action necessary to maintain them in good repair.


132

A3311478

∑ Guarantees require the approval by way of Council resolution.

LeasesCouncil utilises finance leases (as opposed to an operational lease ie renting) as a means of financing some office equipment.

Approved Risk Management Instruments

Interest Rate Swap (“IRS”)

An interest rate swap is an agreement between Council and a counterparty (usually a bank) protecting Council against a future adverse interest rate movement. Council pays (or receives) a fixed interest rate and receives (or pays) a floating interest rate. The parties agree to a notional principal amount, the future interest rate, the settlement dates and the benchmark floating rate, which is usually off the Reuters page containing the daily rate sets for BKBM (bank bill reference rates).

Objective

To provide Council with certainty as to its interest rate cost on an agreed principal amount for an agreed period. Floating rate sets are typically every three or six months over the life of the swap.

Example

Council fixes its interest rate for three years at 6.50%, on a quarterly basis on a portion of its planned borrowings by entering into a three year 6.50% fixed rate swap. The floating rate reference is three month BKBM.

Outcome

On a swap-reset date, the three month bank bill rate is at, say 4.75%. Council borrows from its bank the principal, for three months at 4.75% plus Council’s margin. At the same time the bank pays Council 4.75% on the principal amount for a three month period. Council then pays the bank 6.50% on the principal amount for a three month period. This means that Council’s effective interest rate is 6.50% plus its margin. In practice cash flows would be netted off if the swap and the underlying borrowing facility were with the same bank.

Monitoring and AuditingThe Risk and Assurance Committee will monitor the application of this Policy via reports from Executive staff.


133

A3311478

Reference Number: A3411478

Effective Date: 9 June 2021

Review Period: This Policy will be reviewed every six (6) years, unless earlier review is required due to legislative changes, or is warranted by another reason requested by Council.

Supersedes: 2017 Liability Management Policy

New Review Date: June 2027

Associated Documents/References: Nil.

Policy Owner: GM - Finance and Assurance, Invercargill City Council


134

A3406612





ADOPTION OF INVESTMENT POLICY

SUMMARY

Following consultation, the Investment Policy is appended for adoption.

RECOMMENDATIONS


1. Receive the report “Adoption of Investment Policy”.

2. Note the submissions received.

3. Adopt the Investment Policy (A3420180)

IMPLICATIONS


Yes


No


Yes


This aligns with the Financial Strategy and other financial policies in relation to the Long-term Plan




This policy directs how the Council manages investments. It aligns with the financial strategy which underpins the budget for the Long-term Plan.

Performance, Policy and Partnerships Committee - Public - Adoption of Investment Policy (A3406612)

135

A3406612

BACKGROUND

The Investment Policy directs how the Council will manage investments and determine what is appropriate to invest in. It is one of our cornerstone financial policies alongside our other financial management policies such as the Revenue and Finance Policy and Liability Management Policy. All these policies support our Financial Strategy.

Consultation on the Investments Policy took place alongside the Long-term Plan between 30 March and 3 May.

SUBMISSIONS RECEIVED AND OFFICER ADVICE

Eleven submissions were received, addressing the following issues:

∑ Sale of investments, including forestry and property. Some submitters questioned whether the clauses relating to sale of assets were too broad and were allowing investments which were imprudent. Others want to know where the return on forestry is going to be spent and whether it will reduce debt.

∑ Ethical investment - One submitter wanted a clause on ethical investment. ∑ Appropriateness of investments - One person felt that Council should not be making

investments as it was not core Council business.

A number of the submitters commented that Council should not be making non-core investments, citing investments in property and forestry. The Council’s main investment is in its shareholding in Invercargill City Holdings Limited (ICHL). The role of ICHL is to act as Council’s commercial investment arm ensuring that appropriate returns are provided from these investments in line with the investment policy. The Council sets performance levels in terms of dividend returns and other non-financial outcomes from ICHL and its subsidiaries.

Rather than Council investing directly in commercial activities, the role of ICHL is to consider and make these investments along commercial business lines ensuring that such investments are in line with its own policies. Dividend income from ICHL is used to reduce the level of rates required to undertake the activities of Council.

A number of the submitters referred to Council’s forestry investments. It is noted that:∑ ICHL through Invercargill City Forests (ICF) had a forestry investment. During the

2020/21 financial year these investments were divested, with a dividend being paid to ICHL and ICF has been placed into voluntary liquidation. The funds from the sale and liquidation will be used to repay ICHL and Council debt.

∑ Council also owns the forests on reserve land at Sandy Point. Given the continuing nature of these forests our investments policy must be broad enough to include such an investment.

The Investment Policy does limit what and whom Council can invest (cash or capital) in andsets out the requirements for the financial institutions that it transacts with to ensure that credit risk is appropriately managed. The current policy requires Council to only deal with New Zealand credit institutions with larger limits being provided for those with the higher credit ratings. This aligns investments to the prudent objective of the investment policy.

CONCLUSION

Following consultation and consideration of the feedback from citizens, it is recommended that no changes are necessary to the Investment Policy and the policy as appended isadopted.


136

A3406612

Appendix: Submissions on the Investment Policy


Agree

Linzi Turner

Councils should not be investing in businesses if they do not know what they are doing - and this council certainly have not made great choices over the years which is why we have so much debt that you want to raise our rates again. Not good enough - stay away from any business, buildings, office space, forestry, land - you have no idea how to do it profitably for the people that have trusted you. DO NOT INVEST IN ANYTHING - just stick to your knitting - services and infrastructure!!

Josh

Get Invercargill great again

Henry James Turner

I seem to recall forestry at Dipton.

Geoff Dembo

I wonder how much money could be released by selling council-owned land which is not needed for current purposes. This would be a way to reduce the significant increase in debt that the council is planning.

Shane

Investments make money, ICC need to look at the meaning of investment as I think they have a lack of understanding

Unnamed

Is any consideration given to the ethical status of financial institutions that the council banks with or invests with?

Matt Couldrey


Wade Devine

Prudent except clause concerning property investment which is too free ranging and thus allows property investment UN-fetted under the guise of development need of the district. Would seem this was how the city block funding was allowed.

Jamie Bulling

Silly


137

A3406612

Unnamed

The sale of the forestry must surely have been put into a fund to provide an annual return?


138

INVESTMENT POLICYEffective from 9 June 2021

A3420180 1

PurposeCouncil holds financial investments sufficient to match reserve accounts created by Council resolution and as a result of short term cash flow surpluses.

Local Government Act 2002 RequirementsSection 105 of the Local Government Act 2002 provides that the Investment Policy adopted under Section 102(1) must state Council policies in respect of investments, including:

(a) The mix of investments,

(b) The acquisition of new investments,

(c) An outline of the procedures by which investments are managed and reported on to Council.

(d) An outline of how risks associated with investments are assessed and managed.

ObjectivesThe objectives of this Investment Policy are consistent with market best practices and will take into account the requirements of Council’s Annual Plan and Long-Term Plan. The key Investment Policy objectives are to:

∑ Prudently manage Council’s investment assets in the interests of the Council’s district and its inhabitants and ratepayers, only for lawful purposes and so as to safeguard against loss.

∑ Manage investments in accordance with the Local Government Act 2002; administer, manage and account for its funds and exercise the care, diligence and skill that a prudent person of business would exercise in managing the affairs of others.

∑ Maximise investment income within a prudent level of investment risk. Council recognises that as a responsible public authority any investments that it does hold should be of relatively low risk. It also recognises that lower risk generally means lower returns.

∑ Invest only in approved securities and asset classes as permitted by this policy. Accordingly, only creditworthy counterparties are acceptable.

∑ Ensure investments are maintained at an appropriate level of liquidity to enable the provision of cash flow when required.

∑ Minimise potential risk due to adverse interest rate movements.∑ Regularly review the performance and credit worthiness of all investments.


139

A3420180

∑ Maintain operational controls and procedures to best protect Council against financial loss, opportunity cost and other inefficiencies.

Investment Management and Internal ControlsCouncil approves policy parameters in relation to borrowing and investment activities.

In making any investment decisions the Group Manager Finance and Assurance considers:

∑ The desirability of diversifying investments.∑ The nature of existing investments.∑ The risk of capital loss or depreciation.∑ The potential for capital appreciation.∑ The likely income return.∑ The length of the term of the proposed investment.∑ The marketability of the proposed investment during, and on the determination of the

term of the proposed investment.∑ The effect of the proposed investment in relation to tax liability.∑ The likelihood of inflation affecting the value of the proposed investment.

Council’s Chief Executive has overall responsibility for the operations of Council.

The Group Manager Finance and Assurance has financial management responsibility over Council’s investments.

Investment PortfolioAn investment is an asset held by Council that provides service potential or future economic benefit to Council. Investments include property; ownership in Council related trading entities and financial assets. A financial asset is any asset that is cash or the contractual right to receive cash including the financial investment instruments.

Council invests in the following assets:

∑ Financial investments (excluding day to day cash management activity).∑ Property investments.∑ Cash and working capital management.

Financial InvestmentsCouncil maintains financial investments for the following primary reasons:

∑ Invest amounts allocated to special reserves.∑ Invest surplus cash and working capital funds.

The following are approved financial investments:

∑ Government investments (treasury bills, government stock).∑ New Zealand Registered Bank investments (call and term deposits, registered

certificates of deposit), subject to Counterparty Exposure Limits.∑ Local authority investments subject to Counterparty Exposure Limits.∑ State Owned Enterprise investments subject to Counterparty Exposure Limits.


140

A3420180

∑ Corporate investments (corporate bonds, promissory notes) subject to Counterparty Exposure Limits.

Acquisition/Disposition and Revenue

Interest income from financial investments is credited to general funds or special reserves and is included in the Statement of Comprehensive Revenue and Expenses.

Proceeds from the disposition of financial investments are used for operational and capital expenditure purposes or for the purpose for which they have been established, as approved in the Annual Plan or Long-Term Plan.

Management Procedures

Financial investment strategy is set by the Group Manager Finance and Assurance and implemented by the Finance Team of Council with day to day management centrally through its treasury function. The treasury function is broadly charged with the following responsibilities:

∑ Assist the Group Manager Finance and Assurance in developing its investment strategy by reviewing on a regular basis, cash flow forecasts incorporating plans for approved expenditure and strategic initiatives, evaluation of the outlook for interest rates and the shape of the yield curve, and where applicable, seeking appropriate financial advice.

∑ Develop and maintain professional relationships with the financial markets in general and Council’s main relationship bank in particular.

∑ Manage Council’s investments within its strategic objectives and ensure that surplus cash is invested in liquid and creditworthy instruments.

∑ Manage the impact of market risks such as interest rate risk and liquidity on Council’s investments and currency risk on investments by undertaking appropriate hedging activity in the financial markets.

∑ Minimise adverse interest rate related increases on ratepayer charges and maintain overall revenues within budgeted parameters.

∑ Manage the overall cash and liquidity position of Council’s operations.∑ Provide timely and accurate reporting of treasury activity and performance for

management and the Council.

Investment Risk: Credit Risk – Counterparty Exposure LimitsCouncil’s primary objective when investing is the protection of its capital. Accordingly, only creditworthy counterparties are acceptable. Creditworthy counterparties are selected on the basis of their Standard and Poor’s (S&P) rating except for unrated Local Authorities secured by charge over rates, which are governed by individual counterparty limits.


141

A3420180

More specifically, Council minimises its credit exposure by:

∑ Ensuring all investment, cash management, interest rate risk management and any foreign exchange transactions are undertaken with entities (excluding Government) that have a Standard and Poor’s (S&P) credit rating of at least A2 for short term and A- for long term except for unrated Local Authorities secured by charge over rates, which are governed by individual counterparty limits and State Owned Enterprises which must have minimum credit ratings of A2 and BBB respectively.

∑ Limiting total exposure to prescribed amounts and portfolio limits.∑ Rigorous monitoring of compliance against set limits.

Council approval is required to add to or delete from the counterparty exposure limits. The following table summarises credit requirements and limits:

InstitutionMinimum S&P

Short Term Credit Rating 1

Minimum S&P Long Term

Credit Rating 2

Total Exposure Limit for Each Counterparty

Portfolio Limit (% of Total Portfolio)

Government N/A N/A Unlimited 100%

New Zealand Registered Banks

ÿ On balance sheet exposures A2 AA- $35 million 80%

ÿ Off balance sheet exposures A2 AA- $10 million N/A

Strongly Rated Corporates, SOEs (on balance sheet exposures only), Local Authorities with rates as security (on balance sheet exposures only)

A2

(N/A for Local Authorities)

A-

(BBB for SOEs, N/A for Local Authorities)

$5 million

[Face Value]

50%

1. Short term refers to securities with a remaining maturity of 12 months or less.

2. Long term refers to securities with a remaining maturity of more than 12 months.

If any counterparty’s credit rating falls below the minimum specified in the above table then all practical steps are taken to reduce the credit exposure to that counterparty to zero as soon as possible or in any case within three months of the downgrade being notified. Exposures to each counter party are computed as follows:

On-Balance Sheet

∑ Total principal invested with that counterparty.∑ International equities currency exposure on foreign currency hedging converted on the

day at the spot rate.

Off-Balance Sheet

Credit exposure on interest rate contracts computed by multiplying face value of outstanding transactions by an interest rate movement factor of 5%, per calendar year or part thereof of the life of the instrument.


142

A3420180

Interest Rate RiskInterest rate risk refers to the impact that movements in interest rates can have on Council’s cash flows. Council’s financial investments give rise to direct exposure to interest rate movements. Interest rate risk is managed by Council as part of its overall investment strategy.

The following interest rate risk management instruments are approved by Council:

∑ Interest Rate Swaps.∑ Forward Rate Agreements.∑ Interest Rate Options on approved underlying instruments, eg on Interest Rate Swaps

or bonds.∑ Interest Rate Collar Strategy, but only where the ratio of the face value and interest rate

exposure on bought to sold legs is 1:1.

Council does not enter into incidental arrangements within or outside New Zealand in currency other than New Zealand currency.

Liquidity Risk

Liquidity risk management refers to the timely availability of funds to Council when needed, without incurring penalty costs.

Because of Council’s credit rating criteria, all investments would be readily saleable in the secondary market, which addresses Council’s liquidity requirements, even though there may be a pricing risk if there was a forced sale in adverse market conditions. Nevertheless, at least 25% of financial investments must mature within the ensuing 12 months.

The average duration* of the total investment portfolio would normally be between two and three years.

* Duration is a mathematically calculated term representing the average of the time weighted cash flows of the investment, discounted at current yields.

Property InvestmentsCouncil’s property investments include:

∑ Property owned by Council either for the development needs of the district or for investment purposes which could include land, buildings and ground leases.

Council’s primary objective for property owned for development needs or for investment purposes is that it is important for the economic, physical and social development of the Invercargill district and to achieve an acceptable rate of return. Council generally follows a similar assessment criteria in relation to the acquisition of new property investments.

Acquisition/Disposition and Revenue

Prior to acquisition of property for the development needs of the district or for investment purposes the property will be assessed as follows:

∑ Property for the development needs of the district – a financial and non financial assessment of economic, physical and social benefit to the district, the cost of owning the property and the cost of ownership and assessment.

∑ Investment property – a financial assessment including a calculation and assessment of the total cost of ownership, and the likely returns to be generated from that ownership.


143

A3420180

Proceeds from the disposition of property investments are used for retirement of debt relating to such property, or allocated to general funds, endowment funds or special funds. All income from property investments is shown in the Statement of Comprehensive Revenue and Expenses and forms part of general funds.

Management Reporting and ProceduresCouncil reviews the performance of its property investments on at least a six monthly basis, and ensures that the benefits of continued ownership are consistent with its stated objectives.

Investment RisksInsurance cover is held for all property investments. A risk assessment is carried out prior to acquisition of a property investment.

Cash and Working Capital ManagementCash management deals with the net balance in Council’s main bank accounts. The treasuryfunction is responsible for managing Council’s cash surpluses and/or deficits.

Council maintains a Daily Balancing Report (bank reconciliation) and short term and long term cash flow projections which are updated weekly and which form the basis of its cash management activity. Generally cash management surpluses are available for periods less than 90 days.

Cash management instruments are limited to:

∑ Call deposits with New Zealand Registered Banks.∑ Corporate Commercial Paper with a maturity less than three months.

∑ Term deposits (less than three months) with registered banks.∑ The use of interest rate risk management instruments on cash management balances

is not permitted.

Cash and the counterparties on cash management instruments may only be invested with approved counterparties within the limits detailed.


144

A3420180


Revision History: 21 November 2017 (A804694)




Supersedes: 2017 Investment Policy


Associated Documents/References:

Policy Owner: Invercargill City Council


145

A3420180

Appendix 1Approved Risk Management Instruments

Examples of the Use of Derivative Products

Forward Rate AgreementAn agreement between Council and counterparty (usually a bank) protecting Council against a future adverse interest rate movement. Council and the counterparty agree to a notional future principal amount, the future interest rate, the date and the benchmark rate, which is contained on the Reuters system.

ObjectiveTo provide Council with certainty as to its interest rate cost on an agreed principal amount for an agreed period. A Forward Rate Agreement (FRA) typically applies to a three month period, starting at some point within the next 12 months.

ExampleCouncil wishes to provide certainty on a portion of its floating rate borrowings over the event risk posed by an expected change in monetary policy at a point in the future. A borrower’s FRA is purchased in say, March, at 6.00% for protection through the June to September period. It is described as a 3X6 FRA, ie the rate applies to a borrowing for three months starting in three months’ time.

OutcomeIf on the rate set date in June, the three month interest rate has climbed to, say, 8.00%, Council receives the difference between this and the FRA rate of 6.00%. It then borrows at 8.00%, the payment received making the effective borrowing rate 6.00%, plus its margin.

Interest Rate SwapAn interest rate swap is an agreement between Council and a counterparty (usually a bank) protecting Council against a future adverse interest rate movement. Council pays (or receives) a fixed interest rate and receives (or pays) a floating interest rate. The parties agree to a notional principal amount, the future interest rate, the settlement dates and the benchmark floating rate, which is usually off the Reuters page containing the daily rate sets for BKBM (bank bill reference rates).


146

A3420180

ObjectiveTo provide Council with certainty as to its interest rate cost on an agreed principal amount for an agreed period. Floating rate sets are typically every three or six months over the life of the swap.

ExampleCouncil fixes its interest rate for three years at 6.50%, on a quarterly basis on a portion of its planned borrowings by entering into a three year 6.50% fixed rate swap. The floating rate reference is three month BKBM.

OutcomeOn a swap-reset date, the three month bank bill rate is at, say 4.75%. Council borrows from its bank the principal, for three months at 4.75% plus Council’s margin. At the same time the bank pays Council 4.75% on the principal amount for a three month period. Council then pays the bank 6.50% on the principal amount for a three month period. This means that Council’s effective interest rate is 6.50% plus its margin. In practice cashflows would be netted off if the swap and the underlying borrowing facility were with the same bank.

Interest Rate CollarThe combined purchase (or sale) of a cap or a floor with the sale (or purchase) of another floor or cap. Unlike an outright option purchase there is no premium payable but conversely participation in favourable movements is limited.

ObjectiveTo provide Council with certainty as to its interest rate cost on an agreed principal amount for an agreed period, but at the same time avoid the need to pay an up front premium.

ExampleCouncil wishes to secure a worst case borrowing rate of 7.50% for the next five years, but wishes to avoid paying a premium. In exchange for the worst case protection at 7.50%, Council accepts a best case outcome at 6.00%. In this structure Council has bought and sold options, with the respective option premiums offsetting each other. On each quarterly rate set date Council will have a rate between 6.00% and 7.50%, the parameters of the collar.

OutcomeIf on each rate set date the three month interest rate is in excess of 7.50% Council exercises its option and pays 7.50%, for that three month period, its worst case rate. If on each rate set date the three month interest rate is below 6.00%, the bank exercises its option on Council and Council pays 6.00%, Council’s best case rate. If on any rate set date the three month interest rate is between 6.00% and 7.50%, Council borrows at the market rate.


147

A3406610



AUTHORISED BY: PETE THOMPSON, EXECUTIVE MANAGER – OFFICE OF THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE


ADOPTION OF SIGNIFICANCE AND ENGAGEMENT POLICY

SUMMARY

The Significance and Engagement Policy is appended for adoption following consultation.

RECOMMENDATIONS


1. Receive the report “Adoption of Significance and Engagement Policy”.

2. Note the submissions and feedback received, as well as recommended changes to the policy as a result.

3. Adopt the Significance and Engagement Policy (A3418918), noting the intention that a final graphically designed version will be created following adoption.

IMPLICATIONS


Yes


No


Yes


Underpins how Council will assess significance and consultation requirements for all areas of Council business.



Performance, Policy and Partnerships Committee - Public - Adoption of Significance and Engagement Policy (A3406610)

148

A3406610


No immediate financial implications, however it is noted that meeting increased public expectations for engagement will require increased resource in the Strategy and Policy team over time.

BACKGROUND

Council is required to have a Significance and Engagement Policy under Section 76AA of the Local Government Act 2002, which states:

(1) Every local authority must adopt a policy setting out—(a) that local authority’s general approach to determining the significance of

proposals and decisions in relation to issues, assets, and other matters; and(b) any criteria or procedures that are to be used by the local authority in assessing

the extent to which issues, proposals, assets, decisions, or activities are significant or may have significant consequences; and

(c) how the local authority will respond to community preferences about engagement on decisions relating to specific issues, assets, or other matters, including the form of consultation that may be desirable; and

(d) how the local authority will engage with communities on other matters.(2) The purpose of the policy is—

(a) to enable the local authority and its communities to identify the degree ofsignificance attached to particular issues, proposals, assets, decisions, andactivities; and

(b) to provide clarity about how and when communities can expect to be engaged indecisions about different issues, assets, or other matters; and

(c) to inform the local authority from the beginning of a decision-making processabout—(i) the extent of any public engagement that is expected before a particular

decision is made; and(ii) the form or type of engagement required.

Council made a number of changes to the Significance and Engagement Policy on this occasion, including: - Incorporating more detail on engagement with Maori at the core of the policy- Simplifying the approach to determining significance- Revising the strategic assets list- Developing Councillors Principles of Engagement- Providing a more comprehensive list of exclusions to engagement- Providing more details on the engagement process- Inclusion of relevant sections of the Local Government Act.

Consultation on the Significance and Engagement Policy has been completed. It will next be due for review in six years.

FEEDBACK RECEIVED DURING CONSULTATION AND OFFICER RESPONSE

Six submissions were received on the Significance and Engagement Policy. They are provided in full as an appendix to this report. Of these, some were general or on another aspect of the Long-term Plan. One submitter noted that they believed that Council needed to provide seats for Mana Whenua on Council with full voting rights. They also suggested a change to the strategic assets list to include natural assets.


149

A3406610

It is noted that Council has already determined to consider to provide Mana Whenua seats and that this process has been commenced with discussions with Mana Whenua.

It is not recommended to make any change to the list of strategic assets at this time as the purpose and uses of the strategic assets list is guided by the legislation.

Other submitters noted that more needed to be done to make it easy to engage and understand changes and progress between LTP. Both these matters are being addressed through this Long-term Planning process, as part of moving to a continuous planning approach.

The Significance and Engagement Policy was a matter of priority for Tangata Whenua and was the subject of discussion at the public engagement event at Murihiku Marae on 19 April and at a follow up hui between Mana Whenua and Councillors Darren Ludlow and Rebecca Amundsen and Council officers on 13 May 2021. The feedback raised as part of these discussions is outlined below.

In addition methods of consultation and engagement, and the needs of particular groups, including disabled people, younger people and older people, as well as retailers and business, was touched on as part of general submissions on the Long-term Plan. These submissions varied from feedback that Council needs to engage and consult more, consult differently and feedback from some that Council consults too much and should just get on with decision making and implementation. No changes are proposed as a result of this general feedback.

Proposed changes as a result of engagement with Mana Whenua

Mana Whenua have given positive feedback on the statement on engagement with Maori being included within the Significance and Engagement Policy.

In response to a request for changes, Councillors Ludlow and Amundsen worked together with Mana Whenua to develop changes which included:- Clarification of wording recognising the role of Waihōpai Rūnaka and Te Rūnanga o

Awarua as representatives of Takata Whenua- Noting the commitment of Council to engage with all Maori, both Takata Whenua and

Mataa Waka.- Use of the Ngai Tahu “k” for “Ng” in key words such as Takata whenua/ tangata

whenua and taoka/taonga.. - Support for the use and understanding of the principle of Te Mana o te Wai,

CONCLUSION

Following consultation, the revised Significance and Engagement Policy is appended and recommended to be adopted.


150

A3406610

Appendix: Submissions received on the Significance and Engagement Policy

Shane

ICC don't listen so it is just a tickbox exercise for them

Henry James Tudor

Its hard to follow. On your web site we seem to have a long term plan popping up every two years and when I try to see where we are at between then there is no correlation.

Jamie Bulling

Laughable

Matt Couldrey


Kirsten Diack

Not enough is done in relation to consulting. The community are screaming out for change and aren't being heard.

Unnamed

I would support both runaka having a seat at the council table and not as an advisor, as a councillor, having equal voting rights and guidance on all decisions within ICC. I would also like to see a basic level of significant assets that aren't commercial but of huge value to our wellbeing. For example, listing our whenua, different land parcels or 'reserves' we may own that are not currently protected by a reserve status, should be listed and notified if any discussion or potential sale/subdivision be considered within council. At times this is worthwhile but it like to understand this further.


151

SIGNIFICANCE AND ENGAGEMENT POLICY

Effective from 9 June 2021

1A3418918

Purpose

To identify Council’s approach to determining the significance of proposals and decisions in relation to issues, assets, activities or other matters.

To let the Community know when and how they can expect to be engaged in Council’s decision-making processes.

To act as a guide to Council and Council staff as to what extent, form and type of engagement is required from the beginning of a decision-making process.

Definitions

Community May be a community of place or a community of issue. The ‘community / communities’ to be engaged with on any particular decision will be identified in light of the issue being discussed.

Consultation Is used within this policy, to refer to two a specific type of engagement which has legal requirements for how it must be operated under Schedule 82 and 83. Consultation may take place within a broader engagement process, as during the Long-term Plan process.

Engagement Is a term used to describe the process of establishing relationships, and seeking information from the community to inform and assist decision making. Engagement is an important part of participatory democracy within which there is a continuum of community involvement.

Mana Whenua Refers to the two papatipu rūnaka, Waihōpai Rūnaka and Te Rūnanga o Awarua, who hold customary authority over the City of Invercargill, which includes Bluff.

Significance In relation to any issue, proposal, decision, activity, asset or other matter that concerns, or is before a local authority, means the degree of importance of the issue, proposal, decision, or matter as assessed


152

A3418918

by Council, in terms of its likely impact on, and likely consequences for:

∑ Invercargill City.∑ Any persons who are likely to be particularly affected by, or

interested in, the issue, proposal, decision or matter.∑ The capacity of the Invercargill City Council to perform its role,

and the financial and other costs of doing so.

Significant In relation to any issue, proposal, decision, or other matter, means that it has a high degree of significance.

Special ConsultativeProcedure A formal consultation process prescribed in section 83 of the LGA (see

Schedule 4) that must be used to consult on certain matters and can be chosen by the Council to consult on other matters as considered appropriate.

Strategic Asset An asset or group of assets that Invercargill City Council needs to retain if it is to maintain its capacity to achieve or promote any outcome that it has determined to be important to the current or future wellbeing of the community. The assets that Council considers ‘strategic’ are listed in Schedule 1.

Takata Whenua Tangata Whenua, means the iwi or hapū of a particular area.

Taoka Taonga, means treasure or anything highly prized.

Tikaka Māori Tikanga Māori, means Māori customary values and practices.


153

A3418918

Engagement with Māori

The role of Māori, and Ngāi Tahu (“Kāi Tahu”), as Takata Whenua, as represented by Waihōpai Rūnaka and Te Rūnanga o Awarua, as a partner of Council is recognised.

The LGA recognises and respects the Crown’s obligations under the Treaty of Waitangi by placing some specific obligations on councils. These obligations are intended to facilitate participation by Māori in local authorities’ decision-making processes (sections 4, 81 and 82(2), LGA). The Act includes requirements for councils to: ∑ ensure they provide opportunities for Māori to contribute to decision-making processes;∑ establish and maintain processes for Māori to contribute to decision-making;∑ consider ways in which they can foster the development of Māori capacity to contribute to

decision-making processes;∑ provide relevant information to Māori;∑ take into account the relationship of Māori and their culture and traditions with their

ancestral land, water, sites, wāhi tapu, valued flora and fauna, and other taoka.

The Council will establish and maintain engagement processes that identify and provide opportunities for Māori to contribute to decision-making. In addition to the engagement principles and practices set out in this policy, Council will: ∑ Strengthen and improve ongoing relationships and partnerships with Iwi in the Waihōpai

takiwā, including, but not limited to, engagement with Waihōpai Rūnaka and Te Rūnanga o Awarua.

∑ Strengthen and improve ongoing relationships with Mataa Waka.∑ Ongoing support for Te Ao Marama Inc. ∑ Consider the impact on Māori of specific decisions, proposals or matters, in particular

recognising the special connection of Takata Whenua and their culture and traditions with their ancestral land, water, sites, wāhi tapu, valued flora and fauna, and other taoka.

∑ Recognise legal obligations for engagement with Māori under various legislation including, but not limited to, the Local Government Act 2002 and Resource Management Act 1991.

∑ Recognise agreements such as the Charter of Understanding and other agreements (Mana Whakahono ā Rohe or Joint Management Agreements) developed with Māori as they relate to decision-making processes.

∑ Support appropriate use of tikaka (cultural protocols) and te reo Māori (Māori language) in our daily business and engagement tools and practices.

∑ Provide for Mana Whenua positions on Council’s standing committees and hearings panels as appropriate to ensure direct Māori involvement in decision-making.

∑ Support the implementation, use and understanding of Te Tangi a Tauira – The Cry of the People Ngāi Tahu ki Murihiku Resource and Environmental Management Plan 2008or any subsequent Iwi Management Plans.

∑ Support the use and understanding of Te Mana o te Wai, recognising the primary responsibility of Environment Southland in this area.

Development of Māori capacity to contribute to the decision-making processes of the local authority.

Council is committed to development of Māori Capacity to contribute to the decision making process of the local authority. These opportunities include:

• Provision of information to Māori to underpin processes that assist effective contribution to the decision-making processes of Invercargill City Council;

• Building capacity to enable contribution of Māori to the decision-making processes of Invercargill City Council. Related to this process is the need for Invercargill City Council


154

A3418918

to gain a clear understanding of expectations through hui and ongoing relationships with Māori to agree and commit to practicable steps to building capacity.

• Supporting projects initiated by Māori that involve direct management of the district’s natural resources.

• Ongoing consideration on a case by case basis for the provision of support to assist Māori with resourcing, opportunities for training, engagement and promotion of matters that are of mutual benefit;

• Effective and efficient consultation to improve existing relationships, processes and protocols related to local government and resource management issues.

Approach to Determining Significance

The decision on a matter’s significance rests with Council.

When undertaking a process to determine the extent to which issues, proposals, decisions or other matters are significant; staff will prepare a report against the thresholds and criteria listed below for consideration by and presentation to Council.

Council will evaluate the significance of each proposal or decision it makes on a case-by-case basis. Decisions of low significance, including some decisions made under delegated authority, may not explicitly state the degree of significance.

Significance and engagement will be considered in the early stages of a proposal before decision making occurs and, if necessary, reconsidered as the proposal develops. Differing levels of engagement may be required during the varying phases of decision-making on an issue, and for different stakeholders.


155

A3418918

The Council will determine Significance in two ways outlined in A and B:

A. Assessment

Thresholds and criteria for determining Significance:

HIGHLARGE IMPACT

DEGREE OFSIGNIFICANCE

LOWLITTLE IMPACT

∑ Importance to the Invercargill City Council – the extent to which the matters impact on the social, cultural, economic or environmental welling of the district.

∑ Community Interest – the extent to which individuals, organisations, groups and sectors in the community are affected by the Council’s decisions.

∑ Inconsistency with existing policy and strategy – the extent of inconsistency and the likely impact.

∑ The impact on the Council’s capability and capacity – the impact on the objectives set out in the Financial Strategy, Ten Year Plan and Annual Plan.

∑ Cost to Council and impact on funders, including ratepayers.

Council officers will need to consider each of the five criteria and make a recommendation about the decision’s significance to the elected members.

The final decision about the significance of any matter rests with elected members.

When making this determination other factors may also need to be considered; e.g. urgency,uncertainty, reversibility, safety, commercial sensitivity and public good.

B. Strategic Assets

Any decision relating to the sale or transfer or sale of shareholding of any significant strategic assets is assessed as a matter of high impact and will trigger the Special Consultation Process. To clarify:

∑ Any decision that transfers or changes ownership or control of strategic assets to or from the Council.

∑ The sale or transfer of shareholding of any of the Significant Strategic Assets (outlined in Schedule 1).

∑ Any long term lease of strategic assets (other than land).


156

A3418918

Approach to Engagement

This section lays out Council’s approach to engagement. It includes the following areas:- The Council’s principles of engagement- Process to determine the type of engagement most appropriate- Guidance for undertaking engagement

Principles of Engagement

This is what you can expect from us: ∑ We will take a partnership approach to develop open and transparent relationships with

Mana Whenua. ∑ We will go where the people are, at events in different locations and online. ∑ We will be genuine in our consultation and engagement, using active listening and

different approaches to engagement. ∑ We will have an open mind to community feedback before making decisions and will

explain clearly how we will use the feedback we get to help us make decisions.∑ We will give our community a timely opportunity to have a say. ∑ We will give consideration to the views and preferences of persons likely to be effected

by, or to have an interest in the matter. ∑ We will provide feedback to those who made the effort to give us their opinions and we

will explain our decisions.

We want to engage and consult with the community appropriately, which includes doing what we can to make it easy to approach Council, as well as avoiding consultation fatigue through over-consulting.


157

A3418918

Engagement Assessment Criteria

Community engagement occurs across a spectrum at differing levels, Council has adapted the IAP2 Spectrum of Engagement for our use. Council will determine what level of engagement is appropriate for each decision or matter on a case by case basis using theapproach to engagement above. The five levels Council will consider are:

Level Goal Council’s Promise

Inform To provide the public with balanced and objective information to assist them in understanding the problems, alternatives, opportunities or solutions.

At this level, Council’s promise is that we will keep the Community informed.

Consult To obtain public feedback on analysis, alternatives or decisions.

At this level, Council’s promise is that we will keep the Community informed, listen to and acknowledge concerns and provide feedback on how public input influenced the decision.

Involve To work directly with the public throughout the process to ensure the public concerns and aspirations are consistently understood and considered.

At this level, Council’s promise is that we will work with the Community to ensure that their concerns and aspirations are directly reflected in the alternatives developed and provide feedback on how public input influenced the decision.

Collaborate To partner with the public in each aspect of the decision including the development of alternatives and the identification of the preferred solution.

At this level, Council’s promise is that we will look to the Community for direct advice and innovation in formulating solutions and incorporate the Community’s advice and recommendation in to the decisions to the maximum extent possible.

Empower To place final decision-making in the hands of the public.

At this level, Council’s promise is that we will implement what the Community decides.


158

A3418918

Process for determining the appropriate engagement approach

The Strategy and Policy team will support managers to determine an appropriate level of engagement and implement the engagement process.

To ensure that our approach to engagement is targeted at the right level Council will consider:

∑ 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;

∑ that Maori are a partner in any engagement and we will work with Iwi to determine the level of engagement required on each issue or matter determined to be significant.

∑ the extent to which the current views and preferences of persons who will or may be affected by, or have an interest in, the decision or matter are known to the local authority;

∑ if any circumstances exist in which there is good reason for withholding local authority information (in accordance with the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987); and

∑ the costs and benefits of any consultation process or procedure.

It will not always be appropriate or practicable to conduct processes at the participatory / empower end of the consultation continuum. Many minor issues will not warrant a participatory approach and constraints of time and money will also limit what is possible on some occasions.

Council will assess each situation and determine the appropriate engagement tools. The range of tools that Council will consider using at each level of the spectrum is included in Schedule 2.

The diagram below shows the decision making process which will be followed to determine the appropriate level of engagement.


159

A3418918


160

A3418918

What you can expect from engagement

Each engagement will be planned at the level most appropriate. Schedule 2 outlines the different types of engagement which Council may use in different circumstances.

Below are some general principles which the Council will follow.

You can expect that if we ask your views, we will always let you know:

∑ What is proposed? ∑ Why? ∑ Where relevant, what options we have? ∑ Our preferred option and why? ∑ Costs and rating impact if any. ∑ What are the impacts (if any)? ∑ How the community can have a say? ∑ The timeframe and process. ∑ How we will communicate the outcome.

∑ Council will provide information in a range of formats and provide a range of options for sharing your views

∑ Hearings will be held in Council Chambers and the Council can also allow any person to present his or her views by way of audio link or audio-visual link.

∑ If we’re asked to do so, the Council will facilitate interpretation (including Te Reo and sign language).

∑ We will make available decisions online.∑ For those who wish to receive feedback on the process there is the option to sign up to

the Council engagement e-newsletter.

What is the Special Consultative Procedure Requirement?

This is a formal consultation process that is triggered when a decision is deemed significant (as described above). Under the SCP, we must: ∑ Develop a Statement of Proposal and Summary, and make it widely available. ∑ Allow a minimum feedback period of one month. ∑ Ensure people are given the opportunity to present their views to elected members at a

hearing.

The law requires us to adopt the Special Consultative Procedure for:∑ Making, amending or revoking a bylaw1∑ Transferring Council’s ownership of a significant strategic asset (see the list above and

also Schedule 1).∑ Adopting the Treasury Management Policy∑ Other acts if expressly required by laws∑ Adopting and amending our Long-term Plan

In certain circumstances, Council is legislatively required to consult using the Special Consultative Procedure prescribed in Section 83 of the Local Government Act. One example

1 According to the Local Government Act Part 8: Section 156 (see Appendix 2c), The Council does not need to use the Special Consultative Procedure if the change is minor or a correction of an error. In such a case, the minor change can be made by resolution, publicly notified.


161

A3418918

of circumstances where the Special Consultative Procedure must be used is when making decisions on transferring the ownership or control of strategic assets, as listed in Schedule 1.

When using the Special Consultative Procedure, Council prepares a proposal and advertises it for public submission. Submissions on the proposal can be received from anybody and the time period for receiving submissions is at least a month. People who have submitted can also request to speak to the Council regarding their submission and this is done through a Hearing Process. After considering all submissions the Council then makes a decision to adopt, amend or reject the proposal.


162

A3418918

When Council May Not Seek Additional Information On Community Views

There are times when it is not necessary, appropriate or possible to seek additional information on community views. If this is the case, Council will make this determination in accordance with the criteria below.

The Council will not identify community views when:

∑ The matter is not of a nature or significance that requires consultation (LGA 2002, s82(4)(c)

∑ The Council already has a sound understanding of the views and preferences of the persons likely to be affected by or interested in the matter (s82(4)(b) LGA 2002);

∑ There is a need for confidentiality or commercial sensitivity (s82(4)(d) LGA 2002); ∑ The costs of consultation outweigh the benefits of it (s82(4)(e) LGA 2002); ∑ Entry or exit from a development agreement (private contract) as per section 207A Local

Government Act 2002. ∑ Emergency management activities during a state of emergency – Civil Defence

Emergency Management Act 2002. ∑ Decisions to act where it is necessary to –

ÿ comply with the law; ÿ save or protect life, health or amenity; ÿ prevent serious damage to property; ÿ avoid, remedy or mitigate an adverse effect on the environment;ÿ Protect the integrity of existing and future infrastructure and amenity.

∑ Decisions in relation to regulatory and enforcement activities. ∑ Engagement will not be beneficial as it will not influence the decision (for example if

there is only one or very limited viable options available, there may be no benefit in engaging with the community);

∑ An immediate or quick response or decision is needed or it is not reasonably practicable to engage;

∑ Works are required unexpectedly or following further investigations on projects, already approved by the Council;

∑ Business as usual - the works required are related to the operation and maintenance of a Council asset and responsible management requires the works to take place;

∑ When Council has consulted on the unchanged issue in the last three years.∑ Where we are not required to consult by law, we can consider making a decision without

consultation on a case-by-case basis.


163

A3418918

Exception to Procedure for Determining Significance and Undertaking Engagement

The Local Government Act provides for Council to consider the practicality of undertaking extensive consultation, considering the range of options, and obtaining the views and preferences of other people. In some circumstances, failure to make an urgent decision would result in an inability to achieve the intended outcomes and a loss of opportunity.

Where an urgent decision must be made, Council will tailor its decision–making process to include as much consultation and evaluation as is practicable within the specified timeframe. If, due to time limitations, a potentially significant decision is made without extensive consultation, Council will communicate the details of the decision to the public at a level appropriate to the nature of the matter.

Where a decision is made or is to be made that is significantly inconsistent with this policy, Council when making the decision will identify the inconsistency and the reason for the inconsistency.




Supersedes: Significance and Engagement Policy 2014





164

A3418918

Schedule 1Strategic Assets

∑ Electricity Invercargill Limited∑ Invercargill Airport Limited (97.2% Council ownership)∑ Invercargill City Holdings Limited∑ Invercargill Public Library and Archive – Buildings and Collections∑ Invercargill Waste Transfer Station∑ Roading Network and Connected Infrastructure ∑ Sewerage Networks and Treatment Plants∑ Stormwater Networks in Invercargill and Bluff∑ Stormwater system in Otatara∑ Water Treatment, Storage and Supply Network

Under Section 97 of the Local Government Act, any decision to transfer the ownership or control of a strategic asset to or from Council can only be made if the decision has been explicitly provided for by a statement of proposal in Council’s Long Term Plan. The strategic assets defined above are the asset in total and not any individual element of the asset. Section 97 will only apply to any decision being made on the strategic asset as a whole or a major sub-part of the asset. The strategic asset is the asset that is listed as a strategic asset in the above list. For example, Council’s strategic asset for Electricity Invercargill Limited (EIL) is the shareholding in the parent company (EIL) and not its shareholdings in its associates or joint ventures (for example PowerNet, Otago Power Services Limited).


165

A3418918

Schedule 2Types of Engagement

Please note: This is not a definitive list. Techniques not listed here may be used in addition to those listed below:

Inform

∑ Social media (Facebook and Instagram) posts/stories∑ Paid ads via Social media∑ Newspapers / public notice / noticeboard∑ Websites / internet ∑ Radio∑ Flyers / posters / invitations/ brochures∑ Public information sessions∑ Press statements∑ Displays / installations∑ Community Road Shows∑ Coffee & chat / Q & A sessions∑ Information sent with Rates Notices∑ Email

Consult / Involve

∑ Written and oral submissions∑ Surveys∑ Social media/ online discussion tools∑ Referenda∑ Formal public meetings∑ Focus groups / working panels / Local action groups / task groups∑ Multi Stakeholder Processes such as:

ÿ Open house eventsÿ Meetings with existing groups

∑ Citizens Juries / Panels / Charette (Group of 12-25 people representative of a community, brought together for three to five day to consider an issue)

∑ Advisory groups

Collaborate

∑ Partnerships for major project delivery∑ Membership on governing boards∑ Co-creation/design of projects∑ Working groups

Note, at present the Council does not utilise techniques in the empower space, although this may change in the future. Techniques listed as appropriate in one level may be used in any of the other levels where this will best achieve the purpose of the engagement.


166

A3418918

Schedule 3International Association of Public Participation (IAP2)

The International Association of Public Participation (IAP2) is an association that works with different groups whom undertake public consultation and engagement. They are involved in the public participation process by supporting clients, colleagues and citizen’s decision-making process.

The Invercargill City Council has determined to base its Engagement on the core values established by IAP2 as outlined below:

∑ Public participation is based on the belief that those who are affected by a decision have a right to be involved in the decision-making process.

∑ Public participation includes the promise that the public’s contribution will influence the decision.

∑ Public participation promotes sustainable decisions by recognising and communicating the needs and interests of all participants, including decision makers.

∑ Public participation seeks out and facilitates the involvement of those potentially affected by or interested in a decision.

∑ Public participation seeks input from participants in designing how they participate.∑ Public participation provides participants with the information they need to participate in

a meaningful way.∑ Public participation communicates to participants how their input affected the decision.

Council has adapted the IAP2 Spectrum of Engagement for its use (included in the main Policy). IAP2’s Public Participation Spectrum is designed to assist with the selection of the level of participation that defines the public’s role in any community engagement process. The Spectrum shows that differing levels of participation are legitimate depending on the goals, time frames, resource and levels of concern in the decision to be made.

You can find out more about IAP2 by visiting their website - www.iap2.org.PNDIX 1


167

http://www.iap2.org/

A3418918

Schedule 4Local Government Act 2002

Relevant sections from the Local Government Act 2002 which relate to this policy being: ∑ 76AA Significance and Engagement Policy∑ 81 Contributions to decision-making processes by Maori ∑ 82 Principles of Consultation∑ 83 Special Consultative Procedure ∑ 86 Use of special consultative procedure in relation to making, amending, or revoking

bylaws ∑ 156 Consultation requirements when making, amending, or revoking bylaws made

under this Act

76AA Significance and engagement policy(1) Every local authority must adopt a policy setting out—

(a) that local authority’s general approach to determining the significance of proposals and decisions in relation to issues, assets, and other matters; and

(b) any criteria or procedures that are to be used by the local authority in assessing the extent to which issues, proposals, assets, decisions, or activities are significant or may have significant consequences; and

(c) how the local authority will respond to community preferences about engagement on decisions relating to specific issues, assets, or other matters, including the form of consultation that may be desirable; and

(d) how the local authority will engage with communities on other matters.(2) The purpose of the policy is—

(a) to enable the local authority and its communities to identify the degree of significanceattached to particular issues, proposals, assets, decisions, and activities; and

(b) to provide clarity about how and when communities can expect to be engaged indecisions about different issues, assets, or other matters; and

(c) to inform the local authority from the beginning of a decision-making process about—(i) the extent of any public engagement that is expected before a particular decision

is made; and(ii) the form or type of engagement required.

(3) The policy adopted under subsection (1) must list the assets considered by the local authority to be strategic assets.

(4) A policy adopted under subsection (1) may be amended from time to time.(5) When adopting or amending a policy under this section, the local authority must consult

in accordance with section 82 unless it considers on reasonable grounds that it has sufficient information about community interests and preferences to enable the purpose of the policy to be achieved.

(6) To avoid doubt, section 80 applies when a local authority deviates from this policy.


168

http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/2002/0084/latest/link.aspx?id=DLM172327#DLM172327


A3418918

81 Contributions to decision-making processes by Māori(1) A local authority must—

(a) establish and maintain processes to provide opportunities for Māori to contribute tothe decision-making processes of the local authority; and

(b) consider ways in which it may foster the development of Māori capacity to contributeto the decision-making processes of the local authority; and

(c) provide relevant information to Māori for the purposes of paragraphs (a) and (b).(2) A local authority, in exercising its responsibility to make judgments about the manner in

which subsection (1) is to be complied with, must have regard to—(a) the role of the local authority, as set out in section 11; and(b) such other matters as the local authority considers on reasonable grounds to be

relevant to those judgments.

82 Principles of consultation(1) Consultation that a local authority undertakes in relation to any decision or other matter

must be undertaken, subject to subsections (3) to (5), in accordance with the following principles:(a) 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 relevantinformation in a manner and format that is appropriate to the preferences and needsof those persons:

(b) that persons who will or may be affected by, or have an interest in, the decision ormatter should be encouraged by the local authority to present their views to the localauthority:

(c) that persons who are invited or encouraged to present their views to the localauthority should be given clear information by the local authority concerning thepurpose of the consultation and the scope of the decisions to be taken following theconsideration of views presented:

(d) that persons who wish to have their views on the decision or matter considered bythe local authority should be provided by the local authority with a reasonableopportunity to present those views to the local authority in a manner and format thatis appropriate to the preferences and needs of those persons:

(e) that the views presented to the local authority should be received by the localauthority with an open mind and should be given by the local authority, in making adecision, due consideration:

(f) that persons who present views to the local authority should have access to a clearrecord or description of relevant decisions made by the local authority andexplanatory material relating to the decisions, which may include, for example,reports relating to the matter that were considered before the decisions were made.

(2) A local authority must ensure that it has in place processes for consulting with Māori in accordance with subsection (1).

(3) The principles set out in subsection (1) are, subject to subsections (4) and (5), to be observed by a local authority in such manner as the local authority considers, in its discretion, to be appropriate in any particular instance.

(4) A local authority must, in exercising its discretion under subsection (3), have regard to—(a) The requirements of section 78; and


169


http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/2002/0084/latest/link.aspx?search=sw_096be8ed81a293a2_%22strategic+asset%22_25_se&p=1&id=DLM172321#DLM172321

A3418918

(b the extent to which the current views and preferences of persons who will or may be affected by, or have an interest in, the decision or matter are known to the local authority; and

(c) 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; and

(d) the provisions of Part 1 of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 (which Part, among other things, sets out the circumstances in which there is good reason for withholding local authority information); and

(e) the costs and benefits of any consultation process or procedure.

(5 Where a local authority is authorised or required by this Act or any other enactment to undertake consultation in relation to any decision or matter and the procedure in respect of that consultation is prescribed by this Act or any other enactment, such of the provisions of the principles set out in subsection (1) as are inconsistent with specific requirements of the procedure so prescribed are not to be observed by the local authority in respect of that consultation.

83 Special consultative procedure(1) Where this Act or any other enactment requires a local authority to use or adopt the

special consultative procedure, that local authority must—(a) prepare and adopt—

(i) a statement of proposal; and(ii) if the local authority considers on reasonable grounds that it is necessary to

enable public understanding of the proposal, a summary of the information contained in the statement of proposal (which summary must comply with section83AA); and

(b) ensure that the following is publicly available:(i) the statement of proposal; and(ii) a description of how the local authority will provide persons interested in the

proposal with an opportunity to present their views to the local authority in accordance with section 82(1)(d); and

(iii) a statement of the period within which views on the proposal may be provided tothe local authority (the period being not less than 1 month from the date the statement is issued); and

(c) make the summary of the information contained in the statement of proposal prepared in accordance with paragraph (a)(ii) (or the statement of proposal, if a summary is not prepared) as widely available as is reasonably practicable as a basis for consultation; and

(d) provide an opportunity for persons to present their views to the local authority in a manner that enables spoken (or New Zealand sign language) interaction between the person and the local authority, or any representatives to whom an appropriate delegation has been made in accordance with Schedule 7; and

(e) ensure that any person who wishes to present his or her views to the local authority or its representatives as described in paragraph (d)—(i) is given a reasonable opportunity to do so; and(ii) is informed about how and when he or she may take up that opportunity.


170

http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/2002/0084/latest/link.aspx?search=sw_096be8ed81a293a2_%22strategic+asset%22_25_se&p=1&id=DLM122284#DLM122284




A3418918

(2) For the purpose of, but without limiting, subsection (1)(d), a local authority may allow any person to present his or her views to the local authority by way of audio link or audiovisual link.

(3) This section does not prevent a local authority from requesting or considering, before making a decision, comment or advice from an officer of the local authority or any other person in respect of the proposal or any views on the proposal, or both.

86 Use of special consultative procedure in relation to making, amending, or revoking bylaws

(1) This section applies if, in accordance with section 156(1)(a), the special consultative procedure is required to be used in relation to the making, amending, or revoking of a bylaw.

(2) The statement of proposal referred to in section 83(1)(a) must include,—(a) as the case may be,—

(i) a draft of the bylaw as proposed to be made or amended; or(ii) a statement that the bylaw is to be revoked; and

(b) the reasons for the proposal; and(c) a report on any relevant determinations by the local authority under section 155.

156 Consultation requirements when making, amending, or revoking bylaws made under this Act

(1) When making a bylaw under this Act or amending or revoking a bylaw made under this Act, a local authority must—(a) use the special consultative procedure (as modified by section 86) if—

(i) the bylaw concerns a matter identified in the local authority’s policy under section76AA as being of significant interest to the public; or

(ii) the local authority considers that there is, or is likely to be, a significant impact on the public due to the proposed bylaw or changes to, or revocation of, the bylaw; and

(b) in any case in which paragraph (a) does not apply, consult in a manner that giveseffect to the requirements of section 82.

(2) Despite subsection (1), a local authority may, by resolution publicly notified,—(a) make minor changes to, or correct errors in, a bylaw, but only if the changes or

corrections do not affect—(i) an existing right, interest, title, immunity, or duty of any person to whom the bylaw

applies; or(ii) an existing status or capacity of any person to whom the bylaw applies:

(b) convert an imperial weight or measure specified in a bylaw into its metric equivalent or near metric equivalent.


171








A3417919



AUTHORISED BY: MICHAEL DAY, GROUP MANAGER – FINANCE AND ASSURANCE


CONFIRMATION OF REVENUE AND FINANCE POLICY

SUMMARY

The Revenue and Finance Policy is appended for confirmation following consultation, noting that it will be adopted by Council alongside the Long-term Plan on 30 June 2021.

RECOMMENDATIONS


1. Receive the report “Confirmation of Revenue and Finance Policy”.

2. Note the submissions and feedback received, as well as recommended changes to the Policy as a result.

3. Confirm the Revenue and Finance Policy (Appendix 1 - A3275564) noting that it is required to be adopted by Council alongside the Long-term Plan on 30 June 2021.

IMPLICATIONS


Yes


No


Yes


The Revenue and Finance Policy is a required policy as part of the Long-term Plan process and aligns with the Financial Strategy, the Rating policy, the Liabilities Policy and the Investments Policy.

Performance, Policy and Partnerships Committee - Public - Confirmation of Revenue and Finance Policy (A3417919)

172

A3417919




None.

BACKGROUND

Council is required to have a Revenue and Finance under sections 102(1) and 103 of the Local Government Act 2002.

The Council’s sources of revenue are listed under section 103(2) of the Local Government Act 2002:

(2) The sources referred to in subsection (1) are as follows:

(a) general rates, including—(i) choice of valuation system; and(ii) differential rating; and(iii) uniform annual general charges:

(b) targeted rates:(ba) lump sum contributions:(c) fees and charges:(d) interest and dividends from investments:(e) borrowing:(f) proceeds from asset sales:(g) development contributions:(h) financial contributions under the Resource Management Act 1991:(i) grants and subsidies:(ia) regional fuel taxes under the Land Transport Management Act 2003:(j) any other source.

Consultation on the Revenue and Finance Policy took place alongside the Long-term Plan between 30 March and 3 May 2021. The policy will next be due for review in six years, although it will be reviewed alongside the next Long-term Plan if required.


Council received 11 submissions on the Revenue and Finance Policy. Two submissions were in favour of the Policy. Three submissions were concerned about the reduction in targeted rates which see some properties with a substantial rate increase. Other submissions were not relevant to this specific Policy.

Southland Federated Farmers submitted against the proposed changes. Their concerns centred on the reduction in targeted rates, and the decrease in the UAGC. Federated Farmers did not agree with these proposed changes as they felt it produced an unfair increase in the rates for rural and farming properties.


173

A3417919

Social Credit New Zealand, in their written submission, welcomed the use of the word “renewal” in the Long-term Plan, believing that this embraced the traditional Maori concept of gifting (koha) when it comes to Council receiving funding from Central banks. In their oral submission, Social Credit New Zealand emphasised, it is not, in their view, the Māori way to borrow money and increase debt which will then place the burden on mokopuna and future generations.

Confirmed changes as a result of consultation

Consultation saw the introduction of two further targeted rates for Stormwater Drainage and Transportation services. Both new targeted rates are zoned based on proximity to the core component of this service. This allows those with direct access to the service to be rated at a higher proportion to the balance of the City. Both additional targeted rates are introduced based on Capital Value of those within the rateable boundaries.

CONCLUSION

Following consultation, the revised Revenue and Finance Policy is appended and recommended to be confirmed ahead of adoption by Council on 30 June 2021.

Appendix: Submissions received on the Revenue and Finance Policy

Quinton Holland-KingAll good

Anna ClarkeAgree that increases in rates are necessary and should not be deferred. Infrastructure and construction costs only go up over time, so acting early is prudent. As are addressing maintenance issues in a timely manner.

ShaneDiscriminatory toward sections of Invercargill, charging some 18% more but not making it clear

Jamie BullingJoke

Wade DevineDo not support the change in the reduction of targeted rates for services not received like street lighting and footpaths.

Linzi TurnerI think we need a financial audit going way back to the 1980's. I am sure you will find a lot of money that is not accounted for in the true accounts. I can offer a very good accountant to have a look through all the finances FREE and make some recommendations that will please all ratepayers.

Henry James TudorA Covid outbreak would kill it. As it is business in our town is suffering. What are the pedestrian counts looking like? De we measure meter revenue to see where the people are shopping?

Matt CouldreyMore investment in upfront Climate Change mitigation - not just patch-up jobs once it happens.


174

A3417919

Jinnette PickfordWe are writing to you as members of the Bluff Living Wage Group which is part of the Living wage Movement Aotearoa. We felt the long term planning was an opportune time to approach the local councils of Invercargill and Southland to remind them that it is imperative that they join the growing number of employers in NZ who have committed to becoming Living Wage employers. They number over 200 with the Auckland council contrasted cleaners and the swelling city council bus drivers being the latest groups to join. These workers will receive $22.10 per hour rising to $22.75 from the 1st September 2021. This means that these workers and their families will have access to the basic necessities of life and to live with dignity. It allows these people to participate more fully as NZ citizens and to reduce the level of poverty that is affecting the most vulnerable and especially our children. In NZ the rates for young people with a mental health condition are 1.5 times great for those living in poorer areas than those living in wealthier areas. Southland has significantly high-deprivation population. Reducing income inequality has a direct impact on improving mental health and wellbeing. We are asking you to commit to the following requests: That the “Living Wage” become part of your “Long Term Plan”. That the “Living Wage” be accessible to all employees, whether they be full time or part time workers. That the ultimate goal is to become a fully accredited “Living Wage” employer as soon as possible. With the gap between the living wage and the minimum wage reducing, we believe these goals are very achievable and can be budgeted. We look forward to watching your progress and rewarding your essential workers with a wage that can meet their basic needs and also remove their ongoing stress.

Federated FarmersAppendix 2

Social Credit New ZealandAppendix 3


175

REVENUE AND FINANCING POLICY

Effective from 01 July 2021

A3275564

Revenue and Financing Policy

The requirements for a Revenue and Financing policy are in the Local Government Act 2002. Section 103 requires that the Revenue and Financing Policy must state its policies for:∑ funding operating expenditure and ∑ funding capital expenditure.

A local authority must manage its finances, and financial dealings in a way that promotes the current and future interests of the community.

“The funding needs… must be met from those sources that the local authority considers to be appropriate, following consideration of:

a) in relation to each activity to be funded,-i) the community outcomes to which the activity primarily contributes; andii) the distribution of benefits between the community as a whole, any identifiable part

of the community, and individuals; andiii) the period in or over which those benefits are expected to occur; andiv) the extent to which the actions or inaction of particular individuals or a group

contribute to the need to undertake the activity; andv) the costs and benefits, including consequences for transparency and

accountability of the activity distinctly from other activities; andb) the overall impact of any allocation of liability for revenue needs on the community.

(Section 101(3))

Council has considered the above before establishing this policy.

Policy for funding operating expenses

Funding Sources Per Section 103(2) Application by Invercargill City Council

General rates, including

∑ choice of the valuation system Applied to activities delivering wider community benefits using capital value base. The capital value rate is applied on the same basis to all properties. Rating values are revised every three years.

∑ differential rating Invercargill City Council will apply differentials where there is a significant difference in the level of service available to properties relative to the collective values of


176

A3275564


the properties within a group. If differentials are to be applied the groups will be Commercial/Industrial, Farming, Lifestyle, Tiwai point smelter and residential. Council will analyse the effect of the UAGC on the incidence of rates between groups, in determining whether or not a differential will apply.

∑ Uniform Annual General Charge A uniform Annual General charge is set based on separately used or inhabited parts of the property. It is part of the total general rate and set at a level that Council considers appropriate. The level of the charge is subject to some legal limitations and Council will not breach that limit. In setting the UAGC Council will analyse the effect that any UAGC has in shifting the incidence of rates away from Farming and Commercial onto residential.

Targeted rates Council has a preference for rates to be within the General rate unless the services have a specific area of benefit, which is not as wide as the entire district, and where the amount of the separate rate is substantial enough to warrant the additional administration required for a separate targeted rate.

Targeted rates are not a user charge as there is no provision for a user to opt out. They are levied for separate services where the Rate is a proxy for a uniform user fee. Those services are Sewage disposal, Water supply, Transportation, Stormwater Drainage and refuse collection.

They allow Council to assist communities to collectively fund services that can only be delivered without collective funding. Due to the administration of separate targeted rates Council will try to avoid setting a targeted rate for less than $100k for the total value of the rate. If a targeted rate is set for a lower revenue level Council will identify the special circumstances that warrant an additional rate.

Targeted rates are set for transparency purposes rather than to create an on-going pool of funds separately managed. Therefore any unspent targeted rates will become part of Council general funds.

Lump sum contributions Available for capital project funding under the Local Government (Rating) Act 2002. It is a complex mechanism which is not considered to provide any advantage to our ratepayers and so is not used.

Fees and charges Fees and charges are a preferred funding option for services where they are practicable. They reflect that a choice has been made to utilise community resources. That choice gives benefit to the individual and may impose costs on the wider community. Charges are setto recover the costs Council incurs in delivering that activity. Council recognises that some services it


177

A3275564


provides are for facilities which are available for community and private benefit. If that service attempted to recover full costs it is likely they would be too expensive for users. If the charges are set too high, it could lead to reducing use, and this may mean the net cost of the service increases.

Council believes the community wishes these services to be made available so that individuals have the option to use them if they choose. There the general rate meets a level of cost to provide the option for the community use. In these cases, Council uses its judgement to set the fees at a level it believes is at an acceptable market level.

Interest and dividends from investments Interest and dividends are treated as part of general funds and support the services which are general rate funded. An exception to this is where reserves have been established for targeted rates which cover the long-term needs of a service area. Rates set for that purpose are used for that purpose, and funds not used in a particular year are invested, and interest on those funds are used for that service.

Borrowing The financial strategy identifies that Council operates a net debt policy. This means that we measure our debt based on total external borrowings less funds invested in term deposits. So borrowing and use of invested cash are treated in the same manner being part of our “balance sheet” funding. Our goal with borrowing is for borrowing to be used primarily for capital spending, however borrowing may also be used to level out highs and lows that can occur in services that have cyclic funding needs.

Borrowing is used to recognise issues of inter-generational equity for assets that have a long life and will benefit the community for a long time.

Borrowing will not be used to fund long term operational shortfalls but may be used as part of a strategy to get to long run sustainable rates level without large one-off rates rises. However, Council recognises that staggering necessary rates rises inevitably comes at the cost of higher rates.

Proceeds from asset sales Proceeds from asset sales will not be used to fund operational costs.

Development contributions Invercargill is forecasting little if any growth. As Council desires growth, it considers that Development contributions are likely to be an impediment to growth. Also the asset base for service delivery is large enough to cope with some growth, without requiring significant growth related investment. Not applied

Financial contributions under the Resource Management Act 1991

Invercargill is forecasting little if any growth. As Council desires growth, it considers that Financial contributions


178

A3275564


are likely to be an impediment to growth. Also the asset base for service delivery is large enough to cope with some growth, without requiring significant growth related investment.

Grants and subsidies Other organisations determine the availability of Grants and subsidies. Where grants and subsidies are available, Council will apply when it is considered efficient to do so. Where funding applications are successful or where long-term contracts have grants and subsidy the funds are used for that purpose. The biggest part of subsidy comes from NZTA for roading works. The level of the subsidy is set by NZTA.

Any other source.

Special purpose investments (reserves)

Over many years of operations, Council has established a number of Special fund reserves. These reserves arebacked by cash investments. Where funds are available in those reserves, they will be used only for the purpose that the reserve was established. When that occurs, the funds in the reserve will be used to meet either a capital cost or operating cost. These funded reserves are a way for the council to manage expenditure and revenue so that the requirements from the community are more even and predictable. Special funds invested will earn interest on the funds andreduce the borrowing needs in higher expenditure years.

Capital expenditure funding sources

Council provides activities which have a long life and long-term benefits. The level of capital expenditure over the period of a long-term plan is relatively minor compared to operating expenses. Council takes a long-term view to funding its services and assets on a sustainable basis. Funding of capital works is from:

∑ General and Targeted rates: Rates will be used to fund capital work. Rates are set based on long term projections, to enable sustainable levels of service, which includes renewal of assets. Typically, rates will fund renewal of assets, but there will be years where rates will fund a portion of new capital items, and years when rates will be repaying loans. Rates and debt are the primary funding sources for Councils planned capital work and these two items need to have an equilibrium identified with the Financial strategy.

∑ Borrowing: Borrowing will be used to fund capital expenditure when the level of renewal is above the average renewal funded in the plan. It is also used to fund the majority of level of service improvement for assets. This reflects that those assets will have a long life and so the cost of the asset should be shared a longer period of time.

∑ Subsidy and grants: A reasonable amount of capital expenditure in the Roading activity is funded from NZTA subsidy. Council seeks to maximise the amount of NZTA subsidy available. For some community facilities, it is possible to get grants from specific organisations. Where this is possible Council will use these grants to lower the capital requirement from the community.

∑ Proceeds from Asset sales: Council owns a number of properties that have been


179

A3275564

purchased for operational and strategic reasons. Where capital assets are sold the funds from those sales will be used to fund capital items. This will occur through the repayment of loans which will enable increased borrowing capacity for the capital items. This ensures that debt is attributed to the appropriate group of activities.

∑ Development contributions: Council does not charge development contributions or financial contributions. Growth is not significant in Invercargill and Infrastructure is able to cope with population growth in the foreseeable future.

Consideration of overall effect of funding allocations

When considering the revenue requirements and funding mechanisms used Council is mindful of the impact that both fees and rates can have on individuals in the community. Charges are set to recover the costs that individuals impose on the community and the benefit they receive from the activity. Rates are also set to reflect the ongoing costs of Council activities. Regional Council rates are a small component of total rates paid by property; Council does not believe Council rates levels impose any hardship.

Summary of funding mechanisms used in Activities

Mechanisms selected to fund a particular activity are based on a regular assessment of the efficiency of imposing multiple small charges compared to funding from a larger funding source such as general funds. However, there is a preference for individuals benefiting and causing costs to pay for the costs they impose. This means that individuals can become more aware of the impact their resource use choices have on the sustainability of our activities.

Activity User feesSubsidy/ Petrol tax

Investment income

Dividends and Interest

General Rate Targeted

rate

Roading Marginal Marginal Majority Marginal

Sewerage Marginal Marginal Majority

Solid Waste Management

Market Residual* Marginal

Stormwater Majority Marginal

Water Supply Marginal Residual Majority

General Services (Listed below)

Aquatic Services Market Residual Residual

Arts and Culture Availability Majority

Corporate Services Majority Marginal

Democratic Process Residual Majority Residual

Housing care Full

Investments Market Majority

Libraries Availability Residual Majority

Parks and Reserves Availability Majority


180

A3275564

*Solid Waste Management is predominantly funded from a uniform targeted rate per bin, but a portion of the activity for waste minimisation and part of the contract rate is attributed to City wide public benefit.

User charges are used for services where there is a benefit to an individual. If it is possible to efficiently impose a charge, the council does so, on the basis of either recovering the full cost of the service, the marginal cost added by users, or a rate that the market will pay. The market rate becomes an issue to limit the potential for charging. It applies in circumstances where the council believes that a charge set too high will reduce use and therefore, diminish the value of the facility to the community, and impose a greater cost on ratepayers. In selecting market rate the council has made a judgement that the community values the existence of the facility and would rather fund it from rates than for it to close.

Explanation of notations in the above table (Still under consideration, will be completed when rates are included)1. Full (100%)means that all, or almost all, of the cost of the activity is funded from that

particular source. 2. Availability means that the cost of having the service available is met from that funding

source. For these services council believes that charges can be a major barrier to access for some members of the community. Revenue in these services reflects revenue from programmes, hire of the facility and added value services.

3. Subsidy means that a portion of the activity is funded from a government subsidy. In some instances the subsidy makes a relatively minor contribution, but in others, such as roading, the subsidy is a substantial contributor to the cost of the activity. Those subsidies are identified within the individual plan of the activity.

4. Petrol Tax is a local government share of the petrol tax levied by central government. It is used to contribute to the costs of road maintenance.

5. Majority (more than 50%) means the majority of the service is funded from this source. When used in the fees and charges column it reflects the view that the services should be recovered from users but that legislation imposes some constraints which may mean that full recovery is not possible.

6. Marginal (10-50%) reflects that the service has a level of public benefit but also recognises that the level of the service required is influenced by the actions or inactions of others. The revenue reflects a contribution to the cost from those parties.

7. Market means that the council attempts to set its charges at a level that is affordable for the users and competitive with similar services either within the city or outside the city. It is used where market rates are not sufficient to meet the full costs of the service. The balance is funded from rates.

8. Residual (Less than 10%) indicates that a portion of funds comes from this source. It reflects that in some circumstances there are constraints on council charges, or that the alternative revenue source may include enforcement revenue which is imposed to achieve compliance and may not always cover the costs of enforcement.

9. Licence and enforcement fees can be charged for some services. Licence fees may be set by the council or by regulation, and may not always cover the full costs of the service. Enforcement fees are charged to achieve compliance and do not necessarily meet the full costs of the enforcement activity.

Passenger transport Market Majority Marginal

Property Full

Public toilets Full

Regulatory Services Majority Marginal

Venue Services Market Marginal


181

A3275564


Effective Date: 1 July 2021


Supersedes: Revenue and Finance Policy 2018

New Review Date: July 2027




182

SUBMISSION ___________________________________________________________________

To: Long Term Plan Consultation Invercargill City Council Private Bag 90104 INVERCARGILL 9810

Submission on: Long Term Plan Consultation Document 2021-2031

Date: 03 May 2021

Contacts: Geoffrey Young Southland Federated Farmers Provincial President

Kim Reilly South Island Regional Policy Manager

A3403176


183

SUBMISSION TO INVERCARGILL CITY COUNCIL LONG TERM PLAN CONSULATION DOCUMENT 2021-2031

General Overview

Southland Federated Farmers (Federated Farmers) welcome the opportunity to submit on the Long

Term Plan proposals put forward by Invercargill City Council. We appreciate the current and future

challenges facing the City but have concerns about some of the proposals contained in “ Our Roadmap

to Renewal “ which are summarised below.

Recommendations

1. That the Council does not change its current rating system

2. That the Council continues to use Targeted Rates to charge for services with a defined

benefit

3. That Council restores the UAGC to $360 per SUIP and maximises the amount of UAGC

charged in each year of the LTP

4. That the Council continue to use the Capital value rating system in preference to land value

5. That the Council consider the impact on ratepayers of a $1m increase in employee costs,

and looks to create efficiency savings to fund any staff growth.

6. That Council does not increase rates higher than LGCI.

7. That the Council revisit its capital works programme to ensure ratepayers are only charged

for services which will be delivered in that rating period.

8. That the Council maintain the Dog Registration fee for working dogs at $35 and the

maximum number of dogs charged remains at 5.

“Proposed Changes To The Way We Rate “

Federated Farmers is concerned about the proposed changes to the rating system through the

revenue and financing policy. The proposed changes would reduce the number of targeted rates into

one general rate pot, change the differentials and attempt to even out the costs of services across the

district.

We do not support this proposed change.


184

Federated Farmers supports the use of clear and transparent mechanisms to charge those that use

and benefit from services. Targeted Rates bring transparency to all parties and are preferred to larger

general rates. Loading more and more services onto general rating will dilute the relationship between

rating and benefit even further.

Federated Farmers supports the use of rating differentials which reflect communities or areas that do

not benefit to the same extent as others from councils core services. The proposed rural differential

although it appears to have reduced, with the proposed movement of targeted rates into general

rating there will not be an actual reduction in costs. This is confusing as the changes to which services

are included in general rates makes year on year comparisons difficult at an aggregated level.

The impact of these proposed rating changes on property owners highlights an important

disadvantage with the proposed changes for the farming community. While we support the principle

of capital value we note that all other property values have increased in their capital value , yet farmers

are bearing the largest rating increases, this suggests that farmers are paying an increase in rates to

compensate for the rising values of urban properties and the desire by council to try and have

predictable levels of rates increases.

Recommendations

That the Council does not change its current rating system

That the Council continues to use Targeted Rates to charge for services with a defined benefit


185

Uniform Annual General Charge

Use of the Uniform Annual General Charge (UAGC) is essential to flattening the rate distribution

between high value properties and other property types. As a fixed portion of rates, we believe this

to be the fairest and most equitable way of spreading the public good component of services which

benefit the entire city.

Federated Farmers is concerned that the proposed reduction to UAGC from $360 to $180 raises

further inequity between farming ratepayers and other property owners.

Recommendation

That Council restores the UAGC to $360 per SUIP and maximises the amount of UAGC charged in

each year of the LTP

General Rates

As detailed above we are submitting against the proposed rates increases for farmers and the

reduction in the rural differential. Given the city is facing a number of economic challenges the

imposition of higher rates on farmers and commercial buildings sends a very clear and negative signal

around the councils prioritise towards those currently generating goods and services for the city and

beyond.

Federated Farmers are concerned that the consultation document considers a maximum cap of 7.5%

rates increases in each year. Council should remember that the compounding impact of that will be

to double rates by the end of the long term plan period.

The proposed rates increases are funding an additional $1m in employee costs. There are no details

in the consultation document on this increase but note that many organisations and farms are having

to live within a constrained environment and we would not expect increases in staff numbers unless

the reason for this was clearly articulated in the consultation document. Any increases in staff salaries

and wages should be funded through organisational savings in the first instance.

Recommendation

That the Council continue to use the Capital value rating system in preference to land value

That the Council consider the impact on ratepayers of a $1m increase in employee costs, and looks

to create efficiency savings to fund any staff growth.

That Council does not increase rates higher than LGCI.


186

Capital Projects

The Financial Strategy notes the ongoing under delivery of capital projects. This is a significant issue

for ratepayers across the City as firstly they are rated on the basis that capital projects will be

completed on-time and on budget and secondly where capital projects are delayed they inevitably

suffer from cost escalation and inflation.

Federated Farmers draw attention the emphasis of matter attached to the capital program in their

audit opinion and that this reflects some of the new challenges being faced, in addition to the current

challenges of delivering capital projects.

Recommendation

That the Council revisit its capital works programme to ensure ratepayers are only charged for

services which will be delivered in that rating period.

Dog Registration Fees

Federated Farmers supports the proposal to not increase Dog registration fees, and supports the

current working dog fee being at $35 and the cap on the maximum number of dogs charged remaining

at 5.

Recommendation

That the Council maintain the Dog Registration fee for working dogs at $35 and the maximum

number of dogs charged remains at 5.

About Southland Federated Farmers

Southland Federated Farmers is a voluntary, member-based organisation that represents farming and

other rural businesses. It is one of 24 provinces that comprise Federated Farmers of New Zealand,

which has a long and proud history of representing the needs and interests of New Zealand farmers.

The Federation aims to add value to its members’ farming businesses. Our key strategic outcomes

include the need for New Zealand to provide an economic and social environment within which:

• Our members may operate their business in a fair and flexible commercial environment;


187

• Our members' families and their staff have access to services essential to the needs of

the rural community; and

• Our members adopt responsible management and environmental practices.

ENDS


188

A3402054


189


190


191

A3417914

TO: PERFORMANCE, POLICY AND PARTNERSHIPCOMMITTEE




CONFIRMATION OF RATING POLICY

SUMMARY

The Rating Policy is appended for confirmation following consultation, noting that it will be adopted alongside the Long-term Plan on 30 June 2021.

RECOMMENDATIONS


1. Receive the report “Confirmation of Rating Policy”.

2. Note the submissions and feedback received, as well as recommended changes to the policy as a result.

3. Confirm the Rating Policy (A3427787), noting that it is required to be adopted alongside the Long-term Plan on 30 June 2021.

IMPLICATIONS


Yes


No


Yes


The Rating Policy is a required policy as part of the Long-term Plan process and aligns with the Revenue and Finance Policy.



Performance, Policy and Partnerships Committee - Public - Confirmation of Rating Policy (A3417914)

192

A3417914


None.

BACKGROUND

Council is required to have a Rating Policy under sections 102(1) and 103 of the Local Government Act 2002.

Council asked for feedback on its proposed changes to the rating system in the consultation document and it also asked for feedback on the rating policy itself.

Consultation on the rating policy took place alongside the Long-term Plan between 30 March and 3 May 2021.


Feedback on the proposals included in the consultation document

The below summary of the feedback received on the proposals included in the consultation document, was received by the Performance, Policy and Partnership Committee, along with all the submissions to the Long-term Plan, on 11 May 2021.

It is important to note that in this analysis of the qualitative data, percentages are estimates and should be taken as such.

Just over a third of people were positive about the proposed rating changes. The most commonly given reason was equity – they agreed with Council that the proposed changes would result in a fairer system. The most commonly supported area was the affordability proposals, which would change the balance to be paid between higher and lower value properties. Many also believed spreading out the cost of services previously paid for by targeted rates would also be fairer.

Approximately a third were negative. Most negative responses were to the proposals to change targeted rates with people not happy to pay for services they perceived they do not have the benefit of. Opposition was most strong from Kennington and farming properties.

Some opposition from Otatara tended to suggest they would expect street lights and pavements to be added as a result of the changes and would be unhappy if this did not happen. It should be noted however that others felt this would spoil the rural environment.

The next most common concern from those who are negative about the proposals is from those who believe that it is not equitable to reduce the burden on lower value properties as everyone receives the same services from Council. Some suggested there should be a poll tax.

Federated Farmers raised that the changes would increase burdens on rural ratepayers at a time when they have not seen capital value increases. They oppose the changes to the uniform annual general charge and the change to the targeted rates.

In contrast the Chamber of Commerce members are broadly in favour of the proposed rating changes.


193

A3417914

A significant minority mentioned that property values were not within their control and were not a good indicator of income in many cases.

There remains a significant amount of confusion about the rating proposals due to the complexity of the issue. A significant minority said they did not understand.

Feedback on the Rating Policy

15 submissions were received on the Rating Policy itself. They are provided in full as an appendix to this report. Of these, five submitters were in favour of the policy. Two submitters suggested Council utilise a “poll tax”.

The main concern raised by the submitters was an increase in rates as a result of the proposal to reduce the amount of targeted rates. There was a concern that this proposal has resulted in substantial rates increase for some properties. Two submitters specifically opposed the increase in rates for the Kennington area citing having to pay for services not received.

The Invercargill Ratepayers Association provided feedback on the Rates Postponement Policy, however, it is noted this policy was not up for consultation and they will have the opportunity to submit again on this in the future.

Federated Farmers provided feedback on the Rating Policy, noting opposition to increases in the Uniform Annual General Charge and the reduction of the number of targeted rates with the resultant spread of costs out across all properties.

Confirmed changes as a result of consultation

As a result of the feedback received during the consultation process it is recommended to amend the proposed rating policy to include two new targeted rates to reflect the private/public benefit associated to the services and to adjust the differentials.

The key issues coming through the submission process associated to the proposed changes to way we rate were focused predominately around the increased distribution of rates for the service provision of those services previously targeted in specific areas of the City. The key services included in this redistribution were Stormwater Drainage, Transportation, Streetlights and Footpaths.

Federated Farmers’ submission included a request to go back to the current policy and to increase the UAGC back to $360. UAGC is a new component included into the proposed rating policy - $360 was merely a comparison to the existing fixed charges in the current policy. If the new rating policy is adopted as proposed with the amendment to the UAGC as highlighted by the Federated Farmers this would see a significant increase to the rates within farming properties. It is not recommended to adjust the UAGC, but to look to the other components of the proposed policy changes.

The impact of the recommended changes on the rural areas would see a lower increase than previously proposed. One specific example would be the Kennington area, which would now see an average increase of 19.1% not 31.4%. The biggest contribution to the Kennington area increase remains being the citywide revaluation shift in rates distribution.


194

A3417914

It is recommended to introduce two new targeted rates and that the remainder of the costs remain as part of the General Rates allocation and be distributed across the city based on the proposed rating policy. The revised rating policy will be brought to Performance, Policy and Partnership Committee and then to the Council for adoption on 30 June 2021.

On 18 May 2021 as part of deliberation on the Long-term Plan, the Performance, Policy and Partnership Committee adopted the following changes to the rating proposal to be reflected in the rating policy:

Issue 7: Proposed changes to the way we rate:

4.7.a. Confirm the proposed changes to the rating approach with the following amendments as a result of consultation:

4.7.a.i. Confirm the introduction of two new targeted rates detailed in Table 1.0:

Table 1.0. Private Stormwater Drainage Service Contribution

75% Portion of the Stormwater service targeted to those with direct access to the drainage network component of this service

Private Transportation Service Contribution

50% Portion of the Transportation service targeted to those with direct access to the use of this service

4.7.a.ii. Confirm the changes to the Transportation Boundary detailed in Map 1.0:

Note Map – is contained in file reference A3427745.

4.7.a.iii. Confirm changes to the rating differentials outlined in Table 2.0:

Table 2.0. UAGC & Differential Consultation document proposal

Revised proposal

UAGC $180 $180

Farming Differential 50% 54%

Lifestyle Differential 88% 97%

Commercial Differential 100% 100%

Industrial Differential 100% 100%

4.7.a.iv. Note the impact of recommendations on average rate per property type outlined in Table 3.0:

Table 3.0. Sector Consultation document –

Estimated average property rates

Revised proposal - Estimated

average property rates

Lower Value Residential 3.7% 3.9%

Higher Value Residential 5.7% 6.0%

Lifestyle 4.9% 5.7%


195

A3417914

Commercial/Industrial 5.6% 5.1%

Farming* 6.9% 3.4%

4.7.b. Note that the changes to the proposals to the rating approach will be reflected in updated versions of the rating and revenue and finance policies which will be brought back to the Performance, Policy and Partnerships Committee before adoption by Council with the Long-term Plan.

The rating policy has been revised to reflect these changes.

CONCLUSION

Following consultation, the revised Rating Policy is appended and recommended to be confirmed ahead of adoption on 30 June 2021.

Appendix: Submissions received on the Rating Policy

Quinton Holland-KingFine

Anna ClarkeAgree that the rating scheme changes seem to provide a much fairer and evenly distributed raise in rates across the city.

UnnamedAgreeable to it

Kirsten DiackDo not understand but what is proposed doesn't appear to be too much.

Greg WeakeFine

Linzi TurnerMake it fair - less value houses should still pay the same rates as everyone else as they are using the same services - well probably more as there is usually more people living in those houses. Why should the ratepayers that take care of their property be penalised by higher rates? I recommend that we use a Poll tax like UK

Henry James TudorBest rate is a pole tax. You won’t get that. Rates with differentials based on what the land is used for. Why should a house on any size of land with three people living in it pay much more or less that a house on a tinny section? Make a living off it then that should be covered by a differential.

ShaneThe same as anyone be asked to pay 18% more for nothing extra. Incompetence at best

Jamie BullingUnfair


196

A3417914

Mike GranthamOpposing the Rate increase fees and charges in the Kennington area.

Craig TemplerChanges to way we rate. For Kennington rate payers to be charged for services they do not received is nothing short of theft? It would be nice to have these services, street lit footpaths to walk to a bus and go to the library. The library being a service rate payers from Kennington can use if they have transport, unlike the bus or to be able walk street lit footpaths of a dark evening. The council proposal to charge rate payers for services these is a money grab from a minority of ratepayers. One wonders how metro Invercargill would feel if asked to help with upkeep of Kennington Hall, Kennington residents keep this running with donations, and hires, central govt through the electoral commission hires it for elections, local government could have been neighbourly and hired it for ratepayers meeting?

Wade DevineIf you relaxed the planning process to allow suitable rural subdivision you might actually grow the city.

Jane ScarletWhat exactly is the policy, there appears to be no depth to what has been covered off to date and as in the past lots of promises but that's it?


Federated FarmersAnnexed at 1


197

DRAFT RATING POLICY Effective from 9 June 2021

1A3427787

Rates

Invercargill City Council sets rates using the following methods:

∑ a rate in the dollar on capital value. ∑ a uniform annual general charge (UAGC) fixed charge per separately used or inhabited

part of a rating unit (SUIP)∑ a fixed charge per provision of service∑ a fixed charge per rating unit∑ a fixed charge per connection to a council service

Differentials

In addition to these charges some differentials are applied to recognise different levels of benefit received by some ratepayers and different levels of burden placed on Council’s activities. Examples of differentials are shown below.

∑ Differential of 0 The rate is not applied to the property∑ Differential of 0.54 54% of the rate is applied to the property∑ Differential of 0.97 97% of the rate is applied to the property∑ Differential of 1 The standard rate is applied to the property∑ Differential of 2 Double the rate is applied to the property

Separately Used or Inhabited Part of a Rating Unit (SUIP)

A separately used or inhabited part of a rating unit includes any portion inhabited or used by the owner or a person other than the owner, and who has the right to use or inhabit that portion by virtue of a tenancy, lease, licence, or other agreement.

Council charges a Uniform Annual General Charge (UAGC) per SUIP

Examples of properties with multiple SUIPs include, but are not limited to, the following situations:∑ Single dwelling with flat attached∑ Two or more houses, flats or apartments on one record of Title∑ Business premise with flat above∑ Separate business premise and dwelling on same record of title∑ Commercial building leased, or sub-leased, to multiple tenants∑ Farm or horticultural property with more than one dwelling∑ Council property with more than one lessee


198

A3427787

∑ Individually surveyed lots of vacant land on one record of title offered for sale separately or in groups

∑ Where part of a rating unit that has the right of exclusive occupation when more than one ratepayer/owner

∑ Retirement village with self-contained flats or dwellings

General Rates

The general rate is set as a rate in the dollar on capital value and a uniform annual general charge (UAGC) per separately used or inhabited part of a rating unit.

The following differentials apply:Land Use Basis for rate Differential

Residential Rate in dollar on capital value 1

Lifestyle Rate in dollar on capital value 0.97

Commercial Rate in dollar on capital value 1

Industrial Rate in dollar on capital value 1

Farms Rate in dollar on capital value 0.54

Utilities Rate in dollar on capital value 1

1530 Tiwai Road Rate in dollar on capital value 0.20

Regional Heritage

Regional Heritage is funded as a fixed charge per SUIP across Invercargill City Council, Southland District Council and Gore District Council. This is part of the UAGC.

Community Board

Council sets a targeted rate to fund the costs of the Bluff Community Board. This is set as a rate in the dollar on capital value of properties identified in Map A with property type differentials applied.

City Centre Co-ordinator

Council sets a targeted rate to fund the costs of City Centre Co-ordination. This is set as rate in the dollar on capital value of all commercial and industrial land identified in Map B.

Transportation

Council sets a targeted rate for provision of the direct access to the Transportation Service. This rate is set as a rate in the dollar on capital value of all identified properties in Map C with property type differentials applied. The balance of this service is included in the General rates and distributed across the entire city.


199

A3427787

Activity Targeted Portion General Portion

Transportation 50% 50%

Stormwater Drainage

Council sets a targeted rate for provision of the direct access to the Stormwater Drainage Service. This rate is set as a rate in the dollar on capital value of all properties identified as having access to a Stormwater drainage network with property type differentials applied. The balance of this service is included in the General rates and distributed across the entire city.

Activity Targeted Portion General Portion

Drainage 75% 25%

Water

Council sets targeted rates to fund the provision of reticulated water supply. These are set as fixed charges per SUIP for residential properties and fixed charges per rating unit with differentials based on capital value (CV) for other land as shown in the table below. Vacant properties that are able to connect to Council water supply (serviceable) are charged a differential of 0.5 which is a half charge. The base rates are calculated to collect 84% of the total water rates from residential properties with 16% of the total water rates collected coming from non-residential land.

Rate Type Differential

Water - Residential 1


Water – Non-Residential with CV <$50,001 0.8

Water – Non-Residential with CV $50,001-$100,000 1

Water – Non-Residential with CV $100,001-$200,000 1.2

Water – Non-Residential with CV $200,001-$400,000 1.4

Water – Non-Residential with CV $400,001-$1,000,000 2

Water – Non-Residential with CV $1,000,001-$3,000,000 3

Water – Non-Residential with CV $3,000,001-$5,000,000 4

Water – Non-Residential with CV >$5,000,000 5

Council has determined that a vacant serviceable rating unit is a property where the closest property boundary is less than 100 metres from a water access point and it is not impracticable to access the service. A serviceable rating unit upon which a building is erected is a property where the building is less than 100 metres from water supply and it is not impracticable to connect to the service.

Council charges high usage non-residential properties for metered water supply on a per cubic metre basis. The following rate is charged per cubic metre of water consumed.


200

A3427787

Rate Type Rate per cubic metre

Metered Water Supply $0.72

Sewerage

Council sets targeted rates to fund the provision of reticulated sewerage services. These are set as fixed charges per SUIP for residential properties and fixed charges per rating unit with differentials based on capital value (CV) for other land as shown in the table below. Vacant properties that are able to connect to Council’s sewerage network (serviceable) are charged a differential of 0.5 which is a half charge. The base rates are calculated to collect 75% of the total sewerage rates from residential properties with 25% of the total rates collected coming from non-residential land.


Sewerage - Residential 1


Sewerage – Non-Residential with CV <$50,001 0.8

Sewerage – Non-Residential with CV $50,001-$100,000 1

Sewerage – Non-Residential with CV $100,001-$200,000 1.2

Sewerage – Non-Residential with CV $200,001-$400,000 1.4

Sewerage – Non-Residential with CV $400,001-$1,000,000 2

Sewerage – Non-Residential with CV $1,000,001-$3,000,000 3

Sewerage – Non-Residential with CV $3,000,001-$5,000,000 4

Sewerage – Non-Residential with CV >$5,000,000 5

Council has determined that a vacant serviceable rating unit is a property where the closest property boundary is less than 60 metres from a sewerage access point and it is not impracticable to access the service. A serviceable rating unit upon which a building is erected is a property where the building is less than 60 metres from sewerage network and it is not impracticable to connect to the service.

Refuse Collection

Council sets a targeted rate to fund the provision of kerbside removal of refuse and recycling within the service area. This is set as a fixed charge per provision of the service for residential, commercial and industrial properties within the service area. An additional set of bins can be provided at full cost.


201

A3427787

Rates to be collected

Rate Name Rate Basis Differential Total

General Rate $0.00332256 Per $ capital value 1 $31,485,546

General Rate Lifestyle $0.00322288 Per $ capital value 0.97 $3,836,875

General Rate Farming $0.00179418 Per $ capital value 0.54 $627,979

General Rate 1530 Tiwai Road

$0.00066451 Per $ capital value 0.2 $129,580

(UAGC) $180.00 Per SUIP 1 $4,726,620

Water Supply Residential $409.18 Per connected residential SUIP

1 $8,318,220

Water Supply Non-Residential

$518.48 Per connected rating unit 1 $1,584,424

Sewerage Residential $265.59 Per connected SUIP 1 $5,707,929

Sewerage Non-Residential $615.59 Per connected rating unit 1 $1,902,675

Solid Waste Kerbside Collection

$209.58 Per set of bins provided 1 $4,595,356

Bluff Community Board $0.00027860 Per $ capital value 1 $83,373

Bluff Community Board Rate Lifestyle


Bluff Community Board Rate Farming


City Centre Co-ordinator $0.00028339 Per $ capital value 1 $158,698

Transportation Rate $0.00006158 Per $ capital value 1 $499,370

Transportation Rate Lifestyle $0.00005974 Per $ capital value 0.97 $1,883

Transportation Rate Farming $0.00003326 Per $ capital value 0.54 $310

Stormwater Drainage Rate $0.00048136 Per $ capital value 1 $4,309,869

Stormwater Drainage Rate Lifestyle


Stormwater Drainage Rate Farming


TOTAL $68,117,927

All rates contain GST @ 15%

Non Rateable Properties

Land that is fully non-rateable is set out in Schedule 1 of the Local Government (Rating) Act 2002.


202

A3427787

Map A – Bluff Community Board Rating Boundary


203

A3427787

Map B – City Centre Coordinator Rating Boundary


204

A3427787

Map C – Transportation Boundary


205

A3427787



Review Period: This Policy will be reviewed every three(3) years, unless earlier review is required due to legislative changes, or is warranted by another reason requested by Council.

Supersedes: Rating Policy 2018-19 (A2110028)





206

A3417705





ADOPTION OF THE REMISSION AND POSTPONEMENT OF RATES ON MĀORI FREEHOLD LAND POLICY

SUMMARY

The Remission and Postponement of rates on Māori freehold land Policy is provided for adoption following consultation and changes to the legislation governing rating of Maori Freehold Policy.

RECOMMENDATIONS


1. Receive the report “Adoption of the Remission and Postponement of Rates on Māori Freehold Land Policy”.

2. Note the submissions received on the Rating of Maori Freehold Land Policy.

3. Note the proposed amended policy, including changes required to be consistent with section 102(2)(e) of the Local Government Act 2002 and the Local Government (Rating of Whenua Māori) Amendment Act 2021, which applies from 1 July 2021.

4. Adopt the Remission and Postponement of Rates on Māori Freehold Land Policy(A3426618) which will become operational on 1 July 2021.

IMPLICATIONS


Yes


No


Yes


A required policy as part of the Long-term Plan process.

Performance, Policy and Partnerships Committee - Public - Adoption of the Remission and Postponement of Rates on M?ori Freehold Land ...

207

A3417705




None.

BACKGROUND

Section 102 of the Local Government Act requires Council to have a policy on remission and postponement of rates on Maori Freehold Land and Section 108 outlines what it must include. These sections are appended for information.

Council’s policy is due for review as part of the Long-term Plan process by June 2021.

There are 14 Maori Freehold Land properties within the Invercargill District.

Te Ao Marama Inc., which advises Council on Resource Management Act and Local Government Act matters, advised no change to the policy ahead of consultation.

Consultation took place alongside the Long-term Plan between 30 March and 3 May 2021, including at an engagement event held on Murihiku Marae.

SUBMISSIONS RECEIVED AND OFFICER ADVICE

Eight submissions were received on the Rating of Maori Freehold Land Policy.

Five submissions supported the current policy, stating that in their view it is fair for all types of land to be treated the same.

One person thought the policy was racist. Another was only focused on climate change.

No changes are recommended as a result of consultation, although changes are required as a result of legislation change which is outlined below.

LEGISLATION CHANGE

In April of this year, the Government passed the Local Government (Rating of Whenua Māori) Amendment Act 2021. It will come into force on 1 July 2021.

The key changes are as follows:

Unused land to be non-rateable

Before: Owners of wholly unused Māori land blocks are legally obliged to pay rates.

After: Historic rate arrears on unused Māori land will be automatically removed and no further rates will be charged on wholly unused land blocks.

Impact: There are six Māori freehold land properties that are currently unused and are currently not rated. There will be no impact from this change.


208

A3417705

Ability to write-off arrears

Before: Local authorities do not have the ability to write-off rates that were considered to be unrecoverable.

After: Local authorities must write off outstanding rates on any land that they consider unrecoverable, including rates debt inherited from deceased owners.

Impact: There is one property which will have rates arrears come July 2021 if they remain unpaid. The rating officer advises these rates will be recoverable and therefore will not be written off.

Rates remission for Māori freehold land under development

Before: Local authorities across the country take different approaches to the remission of rates on whenua Māori. While some local authorities remit or postpone rates payments on unused land, others do not.

After: Local authorities are now able to remit rates on Māori land in order to encourage development, regardless of what their current policy states.

Impact: There are no previously unused properties currently undergoing development, although one parcel of land may be effected by the new development on Tramway Road.

Ngā Whenua Rāhui kawenata land to be made non-rateable

Before: Local authorities have the ability to collect rates on Māori land protected for conservation purposes under Ngā Whenua Rāhui.

After: All land protected by Ngā Whenua Rāhui is non-rateable and outstanding rate arrears are written off.

Impact: None. None of the Māori freehold land properties in Invercargill are protected for conservation purposes.

Treating multiple blocks as one

Before: Multiple land blocks from the same parent block are rated individually.

After: Māori landowners can make an application to have multiple Māori land blocks that come from the same parent block to be treated as one rating unit.

Impact: No properties in Invercargill will be affected.

Currently, Māori Freehold Land is rated in the same manner as general land. A ratepayer can apply for a rates remission or postponement if they have suffered a 20 percent loss of income as a result of an event. The ratepayer must complete an application and must provide evidence in support of the application.

Under the new legislation, ratepayers for Māori freehold land will not need to make an application or provide evidence as this will be done automatically as per the legislation.

The ability for Council to write off rates owing alleviates one of the major barriers to Māori landowners engaging, using and developing law which currently has rates owing.


209

A3417705

Historically, ICC has ultra vires not rated some Māori Freehold Land properties, which was out of alignment with the policy. As a result the impact of the changes is minimal.

THE DRAFT POLICY

Staff have drafted a new policy that is in line with the amended legislation.

Further consultation on this new policy is not recommended, as the pool of people who this policy affects is very small and no one is negatively impacted. Officers will, however, engage with the affected parties, providing a letter to each of the land owners informing them of the changes.

This Policy needs to be adopted on 1 July 2021 when the Act comes into force.

CONCLUSION

Consultation on the Rating of Maori Freehold Land Policy has been completed and the policy, with the amended title Remission and Postponement of Rates on Māori freehold land,is provided for adoption.

Appendix 1

Relevant Sections of the Local Government Act:

102 Funding and financial policies(1) A local authority must, in order to provide predictability and certainty about sources and

levels of funding, adopt the funding and financial policies listed in subsection (2).(2) The policies are—

(e) a policy on the remission and postponement of rates on Māori freehold land.

108 Policy on remission and postponement of rates on Māori freehold land(1) If a policy adopted under section 102(1) provides for the remission of rates

on Māori freehold land, the policy must state—(a) the objectives sought to be achieved by the remission of rates; and(b) the conditions and criteria to be met in order for rates to be remitted.

(2) If a policy adopted under section 102(1) provides for the postponement of the requirement to pay rates on Māori freehold land, the policy must state—(a) the objectives sought to be achieved by a postponement of the requirement to

pay rates; and(b) the conditions and criteria to be met in order for the requirement to pay rates to

be postponed.(3) For the avoidance of doubt, a policy adopted under section 102(1) is not required to

provide for the remission of, or postponement of the requirement to pay, rates on Māori freehold land.

(4) In determining a policy under section 102(1), the local authority must consider the matters set out in Schedule 11.

(4A) A policy adopted under section 102(1) must be reviewed at least once every 6 years using a consultation process that gives effect to the requirements of section 82.

(5) For the purposes of this section, the term rates includes penalties payable on unpaid rates.


210

http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/2002/0084/167.0/link.aspx?search=sw_096be8ed815ed1ed_maori+freehold+land_25_se&p=1&id=DLM172359#DLM172359







A3417705

Appendix: Submissions received on Rating of Maori Freehold Land Policy

Henry James TudorCan of worms. What is it used for? Is it using services? pay for service like churches and schools.

Quinton Holland-KingGo for it

Wade DevineStatus Quo

Linzi TurnerWell if people are living on the land then it should be taxed the same as everyone else.

Jamie BullingRacist


Lincoln HarrisonRate it like every other type of land, it is no different and has the same underlying productive land use.

Sandy CooperShould be no different to anyone else please


211

REMISSION AND POSTPONEMENT OF RATES ON MĀORI FREEHOLD

LANDEffective from 1 July 2021

1A3426618

PurposeThis policy allows for rates postponement and remissions on Māori freehold land.

This policy helps to reduce the barriers for owners of Māori freehold land who want to use, occupy, build houses on, and develop their whenua, particularly for those who have rates arrears. It also provides greater consistency, equity and clarity around the rating of Māori land for the benefit of Māori landowners and local authorities.

Statutory Requirements ∑ Section 102(2)(e) of the Local Government Act 2002 states that Council must adopt a

policy on the remission and postponement of rates on Maori freehold land.

∑ Section 108 and Schedule 11 of the Local Government Act 2002 states what the policy must contain.

∑ Section 114 of the Local Government (Rating) Act 2002 allows the Council to remit all or part of the rates on a rating unit if it has adopted a remission policy and is satisfied that the conditions and criteria in the policy are met.

∑ Section 114A of the Local Government (Rating) Act 2002 allows the Council to remit all or part of the rates on a unit if the ratepayer has applied in writing for a remission on the land and the ratepayer or another person is developing, or intends to develop the land.

∑ Section 115 of the Local Government (Rating) Act 2002 requires the Council to postpone all or part of the rates on a rating unit if it has adopted a postponement policy and is satisfied that the conditions and criteria in the policy are met.

∑ Section 108(4A) of the Local Government Act 2002 states that this policy must be reviewed at least once every 6 years using a consultation process that gives effect to the requirements of section 82 of the Local Government Act 2002.


212

A3426618

Principles To recognise the special characteristics of Māori freehold land.

Māori freehold land is recognised under the Te Ture Whenua Māori Act 1993 as a taonga tuku iho of special significance to Māori passed from generation to generation. An interest in Māori land is also considered a tangible whakapapa (genealogical) link for owners to their past and present whānau, hapū and Iwi, whether they live on or close to the land or not.

Key DefinitionsRemitted rates Rates for which the requirement to pay is

remitted.

Māori freehold land Land whose beneficial ownership has been determined by the Māori Land Court by freehold order.

Māori freehold land in multiple ownership Māori freehold land owned by more than two persons (Section 5 of Local Government (Rating) Act 2002).

Rates Postponement Rates for which the requirement to pay is postponed.

Wholly Unused LandMāori freehold land that is wholly unused will not be charged rates.

Any wholly unused Māori freehold land that has historic rates arrears will be automatically removed and no further rates will be charged.

Ability to write-off arrearsInvercargill City Council will write-off outstanding rates on any land that it considersunrecoverable, including rates debt inherited from deceased owners.

Rates remission for Māori freehold land under development Invercargill City Council can remit rates on Māori freehold land in order to encourage development.

Ngā Whenua Rāhui kawenata land to be made non-rateableAll land protected by Ngā Whenua Rāhui is non-rateable and outstanding rate arrears are written off.



213

A3426618

Revision History: NIL


Effective Date: 1 July 2021


Supersedes: 2015 Policy on Rating of Maori Freehold Land(A1214017)


Associated Documents/References: Local Government (Rating of Whenua Māori) Amendment Act 2021; Te Ture Whenua Māori Act 1993

Policy Owner: Strategy and Policy


214

A3248626

TO: PERFORMANCE, POLICY AND PARTNERSHIP COMMITEE


AUTHORISED BY: MICHAEL DAY – GM FINANCE AND ASSURANCE

MEETING DATE: TUESDAY 8 DECEMBER 2020

DRAFT DEVELOPMENT CONTRIBUTIONS POLICY

SUMMARY

The draft Development Contributions Policy is due for review. No changes are proposed prior to consultation alongside the Long-term Plan in 2021.

RECOMMENDATIONS

That the Performance, Policy and Partnership Committee:

1. Receive the report “Draft Development Contributions Policy”

2. Confirm the Draft Development Contributions Policy (A3417789) for consultation alongside the Long-term Plan in 2021.

IMPLICATIONS


This is a required policy and due for renewal alongside the Long-term plan


No


Yes


This is a required policy and due for renewal alongside the Long-term plan


Consultation will take place alongside the Long-term plan


None.

Performance, Policy and Partnerships Committee - Public - Draft Development Contributions Policy (A3248626)

215

A3248626

BACKGROUND

Under Section 102 of the Local Government Act, Council is required to have a policy on development contributions or financial contributions. The relevant sections (Sub part 5) are provided for information as an appendix below.

The purpose of the development contributions provisions is to enable territorial authorities to recover from those persons undertaking development a fair, equitable, and proportionate portion of the total cost of capital expenditure necessary to service growth over the long term.

Council’s policy is due for renewal and consultation will take place alongside the Long-term Plan.

THE POLICY

The current policy reads in its entirety: It is Council’s policy not to charge Development Contributions (Local Government Act) or Financial Contributions (Resource Management Act).

No changes to this policy are proposed for the following reasons:

∑ Council does not anticipate significant extensions to its networks in order to service growth over the immediate period. The District Plan follows a general principle of increasing density rather than allowing for green-field development. This is in line with the National Policy Statement on Highly Productive Land and is not anticipated to change in the immediate period.

∑ The costs and complexity of administering development contributions can outweigh any benefit received.

∑ Government has indicated that policy in the area of financial contributions (RMA) will change, removing financial contributions as an option. The existing policy and practice in the Regulatory Services activity aligns with this future change.

CONCLUSION

The draft Development Contributions Policy is due for review. No changes are proposed prior to consultation alongside the Long-term Plan in 2021.


216

A3248626

APPENDIXLocal Government Act

Subpart 5—Development contributions

197AA Purpose of development contributions

The purpose of the development contributions provisions in this Act is to enable territorial authorities to recover from those persons undertaking development a fair, equitable, and proportionate portion of the total cost of capital expenditure necessary to service growth over the long term.

197AB Development contributions principles

All persons exercising duties and functions under this subpart must take into account the following principles when preparing a development contributions policy under section 106 or requiring development contributions under section 198:

(a) development contributions should only be required if the effects or cumulative effects of developments will create or have created a requirement for the territorial authority to provide or to have provided new or additional assets or assets of increased capacity:

(b) development contributions should be determined in a manner that is generally consistent with the capacity life of the assets for which they are intended to be used and in a way that avoids over-recovery of costs allocated to development contribution funding:

(c) cost allocations used to establish development contributions should be determined according to, and be proportional to, the persons who will benefit from the assets to be provided (including the community as a whole) as well as those who create the need for those assets:

(d) development contributions must be used—(i) for or towards the purpose of the activity or the group of activities for which the

contributions were required; and(ii) for the benefit of the district or the part of the district that is identified in the development contributions policy in which the development contributions were required:

(e) territorial authorities should make sufficient information available to demonstrate what development contributions are being used for and why they are being used:

(f) development contributions should be predictable and be consistent with the methodology and schedules of the territorial authority’s development contributions policy under sections 106, 201, and 202:

(g) when calculating and requiring development contributions, territorial authorities may group together certain developments by geographic area or categories of land use, provided that—(i) the grouping is done in a manner that balances practical and administrative

efficiencies with considerations of fairness and equity; and(ii) grouping by geographic area avoids grouping across an entire district wherever

practical.

Resource Management Act

Section 1089 In this section, financial contribution means a contribution of—

(a) money; or(b) land, including an esplanade reserve or esplanade strip (other than in relation to

a subdivision consent), but excluding Maori land within the meaning of Te Ture Whenua Maori Act 1993 unless that Act provides otherwise; or

(c) a combination of money and land.


217

http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1991/0069/latest/link.aspx?search=sw_096be8ed81a2eece_financial+contributions_25_se&p=1&id=DLM289881

http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1991/0069/latest/link.aspx?search=sw_096be8ed81a2eece_financial+contributions_25_se&p=1&id=DLM289881

DEVELOPMENT CONTRIBUTIONS POLICY

Effective from 9 June 2021

1A3417789

It is Council’s policy not to charge Development Contributions (Local Government Act) or Financial Contributions (Resource Management Act).




Supersedes: Development and Financial Contributions Policy 2015





218

A3420167





CONFIRMATION OF THE FINANCIAL STRATEGY AND INFRASTRUCTURESTRATEGY

SUMMARY

Following consultation, the Financial Strategy and Infrastructure Strategy are appended for confirmation ahead of adoption by Council alongside the Long-term Plan.

RECOMMENDATIONS


1. Receive the report “Confirmation of the Financial Strategy and Infrastructure Strategy”.

2. Confirm the following recommended budget change as a result of changes to the operational environment: To retain ownership of the Don Street development and to address revisions to NZTA funding allocations as part of the 2022/23 Annual Plan.

3. Note the increased funding for Anderson House as a result of deliberations on 18 May and that in line with the Significance and Engagement Policy this is not a significant increase in funding and confirm that no further consultation is required.

4. Confirm the Financial Strategy (A3352000) and Infrastructure Strategy (A3009110) noting that they will be required to be adopted alongside the Long-term Plan on 30 June 2021.

5. Adopt the updated Assumptions for the 2021 – 2031 Long-term Plan (A3248620).

IMPLICATIONS


Yes


No

Performance, Policy and Partnerships Committee - Public - Confirmation of the Financial Strategy and Infrastructure Strategy (A3420167)

219

A3420167


Yes


The Financial Strategy and Infrastructure Strategy are required as part of the Long-term Plan process.




There are a few changes recommended to the financial strategy following consultation. Thechanges are:∑ proposed delivery forecast has been reduced for the capital programme ∑ impact on the Financial Benchmarks has been included∑ financial impact on capital and operational budgets changes has been incorporated∑ corresponding impact on the forward rates projection has been updated

BACKGROUND

The Financial Strategy and Infrastructure Strategy are required components of the Long-term Plan.

Council consulted on the summaries of these strategies through the consultation document as required by the Local Government Act. The strategies in full were also available on the consultation website.

Consultation took place between 30 March and 3 May 2021.

The Performance, Policy and Partnerships Committee received a summary of the issues raised, along with all submissions to the Long-term Plan on 11 May 2021. The Committeedeliberated and confirmed their decisions as a result on 18 May 2021. The relevant information is included below from the 18 May 2021 Deliberations Report, along with the final decisions adopted during that meeting.

UPDATES FOLLOWING THE LONG-TERM PLAN BUDGETING PROCESS

Officers took the resolutions from the 18 May 2021 meeting and completed the budgeting process prior to Audit commencing on 31 May 2021. As a result of this process the following changes are recommended for confirmation by the Committee:

Sale of Don Street Investment Property

In the draft budgets Don Street was forecast to be sold in 2022/23 with a forecast value of $14.5 million. Following further analysis it is now recommended to retain this property for the term of the Long-term Plan. The property is now fully let and is generating a net surplus of $0.6 million to Council a year. Retaining the property would result in initial higher net debt balance due to reduced funds from the sale of $14.5 million however the surplus generated will reduce this amount over the time of the investment.


220

A3420167

NZTA Forecast

Initial assessments of the Waka Kotahi indicative funding announcement is that we will be negatively affected by roughly $300,000 per year based on what we have included in the LTP. It is unclear whether this will be in the operational or capital areas at this point. Given Council holds a contingency in the Capital Programme of roughly $1 million per annum and that the detailed information required to make adjustments to the budget has not yet been received, no adjustment to the budget can be made at this time.

Council has already made an assumption in the Capital programme that we would not receive the anticipated funding by including the Roading programme in the 70-75% deliverability calculation. This has covered most of the gap in the indicative numbers Council has been provided.

As a result an amendment to the NZTA level of funding will be made in the Annual Plan.

Anderson House

Council confirmed on 18 May 2021 to increase the budget from $900,000 to $1.4 million. This change incorporated a $200,000 increase in the budget and $300,000 reduction in forecast external funding.

The consultation document noted that we would consult the community again if significant increased ratepayer funding was required as a result of reduced external funding.

Further consultation is not recommended for two reasons:- The current Significance and Engagement Policy defines a significant capital spend as

a spend over $5 million.- Community feedback on Anderson House both in previous years and during

consultation has been supportive of Council progressing work on Anderson House.

As a result it is requested that the Committee confirm that no further consultation is required at this time.

INFRASTRUCTURE STRATEGY

Appendix A includes the information relevant to the Infrastructure Strategy from the 18 May 2021 report to the Performance, Policy and Partnerships Committee, including the resolutions passed at the meeting.

None of these resolutions require changes to the Infrastructure Strategy. The financial forecasts included in the Infrastructure Strategy have been updated and the finalInfrastructure Strategy is appended for confirmation.

FINANCIAL STRATEGY

Appendix B includes the information relevant to the Financial Strategy from the from the 18 May 2021 report to the Performance, Policy and Partnerships Committee, including the resolutions passed at the meeting.

The following changes have been made to the Financial Strategy as a result of these resolutions:∑ Inclusion of the lower delivery forecast for the capital programme.


221

A3420167

The assumptions have also been updated to reflect this change to the capital programme forecast and appended for adoption.

In addition the impact of the changes have been reflected in amendments to all the benchmarks and to the projected Rates increases. The changes do not impact on the rates increase for the first year of the LTP.

Projected Rates Increases are:

0%

1%

2%

3%

4%

5%

6%

2016/17 2017/18 2018/19 2019/20 2020/21 2021/22 2022/23 2023/24 2024/25 2025/26 2026/27 2027/28 2028/29 2029/30 2030/31

Rates Increases Rates CAP LTP

CONCLUSION

The Infrastructure Strategy and the Financial Strategy are appended for confirmation, ahead of adoption which is required to take place alongside the Long-term Plan on 30 June 2021.


222

A3420167

Appendix A: From 18 May 2021 Report to the Performance Policy and Partnerships Committee:

Issue 5: Feedback on other plans and activities (Infrastructure Strategy)

Council asked for feedback on its other plans and activities, including those which form the Infrastructure Strategy.

It is important to note that in this analysis of the qualitative data, percentages are estimatesand should be taken as such.

The most common feedback is positive (approximately 25%). These submitters are pleased to see investment in core infrastructure, which they believe is in the right places and at an appropriate level. Some raise the importance of a steady investment in maintaining assets.

This compares to approximately 1 in 10 who are concerned about cost. This is often discussed in relation to the issue of affordability, although some question whether Council knows what is needed.

The most commonly mentioned area of infrastructure is three waters. The importance of prioritizing an alternative water supply was most mentioned, followed by concerns about three water reform and the need for improved water quality.

Roading was frequently mentioned. Some have specific concerns about quality issues, others are concerned about the frequency of roadworks.

Climate change is mentioned by a significant minority. Support for walking and cycling is the most mentioned related issue, with other mitigation measures mentioned by a few.

Recycling and waste are activities where submitters would like to see innovation.

Some Bluff residents are concerned they are not receiving the same level of service as Invercargill.

Some Otatara, Kennington and residents in other rural areas have raised concerns about service provision, mostly in relation to the proposed rating changes.

5. Other plans and activities (Infrastructure Strategy) – Summary and recommendations

New River Estuary (Submission 450) – The issue of the environmental impact of the old waste dump adjacent to the New River Estuary has been raised. Officers have been in dialogue with Environment Southland on this issue for a considerable time.

Resolution

That the Committee

4.5.a Request officers to report back on progress of the dialogue on New River Estuary at the time of the 2022/2023 Annual Plan.


223

A3420167

Sealing of the Omaui and Mokomoko Road (Submission 423) – A submission from 40 local residents was received in support of sealing the Omaui Road.

The roading asset management plan does not include any planned seal extensions for the next 30 year period and accordingly no budget has been allowed.

The typical cost to take a unsealed road to a sealed surface is around $250- $300 thousand dollars per kilometre. This work is not able to claim a NZTA subsidy.

Some preliminary work on prioritising which roads would be selected (if a budget is available) has been undertaken. There are probably at least 4 to 5 locations where a strong case exists for this work, of which the Omaui and Mokomoko Roads are in the middle in terms of priority. This desktop evaluation has highlighted roads as being of high priority (5.6km - $1.6 million) and medium (18km $5.4 million) as the most likely to be considered.

Resolutions

4.5.b. Confirm not to extend sealing of the Omaui Road in this Long-term Plan, but to include it for consideration as part of the development of the 2024 – 2034 Long-term Plan.

4.5.c. Include Omaui and Mokomoko Roads within the speed review planned for late 2021/ early 2022.

Public Motorhome Dump and Wash Station in Bluff (Submission 437)

The Bluff Community Board has requested a motorhome dump station be installed in Bluff.

Research was undertaken with Venture Southland (now Great South) in 2019 which showed that numbers of freedom campers in the Invercargill District, including Bluff, remain at a lower level than in many areas of the wider region. Low levels of environmental impact such as dumping of rubbish and waste were observed. Great South note that Bluff is a popular destination for freedom campers and there is likely to be increased numbers in the future. There is a dump station in Invercargill at Glengarry.

Resolution

4.5.d. Review the need for a dump station as part of the development 2024 – 2034 Long-term Plan.

Third Public Toilet in Bluff (Submission 437)

The Community Board has also requested an additional toilet in Bluff.

There is the opportunity for officers to work with the Bluff Community Board to discuss this matter further. Prioritising an additional toilet in Bluff would mean delaying other toilets within the strategy. Within the property capital programme there is allowance for a new toilet every other year.

Resolution

4.5.e. Confirm no increase in the budget allowance for an additional toilet, but direct officers to reconsider this location against other priorities.


224

A3420167

Improved drainage to the Cricket Oval at Queens Park (Submission 88)

The Southland Cricket Association is requesting improved drainage on the Cricket Oval, which is on reserves land, as well as support for an electronic scoreboard. Officers advise that changes to the operational approach has already been progressed and only minimal increase in budget allowance is needed, which can be met through existing budgets.

Resolution

4.5.f. Request officers continue to engage with the Southland Cricket Association to support effective use of the cricket ground.

4.5.g. Decline the request for $20,000 funding for an electronic scoreboard as part of the Long-term Plan, but remind the Association of the opportunities for funding from both the Community Wellbeing Fund and the Active Communities Fund.

Improved carparking at Turnbull Thompson Park (Submission 506)

A request has been made for improved carparking specifically in relation to football.

Resolution

4.5.h. Request officers to collaborate with Southland Football and Sport Southland to understand needs for car parking at Turnbull Thompson Park, within the context of priorities of other reserves’ car parks.

Improved fencing at Russell Square (Submission 448)

A request has been made by South Alive for additional fencing at Russell Square to improve safety at the playground.

Resolution

4.5.i. Note that Russell Square is the first playground in the Parks programme for 2021/2022 and consideration is being given to fencing.

Safe Cycling Network (Submission 433)

Many submissions raise the importance of cycling within the city, including requests to make it easier to cycle by creating a joined up network of cycle paths.

The Roading Asset Plan has no planned extensions to cycle paths in the Myross Bush areas. The existing paths on the stop banks are managed by Environment Southland. There is funding allocated for maintenance.

Work is being undertaken with Environment Southland and NZTA to complete the Invercargill to Bluff trail and Council is undertaking works on Dunns Road to ensure a safe shared path is available.

Funding constraints have limited the planning of further trails.

A longer term vision approach to connect additional parts of the City would have benefits to ensure that reliable future funding may be bid for when such opportunities arise.


225

A3420167

Resolution

4.5.j. Request officers to undertake initial vision and feasibility assessment for a joined up cycling network in preparation for the 2024 – 2034 Long-term Plan. Climate change

Climate change was an issue raised by a significant number of submitters. Council’s approach to climate change is to assess the impact on core infrastructure, followed by assessing impact on other activities, in line with the regional approach led by Environment Southland.

Resolution

4.5.k. Note the establishment of an internal working on climate change which has been formed and will commence work in June 2021, bringing recommendations to Council as part of the development process for the 2024 – 2034 Long-term Plan.

Appendix B: From the 18 May 2021 Report to the Performance, Policy and Partnerships Committee with the resulting resolutions noted:

Issue 6: Feedback on plans for finance and rates (Financial Strategy)

Council asked for feedback on its plans for finance and rates, which form the core of its Financial Strategy.

It is important to note that in this analysis of the qualitative data, percentages are estimatesand should be taken as such.

Approximately a third of submissions are positive about the plans for finance and rates. Some of those who are positive believe the increases are fair to pay for the plan; some are pleased to see overdue investment being made and others are pleased to see consistent steady rates increases.

Approximately a third are negative believing rates are too high. The most commonly raised issue is affordability, particularly for people on fixed incomes. Others believe Council is not responsible or is trying to do too much. Some objected to the level of debt being proposed and others believed more needed to be done to seek alternative sources of revenue. The post-Covid environment was mentioned by some.

Some, including the Bluff Living Wage group, raised the importance of Council paying a living wage, as well as planning rates increases at a level which are manageable for people on lower incomes.

Many recognised that it would not be possible to set rates at a level everyone would be happy with.

6. Plans for finance and rates (Financial Strategy) – Summary and Recommendations

One submitter encouraged Council to become a Living Wage employer. Local market forces have already required Council to remunerate above the minimum adult wage; accordingly Council has developed the Invercargill City Council Fair Wage. This is included in the Long-term Plan.


226

A3420167

Another submitter proposed that Council should not utilise debt as this is not, in her opinion, the Māori way as it places the burden on the mokopuna, and that Council should borrow from the Reserve Bank. The advice of officers is that this is not legally feasible.

As a result of proposed changes in response to consultation feedback and changes in the operating environment, changes will need to be made to the financial forecasts in order to maintain a balanced budget.

Resolutions

It is recommended to note and confirm all the changes required as a result of changes to the operating environment not dealt with under other recommendations. The recommendations below are provided on the basis that Council decisions align with the recommendations provided on all other areas in this report. During deliberation guidance will be given on the impact of alternative decisions on the overall financial position of Council and as a result on rates and debt levels.

4.6.a. Note and confirm all the changes required to the budget as a result of changes to the operating environment.

4.6.b. Lower the delivery forecast for the infrastructure programme from 75%-85% to 70%-75%, noting that this is still an ambitious target and more accurately the reflects the constraints within the construction sector in the post-Covid environment.

4.6.c. Note that the changes to plans for finances and rates will be reflected in updated versions of the financial strategy and related policies which will be brought back to the Performance, Policy and Partnerships Committee before adoption by Council with the Long-term Plan.


227

FINANCIAL STRATEGYDRAFT Effective from 01 July 2021

A3352000

Prudent Financial Management

Prudent financial management is a legal requirement for Councils. Subpart 3 of the Local Government Act provides for a level of predictability for ratepayers, and highlights the need decisions to be made in the interest of current and future residents.

The major components of a good strategy tie in three key factors:∑ Capital expenditure identified to continue to deliver sustainable levels of service. This

includes:o costs to renew existing assets,o to provide for increasing levels of service where desired, and o to provide for growth if necessary.

∑ Borrowing is a rationed resource. Council does not have unlimited borrowing capacity and the ratepayers do not have unlimited resources to pay increasing rates for increased debt servicing.

∑ Rates are a limited resource. Council must be mindful of the impact rates has on ratepayers. It runs into two limitations. The first is ability to pay, and the second is willingness to pay. Ability to pay is addressed through the government rates rebate, but willingness to pay is harder to define.

Key challenges

Invercargill will be exposed to several challenges over the next ten years. Those challenges include:

1. A demographic change toward an ageing population with less growth than forecast. 2. Growing pressure to recognise climate change effects3. Significant capital expenditure on existing infrastructure4. Emerging pressure on higher standards for water, stormwater and Sewage disposal5. Growing pressure to amalgamate Three Waters into larger service delivery entities6. Investment in the Inner city7. Aging Buildings needing significant upgrade or replacement (including Rugby Park,

Museum, Civic Administration building among others)

However, acknowledgment of these challenges is the first hurdle to overcome. Commentary on items 1-3 is included below.

For water and sewerage reform, Council has taken an approach of business as usual. The combination of rising standards and amalgamation of waters into separate entities address problem and solution. Council approach to these is that ICC will continue to deliver water and sewerage according to our plans, and that if new entities are formed in the next 3 years as expected, then they will get assets and a revenue base that has been maintained.


228

A3352000

Investment in the Inner city and aging buildings has been addressed through the capital work programme.

There are no other factors that are expected to impact on ICC ability to maintain existing levels of service and to meet additional demands for service.

Demographic changes

In the recent past there was a short-term trend for provincial city populations to decrease, leading some commentators to raise the spectre of “ghost towns”. This followed several years of slow decrease in population with an increased drift to major urban centres. In the past 3 years this trend of lower populations and decreasing real estate values has slowly reversed. Invercargill has seen significant lifts in property values and discussions have emerged relating to housing shortages. The recent outbreak of Covid-19 will create significant uncertainty about the near- and medium-term economic outlook and that will flow through to property and population. However, it is too early to determine whether that will be a short term “blip’ in the statistics or move provincial NZ to more growth or more retraction. That trend will take some time to determine, however analysis at this time shows that Invercargill population growth has outstripped recent StatsNZ mid-range forecasts.

While Council will be taking action to influence a positive outcome rather than a negative impact, it is worth reflecting on what the impact of change may be for Council and the community. In relation to growth the city has most of the infrastructure necessary to service a population for most of the growth in the Long Term Plan. Council has already identified a need for another water supply to mitigate the risks of a single source of supply. That need would be accelerated if population rises. The costs of an emergency water supply are highlighted in the Water activity. Another effect of growth would be on the volume of sewage outfalls. An increased population may put additional pressure to improve the quality of the outlets for treated sewage, however it is expected that the standards for these will be lifted when the current consents need to be renewed. Increasing population would likely see the current increase in house prices continue, with more houses being built to cope. Subdivision capacity for growth is not unlimited but is able to respond to market demand. New subdivision are responsible for providing all of the infrastructure for new properties (roads, footpath, stormwater pipes and water and sewerage pipes) so the increase for Council is the maintenance of those assets, which is funded from the increased rates. Costs only fall to Council if the major arterials and collector pipes need to be upgraded through growth. This is not envisaged to be a factor in the next 20 years.

Major demographic “shocks” are possible through Central Government reform. Those reforms include:

∑ Reform of the Southland Institute of Technology will have an uncertain impact on the number of both foreign and NZ students living in Invercargill to complete their studies.

∑ Increasing likelihood that Water, Sewage disposal and stormwater disposal will be delivered by Central Government.

∑ Potential future closure of Tiwai point.

These changes are uncertain, and so cannot be planned for. The extent of the change and impact is unknown. However, it takes a significant change to significantly impact on Council services and costs. Also, it takes some time for the community to make decisions and adjust to the change. Council will need to respond to the collective impact of individuals choices.

If population reduces it can have different impacts:∑ The same number of properties but a lower average persons per property.


229

A3352000

∑ Sales prices of properties reduce and they take longer to sell. The Market adjusts for these changes.

∑ Properties are unable to sell and get abandoned, and then subsequently demolished. This has occurred in NZ in past decades but typically in much smaller communities than Invercargill. A trend at this level takes time to emerge and so there is time to manage it if it emerges. Communities need to be mindful of this possibility. The sooner it is identified the better it can be managed.

Due to the significant uncertainty of the current economic outlook, Council is not planning for majorchanges in population. Our past observation is that the changes in recent year have been both up and down and the impact has been minor.

Changes in the composition of population by age group and ethnicity are also expected to continue. This change is not expected to have a significant change in the services provided by Council, although Council will adapt to these changes as they emerge. Changes may occur in the nature and shape of Council’s activity programmes for operating activities. These changes will not be significant and will occur within the current funding envelopes.

One major composition change that may impact significantly is dependent on the economic fall-out from Covid-19. It is expected that this will have a significant impact on unemployment, although how much and where and when that may occur is extremely uncertain. Council will be monitoring unemployment levels for Invercargill/Southland and also other statistics for homelessness and crime. If necessary, Council will change its programme delivery to address these issues. Council expects that if these occur there will be Nation-wide initiatives to help address these. Council will beready to engage in these for the benefit of Invercargill. Council will also modify its operational programmes if needed.

Information from Statistic NZ shows the population change for Invercargill since 1996. The shape of the blue line indicates why there has been significant change in the Invercargill housing market. After a long period of decline to be below the 1996 population, the population rose to be at a similar level to 1996 in 2015. Steady growth since then has put pressure on existing housingsupply. That pressure has built-up and the latest Rating Values show very large rises in residential property values averaging around 50% since 2017.

An increase in population of 500-600 people per annum is around 1%. Our assessment of growth for the LTP has been included at 0.6%. The impact of growth for the City is positive for the next 10 years as it can occur with within the current and planned infrastructure so does not incur additional cost.

There is a consistent theme within the Council’s Community Outcomes. The Outcomes demonstrate that the Council will maintain a strong, safe and well- utilised City with an increased, more diverse and active population who encourage the development of future technology and embrace the facilities offered to them.


230

A3352000

The Council seeks to encourage this through the development of growth projects and sustainability of existing services. However, it is not anticipated that land use will change to an extent that would have an impact on debt over this course.

With low growth anticipated for the number of properties, the Council notes that the current infrastructure network is set to service the community, provided it is renewed when required. The Council’s infrastructure network has been built to service a population much larger than that which currently resides within the City.

The historic pattern of Invercargill growth and development means that a number of the Council’s assets were built at the same or a similar time, and therefore generally require renewal at a similar time. As a result there will be peaks in renewal costs which are evident within this Strategy.

Growing pressure of Climate change

Climate change has been noticeable in some forms for a number of years. There is no doubt that the weather patterns have developed more extremities. Council is noticing a combination of more storms, with flooding, and more droughts. These higher extremes place more pressure on Council infrastructure services. Higher frequency of storms leads to increased costs on roads to recover from Storm damage, also the flooding frequency could lead to a need to upgrade the capacity of the stormwater network to mitigate flooding of buildings. Droughts create more frequency and longer duration of water peak use, and that puts stress on the current single source of water.

In addition to the weather pattern changes, rising sea levels are a future concern. Invercargill is a flat and low-lying city; parts of the City are likely to be impacted by rising sea levels.

While not wanting to diminish the significant future impact of these issues the timeframes for sea level rises are into the future, rather than the ten-year planning horizon of this plan. It is expected that rising sea levels will have an impact on some Invercargill properties. Those that are low lying and close to the sea. Assessment of the impact of the mid-range forecast of sea level rise for the Southland region, shows that the number of areas impacted by a 1m rise in Invercargill are very minimal. The potential impact of more significant sea level rises will emerge over time and individual property owners will become aware of the impacts well in advance. Council will be aware of future developments and will be mindful of rising sea levels when considering Resource consents for new properties and the impact on future District Plans. Council will not impact individual’s property rights by taking pre-emptive action on existing properties where the current uncertainty remains. As this may have an effect of making a future possible loss for a property owner a certain current loss. At this stage that would be unfair to both the property owner and the ratepayers who may then have to fund the loss.

Significant Capital Expenditure

This Strategy operates in line with the Infrastructure Strategy and observes that over the next ten years the cost to the Invercargill Community to preserve, renew and maintain our infrastructure assets will be significantly higher than previous renewal costs. Because of this the rates increase will be higher than in previous years. When looking at this Strategy it is important to understand where Council is starting from and where it wants to get to in ten years. As at 30 June 2020 the financial situation of Council is one of good health, with reasonable strong capacity to invest for the future.

Council was meeting four of the six prudence benchmarks. It has a relatively low level of debt compared to other New Zealand Councils and a low level of debt compared to its rate revenue.


231

A3352000

Council asset position showed total assets of over $1 billion and investments of $97.6 million with no significant liabilities outside of term debt. Council also had its credit rating from Fitch Rating upgraded from AA to AA+ stable, which further supports Council’s strong financial position.

The ten years cover by the Long-term Plan does present the Council with challenges financially. This is in response to the Council’s increasing knowledge of its infrastructural assets and the increasing demand for improving infrastructure. This is of particular importance for Water Supply and Stormwater, as communities within New Zealand are becoming more concerned about drinking water quality and reducing contaminant entering our waterways via stormwater runoff.

Invercargill City Council like many other Councils has a pattern of under delivering on its Capital spending plans. There are 2 potential methods to address this:

1. Spend more money to ensure that the capital is spent. Taking this path would require greater knowledge of the obstacles related to capital projects, and indicates a sense of certainty that does not exist in reality.

2. Recognise that there is a sense of guess work in the programme and recognise that it will not all be delivered within the arbitrary time constraints that are an integral constraint of financial planning. That constraint is the accounting concept of a financial year.

Council will take a joint approach:∑ additional resource being engaged to monitor capital project delivery,∑ provision of funding for a portion of the items listed in the plan.

The level of funding provided for the renewals component of the capital programme will gradually rise from 70% to 75% of the programme over three years. This recognises that the assessment of work and timing is uncertain. The renewal capital programme is based on average lives, and while it is supported by evidence, it clearly cannot be based on prospective asset condition.

When resorting to statistical references for averages it can be seen:

An average life of 80 years will have a level of variation for each asset. This is called a standard deviation. Statistics tells us that there is almost certainty that an asset will need to be replaced within 3 deviations. If the variation is 5 years, which is reasonably conservative, then it can be almost certain that an asset will be replaced in one of 30 years. Being 15 years before the average and 15 years after. Not as precise as modelling may suggest.

In regards to major projects, 75% will effectively mean that the projects will be delivered 25% later than that indicated in the plan. That is, a 2 year project will take 28-30 months, which is a significant improvement on our historic delivery.

Council is also focused on growing Invercargill’s community assets and reinvigorating Invercargill’s CBD. A number of large community projects are planned throughout the ten years, all part of making Invercargill a more desirable place to live and work. These initiatives are also designed to complement and support the Southland Regional Development Strategy. The main projects that fall within this category include a new urban play facility and art centre within the CBD and a MuseumRedevelopment.

The Council via its subsidiary company, Invercargill City Holdings Limited, is taking part ownership of a company that is planning a major upgrade of the inner city area.

The end goal for Council is to provide its citizens with a City that is maintaining and improving its key infrastructure assets while understanding that a City needs to also be a vibrant, entertaining and an interesting place to live, work and play.


232

A3352000

Financially this means that the Council will be increasing its debt over the life of the Plan in order to achieve what it has set out to do.

Depreciation is calculated on an annual basis and currently represents 27% of total operating expenditure.

Charging depreciation each year spreads the cost of an asset over its useful life.

Council is proposing to balance its budget in each year of the LTP. With Council’s net debt approach and a balanced budget Council is funding depreciation at a global level. Council does not fund depreciation on a service by service basis. Council does not transfer depreciation into special reserves but for some targeted rates outlined below any cash surplus after meeting all costs (excluding depreciation) and capital spending, will be placed in a targeted reserve so rates for that purpose will only be used for that purpose. Those targeted rates that will have a targeted reserve are:

Water RatesSewage disposal ratesCentral City CoordinatorBluff Community Board.

While depreciation is an important indicator of the true long term cost of the service, as it reflects a level of asset consumption in a particular period, it is not a panacea for the long term sustainability of a given service. Assets have been purchased by a combination of debt and annual revenue. The goal of the funding of services is that there is a level of equity between generations that is that each generation pays a fair share. Depreciation can be a proxy for this equity but there are a number of circumstances where this does not hold true. New assets that have a high debt, have the cost of debt and depreciation to meet. However, debt has a lower cost over time due to inflation, and the generation that has the debt pays interest and contributes to repayment of the debt. This reduction of debt lowers the costs for future generations through two mechanisms. The first being the inflation effect on debt and the second being the debt repayment.

The financial strategy reflects a prudent approach to debt and inter-generational equity.

Intergenerational Equity

The services that the Council provides are costly due to the value and amount of assets that are used. The Council’s strategy is to ensure that both current and future ratepayers pay their fair share of the cost of providing services. Intergenerational equity is achieved through loan funding long-term assets and drawing rates to pay for the loan over an extended period of time. Also, depreciation assists in intergenerational equity by ensuring that a cost is recognised for the consumption of the assets. Where debt is low and future asset renewal is approaching, the generation that is consuming the asset should also be contributing to its replacement. For major renewal the level of service remains the same before and after replacement. This ensures that both current and future users pay for the assets. Examples of this can be found in the Invercargill City Council Infrastructure Strategy.

Replacement of an asset with a like asset should not lead to a significant increase in the funding required for a service. If that occurs it indicates that funding is not equitable, as ratepayers of the future are paying a higher cost for the same level of service enjoyed by previous ratepayers at a lower cost.


233

A3352000

Debt Management

Net Debt

To aide understanding and predictability of funding requirements Council has introduced the concept of net debt.

Net Debt = total borrowings less cash and cash investments.

Council is able to borrow and invest money at similar interest rates. Sometimes it is slightly higher and sometimes slightly lower. Currently the interest rate paid on debt is lower than the amount which can be earnt on an investment. As Council is a conservative organisation it does not borrow for the sole purpose of investing. In some years there may be financial gain from that, but in other years it will have a cost. Borrowing for the sole purpose of investing is considered to be too close to speculation. It is prudent to speculate with ratepayers’ money. However, to gain future certainty of funding costs Council may decide to borrow in anticipation of capital spending. In such a case the funds will be invested for a short period.

Borrowings

The Council’s debt (excluding Invercargill City Holdings Limited (ICHL) bond) remains relatively low against the Council’s total assets base (11.8% as at 30 June 2020). However, Council recognises that it has $100m of uncalled capital within ICHL. That capital can be called at the discretion of the directors of ICHL. Therefore in determining the maximum debt to would be prudent to incur, allowance needs to be made for the possibility of the capital to be called.

As a borrower from LGFA there is a maximum debt that Council can borrow. As a Credit rated Council that limit has been 250% of annual operating revenue. This is expected to rise to 300% before falling back to 280% over a number of years. Due the reduction to 280% being in 5 steps it would be unwise to take debt above 280%. In addition to the uncalled capital Council needs to make provision for unforeseen shocks. It would not be prudent to be at the maximum debt and then find a recession or natural disaster impacts on costs or revenue, with the potential to push the organisation above debt limits and therefore not able to access the necessary cash.

To be prudent Council has set a maximum debt level of 150% of revenue. This provides an increasing net debt cap over time rising from $148M to $210M

While the Council remains focused on keeping debt to a manageable level over the course of the Long-term Plan, large infrastructure projects as well as future growth projects necessitate the need for the Council to take on an increased level of debt.


234

A3352000

Debt repayment

A significant issue for this LTP and this strategy is the increasing debt at a time when interest rates are at historic lows. This exposes the community to a significant risk of increased interest rates.

Debt is predicted to get close to the debt limits in the first 5 years of the plan. With borrowing rates as low as 1%, a rise of 1% will double the rates requirement to pay the interest. Every 1% increase in the interest rate would mean a rates rise above the forecast rates increase of about 2.5%. So a 2% rates rise would become 5%. Part of this impact can be managed through prudent borrowing, but only for a period of time.

In the interests of intergenerational equity Council should not go to the debt limits without a recognition that the debt will need to be reduced to allow future ratepayers to also undertake projects that will emerge in the future.

The funding strategy for rates will incorporate an amount of 2% of debt to go to the repayment of the debt.

Security for Borrowings

Council borrows from the Local Government Funding Agency. Part of borrowing from that source is that a standard security over rates is required. This is the most common security for Local Authority borrowing and is understood by the financial market lenders. It means that there is the ability in the event of a debt default for a security agent to set a rate to be able to pay the loan requirements.

The Council currently maintains an AA+ credit rating

Cash and Cash investments

The Council must ensure that each year’s projected operating revenues are set at a level sufficient to meet that year’s operating expenses, unless the local authority resolves that it is financially prudent not to do so.


235

A3352000

The Council aims to operate a surplus for the duration of the Long-term Plan. To maintain sound treasury practice Council holds a range of investments in cash deposits. These are in two groups, funds held for restricted and non-restricted reserves.

Restricted reserves are held for a specific purpose and money is only available to be used for that purpose. In contrast a non-restricted reserve can be for a variety of reasons. These investments build up or reduce over time due to funding needs.

Holding a level of cash in investments provides a safety buffer for Council in times of uncertainty in the financial markets, as it gives us the option to use funds if the interest rates are considered to be artificially high. Having this flexibility is one factor contributing to Council’s strong financial position and good credit rating. Council is targeting to maintain at least a cash investment portfolio of around $40m, this will fluctuate according to financial need.

Council limit on borrowing

Council is setting its limit on borrowing based on the Net debt measurement. The net debt limit is 150% of annual operating revenue (excluding significant one off revenue items).

Gross debt will be limited to 150% of annual operating revenue (excluding significant one off revenue items) plus the value of Cash and cash investments.

Rates

The Council will ensure that there are sufficient cash resources available to meet its obligations. The Council’s current assets need to outweigh current liabilities, where current assets include cash on hand and available lines of credit

Council reviews operational expenditure for short and long-term cost savings and has established operational savings targets for the first three years of the Long- term Plan. These savings are intended to improve efficiencies within activities and services without impacting the current level of service being provided.

Rates are the “balancing factor” in the financial equations of Council. Revenue for all sources are examined on an annual basis, as are costs. Capital expenditure is evaluated for priority, need and timing for maintaining levels of service. Capital is funded from rates and, borrowing or use of investments. In the long term there is a limit on borrowing as the result of which either rates need to rise or the level of capital investment needs to reduce. This is an iterative process where the outcome is to get the service level desired by the community at a costs that is both affordable and does not hit the “willingness to pay” trigger.

Rates are set based on the factors relating to the property. One of the main factors that impacts predictability of rates is the three yearly revaluation of every property to establish the “Rateable values’. When properties are revalued it creates distortion in the rates increases each ratepayer has compared to Council stated rates rise. Unfortunately, there is very little Council can do to alleviate this effect. However, council is mindful that the rates increases should be predictable, not just in terms of total rates rise but also in impact on an individual property. For the past two years Council has set a uniform increase in rates that is each rate has risen by the same percentage. This means each ratepayer has the same increase, unless the owner has made changes to the property that trigger a need for a revaluation. It is part of this strategy that Council will maintain that practice for years that are not a Rates revaluation year.


236

A3352000

Council limit on rates rises

In determining the impact and limits of rates rises Council has considered the level of capital spending required and also the limit on Council borrowing. To be able to undertake the capital works in the LTP the limits on rates rises are:

∑ The rates rise in any year will not be higher than 7.5%.

∑ The total rates take in any year will be no higher than a compounding annual rates rise of 7.5% per annum plus growth within the rating base.

Council in this strategy has put an emphasis on the predictability of rates. Council also recognises that the LTP is a ten year plan rather than being 10 one year plans. This means that the work programmes are established to maintain levels of service and that if work is not completed in one year it still needs to be funded over the period of the plan.

Managing Financial Investments and Equity Securities

The Council holds investments in companies, property and cash.

Investments in Companies/Trusts

The Council is an equity holder in companies and has a controlling influence over four trusts. The principal reason for holding an equity interest in the company investments is to provide a financial return on investment for ratepayers. The interests in the trusts are to enable more efficient and targeted community outcomes for the community. Trusts provide a good opportunity for community engagement with a particular outcome. Council does not seek financial return for the trusts. The Council’s interest in the companies and trusts are as follows:

Company Shareholding/Interest

Principal Reason For Investment

Budgeted Return

Invercargill City Holdings Ltd

100%To undertakecommercial opportunities and provide dividend returns to the City.

$4,886,000 for 2020/21 year

Southland Museum and Art Gallery Trust Board

Controlling interest To provide specialised governance for the Museum.

Nil.

Bluff Maritime Museum Trust

Controlling interest To provide specialised governance for the Museum.

Nil.

Invercargill City Charitable Trust

100%To provide access to recreational andcultural events within the City, in line with community outcomes.

Nil.


237

A3352000

Invercargill Community Sports and Recreation Trust

100%To increase Invercargill residents’ active participation in sports and physical activities and arts and cultural activities.

Nil.

The Council has no plans to change its shareholding, although in accordance with good practice this is reviewed regularly.

Property Investments

The Council’s Investment Property Department oversees the development and undertaking of investment in property within the City. The properties are divided into two categories:

∑ Endowment properties which have been either allocated (per above) or purchased fromendowment funds.

∑ Trading properties (fee simple, no classification on title, currently leased).

The Council’s objective is to maximise return from endowment and trading properties, however due to historic lease arrangements (21 year Glasgow leases) the return from these properties is below market rates. The objective for the net return on investment from both endowment and trading properties is at least equal to current market interest rates.

Council also has a portfolio of operational properties and properties acquired for a strategic purpose. Where a property acquired for a strategic purpose is no longer required for that purpose, it is placed in the Trading Properties portfolio and is considered to be available for sale. Council does not see itself as a property investor for profit, with the exception of the endowment property portfolio.

One significant property acquired for strategic purposes is the Don Street property developed by Council

Cash Investments

The Council holds cash for two main reasons:

∑ To ensure strong lines of liquidity and access to cash remains available to Council.∑ To support the balance of reserves through short- term investments (90 to 360 days) to

maximise return on investment.

Rates and Affordability

The Council has come through a period of medium-level rates rises over the previous three years (2018/19: 4.91%, 2019/20: 3.50% and 2020/21: 2.00%). This was due to the Council focusing on ensuring that rates were low and consistent from year to year.

For future years there are some key challenges that will present themselves in relation to affordability. This will occur as the Council enters a period of accelerated capital expenditure to develop our services, whilst looking to be a growing and innovative City.


238

A3352000

Increasing costs of providing council services is likely to intensify the affordability issues in the future. In certain years of the Long-term Plan, pressure from required infrastructure renewals has led to rates increases that are less affordable than what the Council would like.

A larger rates increase will not necessarily occur in these years as growth projects are loan-funded and will be paid back over time so as not to unfairly unburden the current ratepayers with the large costs associated with these projects.

The Council seeks to embrace innovation and change over the upcoming years, and with the constant evolution and growth of technology, is witnessing and experiencing the change first-hand.

Invercargill City Holdings Limited (ICHL)

Invercargill City Holdings Limited is a 100% owned subsidiary of Invercargill City Council. ICHL was formed to provide a clear differentiation between Council’s core ratepayers orientated activities and its commercial trading enterprises and investments. It was established for the purpose of consolidation and management of existing Council companies, with the responsibility of control and oversight of the performance of the Council Owned Companies activities on behalf of the ultimate shareholder, Invercargill City Council.

Companies that sit within the ICHL group include, Invercargill City Property Limited (ICPL), Invercargill Airport Limited and Electricity Invercargill Limited (EIL). Within ICPL sits an additional entity. Within EIL sits a number of utility based entities. One of the main purposes of ICHL is for these individual companies to trade profitably in order for ICHL to return a dividend to Council and help offset the rates demand as a result.

ICHL has historically given a dividend to Council since 1999. In order to provide predictability for rates Council has set an expectation that the dividend is set at a level that allows ICHL to be able to pay an annual dividend that will increase with inflation each year. The dividend is forecast to increase over the next ten years with $4,886,000 predicted for the 2020/21 year. Should this dividend fail to increase as predicted, Council would have less income received to minimise the impact on the general rates draw.

Council has noted that they cannot be financially reliant on an increasing dividend to match 10% of the general rates draw every year. Whilst ICHL strives to produce greater dividends year on year this is not necessarily going to be in line with the anticipated rates requirement increase.

Disclosure Statement

The purpose of this statement is to disclose the Council’s planned financial performance in relation to various benchmarks to enable the assessment of whether the Council is prudently managing its revenues, expenses, assets, liabilities and general financial dealings. The Council is required to include this statement in its Long-term Plan in accordance with the Local Government (Financial Reporting and Prudence) Regulations 2014 (the regulations). Refer to the regulations for more information, including definitions of some of the terms used in this statement.

Rates Affordability Benchmark


239

A3352000

The Council meets the rates affordability benchmark if: ∑ its planned rates income equals or is less than each quantified limit on rates; and ∑ its planned rates increases equal or are less than each quantified limit on rates increases.

Rates (Income) Affordability

The following graph compares the council’s planned rates with a quantified limit on rates. The quantified limit is rates revenue will not exceed 60% of total revenue.

The Local Government Rates Inquiry suggests that around 50% of a council’s operating revenue should be taken from rates. Currently the Council draws about 55-57% of its operational revenue from rates.

The Council aims to maintain the rates collected to between the range of 50% and 60% of total Council revenue. The Council intends to increase user-pays methods to enable the income required from rates to maintain steady without significant rates increases. The Council will also seek efficiencies in how services are delivered to assist with maintaining rates revenue at a steady level.

Rates are an important source of funding for the Council, but they are not the only source available. You can see more about how the Council funds its services in the Financial Management section of the Long-term Plan. The Council’s Revenue and Financing Policy sets out the funding of its operational and capital expenditure and the sources of those funds on an individual activity basis.

Throughout the Long-term Plan rates fund between 55% and 61% of the Council’s total revenue. The 2026/27 year has a significantly higher rates funded component due to the planned completion of the Museum. The Museum will cost roughly $2 million annually to cover the repayments and interest with minimal fees revenue to offset this charge to rates. Council will look to increase fees slightly in the later years to bring the balance back once the timing of the Museum opening is further defined.

Rates (Increases) Affordability

The following graph compares the Council’s planned rates increases with a quantified limit on rates increases. The quantified limit is rates increases will not exceed the Local Government Cost Index (LGCI) plus 3%. The forecast LGCI increases for the next ten years are shown in the table below, but for example, if the LGCI change was 2.20%, the Council’s rates increase would be no more than 5.20%. The Council recognises that this increase could potentially be higher than household


240

A3352000

income, so although a maximum limit has been set, the Council will endeavour to achieve lower increases when planning projects and services that rely on rates revenue.

The Council recognises that the cost of providing Council services (LGCI) is rising at a higher rate than the Consumer Price Index (CPI). The Council is also mindful of affordability issues amongst our ratepayers. The Council continues to investigate cost-cutting methods to ensure that the revenue required to run the Council is kept relatively steady. The rates increases reflect the money required each year.

Changes in the consumer price index (CPI) are used as the basis for measuring the inflation faced by households. It gives a picture of how the prices of the goods and services purchased by the typical New Zealand household are changing over time. It is therefore heavily represented by food, accommodation and transport costs, which collectively make up over 50% of the index. The Council however purchases a different mix of goods and services. The Council’s ‘basket’ is dominated by changes in the Local Government cost adjustors such as labour costs, land and materials associated with assets. There is therefore a difference between changes in CPI and the Council’s cost (LGCI). To enable the Council to best predict what the future cost of providing its services will be, Council has based future inflationary costs on the LGCI rather than CPI. The additional 3% is to allow the Council to undertake new projects, for example the Central City Master Plan, Museum and Art Centre projects.

Debt Affordability Benchmark

The Council meets the debt affordability benchmark if its planned borrowing is within each quantified limit on borrowing.

The following graph compares the Council’s planned debt with a quantified limit on borrowing. The quantified limit is that debt will not exceed 15% of total assets.


241

A3352000

During the Long-term Plan period, the debt affordability percentage is expected to increase, peaking at 14.32% in 2026/27 before decreasing again.

The Council considers that setting a borrowing limit of 15% of assets will assist in prudently managing Council’s borrowing activities to ensure the ongoing funding of Council. The Council will continue to consider and approve the borrowing requirement for each financial year in the Annual Plan or Long-term Plan recognising that borrowing capacity does not have to be fully utilised.

Balanced Budget Benchmark

The Council meets this benchmark if its revenue equals or is greater than its operating expenses.

The above graph displays the Council’s planned revenue (excluding development contributions, financial contributions, vested assets, gains on derivative financial instruments, and revaluations of property, plant, or equipment) as a proportion of planned operating expenses (excluding losses on derivative financial instruments and revaluations of property, plant, or equipment).

The Council meets the balanced budget benchmark if its planned revenue equals or is greater than its planned operating expenses.

Section 100(2) of the Local Government Act 2002 (LGA) sets out the matters that Council must have regard to when determining that it is prudent to operate an unbalanced budget.


242

A3352000

These matters are: (a) the estimated expense of achieving and maintaining the predicted levels of service provision

set out in the Long-term Plan, including estimated expenses associated with maintaining the service capacity and integrity of assets throughout their useful life; and

(b) the projected revenue available to fund the estimated expense associated with maintaining the service capacity and integrity of assets throughout their useful life; and

(c) the equitable allocation of responsibility for funding the provision and maintenance of assets and facilities throughout their useful life; and

(d) the funding and financial policies adopted under section 102.

The proposed Long-term Plan has set projected operating revenues for all years at levels that would meet the projected operating costs.

Essential Services Benchmark

The following graph displays the Council’s planned capital expenditure on network services as a proportion of expected depreciation on network services.

The Council meets this benchmark if its capital expenditure on network services equals or is greater than depreciation on network services. Although not reaching the target in every financial year, over time Council’s capital expenditure should equal its depreciation. This will mean Council is replacing its assets as they deteriorate, however due to some projects being large it is hard to assess this on a year by year basis.

Council does not meet this benchmark in four of the 10 years. 2023/24, 2024/25, 2028/29 and 2029/30 are lower than deprecation level due mainly to the timing of projects which were brought forward to meet Government funding requirements around 3 Waters and Shovel ready projects. The increase years for the Government joint funding projects are in 2020/21 and 2021/22. Council does meet the Benchmark over the course over the combined 10 year, and exceeds in most cases.

Debt Servicing Benchmark

The following graph displays the Council’s planned borrowing costs as a proportion of planned revenue (excluding development contributions, financial contributions, vested assets, gains on derivative financial instruments, and revaluations of property, plant, or equipment).


243

A3352000

Because Statistics New Zealand projects the Council’s population will grow as fast as the national population is projected to grow, it meets the debt servicing benchmark if it’s planned borrowing costs equal or are less than 10% of its planned revenue.


244

A3009110

Infrastructure Strategy: 2021 - 2051

Contents1. Introduction .................................................................................................................. 3

2. Infrastructure Strategy Overview ................................................................................ 4

2.1 Who we are............................................................................................................. 4

2.2 Council’s Vision and Direction ................................................................................. 4

2.3 What we deliver....................................................................................................... 8

3. Background .................................................................................................................. 9

4. Key Assumptions ........................................................................................................11

5. Significant Challenges and Issues.............................................................................27

5.1 Meeting our long-term renewal expectations for Infrastructure ...............................27

5.2 Responding to the changing environment (both natural and technological) and retaining Invercargill’s character including its built environment..........................27

5.3 The City’s changing demographic profile and its ability and willingness to pay.......28

5.4 Ensuring Council works in a financially prudent manner that promotes the current and future interests of the community.................................................................28

5.5 Water Reform.........................................................................................................29

5.6 CBD Revitalisation .................................................................................................29

6. Our Strategic Response to the Challenges and Issues ............................................30

6.1 Maintain Our Current Asset Base...........................................................................30

6.2 Renew Assets at the Rate of Asset Consumption ..................................................30

6.3 Focus on Asset Criticality .......................................................................................30

6.4 Focus on Sound Evidence based Activity Decision Making....................................30

6.5 Understand Our Community...................................................................................31

7. Our Tools to Deliver the Strategy...............................................................................32

7.1 Strengthen our Asset Management ........................................................................32

7.2 Better Investment Decision Making ........................................................................33

7.3 Engage our Customers to better understand their needs and wants ......................33

8. Linking the Long-term Plan to Activity Plans............................................................34

8.1 Core Infrastructure .................................................................................................34

9. Priority Projects and Options .....................................................................................35

10. Significant Decisions: .................................................................................................35

10.1Water – EMERGENCY Water Source ....................................................................35

10.2Sewerage – Discharge Consent RenewalS 2025 & 2029.......................................36

11. Changes to Levels of Service .....................................................................................36

12. Our Approach to Asset Management.........................................................................38

12.1Statutory and regulatory requirements ...................................................................38


245

A3009110 Page 2 of 48

12.2Asset Management Policy and Asset Management Strategy..................................38

12.3Asset Management Information Systems (AMIS) ...................................................39

12.4Progressively improve asset evidence ...................................................................39

12.5Operate in a prudent manner .................................................................................39

12.6Renew in a financially prudent manner...................................................................40

12.7Levels of service and demand................................................................................40

12.8Improve the asset management system.................................................................41

12.9Sustainability and Resilience..................................................................................41

13. How We Are Going To Fund Infrastructure ...............................................................42

14. Long Term Financial Estimates..................................................................................43

14.1CORE Infrastructure Expenditure...........................................................................43

14.2CORE Infrastructure Expenditure...........................................................................44

14.3CORE Infrastructure Funding Forecast ..................................................................44

14.4Total Infrastructure Financials ................................................................................45

14.5financial implications ..............................................................................................48


246

A3009110 Page 3 of 48

1. Introduction

Infrastructure provides a foundation for building strong and resilient communities.This Strategy sets out how the Invercargill City Council’s existing infrastructure base for roading, water supply, sewerage and stormwater, will be continued into the near future. The Local Government Act requires that the Council include Roading and 3 Waters, including flood protection, in its Infrastructure Strategy. Building Assets,and Parks and Recreation were previously included in the Infrastructure Strategy but have been removed from this strategy now. Building Assets and Parks and Recreation still adhere to the principles of the Infrastructure Strategy. Solid waste has been previously included within this Infrastructure Strategy, however is more aligned to an activity management plan approach and therefore not included within this strategy.

Invercargill City Council is required under legislation to plan for the next thirty years and identify what issues relating to infrastructure may be experienced over this timeframe, how Council intends to manage these issues, and what implications may arise. It will further outline how Council will renew or replace their infrastructure assets and respond to varying levels of service for these assets.

This document is supplied under Section 101B of the Local Government Act 2002.

The Strategy identifies how Council will meet their long-term renewals for significant assets, adapting to the changing environment and demographic trends while embracing growth projects aligned with Council’s vision.

Invercargill City Council provides residents with services that are essential to the community. The Long-term Plan (LTP) sets out the services, the standard to which they are provided and what they will cost. Some of these services are provided by using assets that form part of the City’s infrastructure.

The Infrastructure Strategy is the document that summarises the way in which Invercargill City Council will adapt its infrastructure to meet the challenges ahead.


247

A3009110 Page 4 of 48

2. Infrastructure Strategy Overview

2.1 WHO WE ARE

Invercargill City is a relatively small and compact City extending from Makarewa in the north to Bluff in the south, Kennington in the east and Oreti Beach in the west.The Invercargill City District encompasses an area of 49,142 hectares. Generally we cover a land area 33.8 km by 20.1 km. Landscape features of importance to the community include Bluff Hill (Motupohue) and four major waterways which thread through the City (Makarewa, Waihopai, Otepuni, and Kingswell rivers). These, along with the Oreti River all flow into the New River Estuary. The urban areas of Invercargill and Bluff contain extensive areas of open space as well as distinct heritage buildings.

Invercargill has many extensive parks and recreational areas that are both close and accessible to residents. Queens Park is a centrally located, nationally recognised premier park offering wide and varied recreational use. Sandy Point area is a large environment and recreational area and is close to the city residents.

Road networks are generally formed on a grid layout and with relatively flat terrain, which makes mobility and accessibility easy for all modes of transport. The roading network has plenty of capacity.This ensures that travel reliability is a given for all road users.

The pipe networks provide potable water supply, wastewater (sewerage) reticulation and stormwater reticulation. The piped networks are compact and generally contained within road reserve and generally not located in residents private property where access is more difficult. They are well structured and historically well sized to provide for the City’s requirements with only short travel distances to and from treatment facilities, with the exception of drinking water.Water is sourced and treated at Branxholme to the north of the City and piped 16.5km to reservoirs within the urban areas of Invercargill and Bluff

This map outlines the territorial boundaries of the Invercargill City Council.

2.2 COUNCIL’S VISION AND DIRECTION

Council’s vision for Invercargill is “Our City with Heart – He Ngākau Aroha.” Council must provide sound management of its infrastructure to realise this vision.


248

A3009110 Page 5 of 48

Challenges faced by Council

∑ Meeting our long-term renewal obligations for infrastructure∑ Ensuring Council decisions are financially prudent and recognise the current

and future interests of the community∑ Responding to the changing environment (both natural and technological) and

retaining Invercargill’s character including its built environment ∑ Recognising the City’s changing demographic profile, and its ability and

willingness to pay for the services required∑ Encouraging growth projects whilst ensuring financial and operational

sustainability for future generations∑ Climate change and the impacts of this upon our infrastructure now and future

demands∑ Central Government water reform and the uncertainty of the impact of this∑ Ensuring the CBD revitalisation achieves its goals

What is our Strategy to achieve the vision and manage the challenges?

∑ Maintain our current asset base, while responding to the challenges in a strategic manner

∑ Focus on critical aging assets and allow non-critical assets to experience limited failure before renewal

∑ Avoid expanding existing infrastructure networks (at our own cost), except to improve levels of service to meet consent and legislative requirements, and utilise current network capacity to meet forecast growth needs

∑ Focus on sound evidence-based activity investment decisions, rather than just the management of assets

∑ Renew assets at the rate of asset consumption∑ Design pipe network renewals to accommodate impacts of climate change∑ Should unplanned failures occur, use a mix of Council’s financial "good health”,

accumulated reserves and / or insurances (where appropriate) to manage risks∑ Ensure growth is focused on social, financial and operational sustainability and

aligned to Council’s vision∑ Better understand and meet our community’s needs, through consultation and

delivery of agreed levels of service∑ When arranging contracts or significant activities, consider how investment

decisions may impact a viable competitive supplier market in the Region

The tools we are going to use

∑ Strengthen our asset management capabilities and practices, in order to improve cost-efficiency, better manage our risks, and make better informed decisions about infrastructure

∑ Improve business decisions when investing by using an evidence based business case approach

∑ Engage our customers more often to better understand their needs and desiresand how these may change over time


249

A3009110 Page 6 of 48

Our Assumptions at a glance

Assumption Level of UncertaintyEconomy MediumPopulation Growth MediumClimate Change HighConsents MediumNatural Disaster MediumCouncil services and structure MediumAsset life and Asset Revaluation MediumInflation MediumInterest Rates - Borrowing HighExternal Funding High

Where will we be in 30 years?

∑ Infrastructure in Invercargill will continue to meet the needs of the community.∑ The CBD will be a vibrant hub and have Community Facilities which support it.∑ Assets will have had sufficient maintenance and renewal, and will operate by

meeting the agreed community levels of service. Council will have good knowledge on how to sustain and support the assets over their lives.


250

A3009110 Page 7 of 48

This information has been developed from the valuations undertaken for 30 June 2019, for more detail please see individual Asset Management Plans.


251

A3009110 Page 8 of 48

2.3 WHAT WE DELIVER

Roading – The Roading activity provides a safe, convenient and efficient transport system for all transport modes within the city including pavements, streetlights, traffic signs and signals, footpaths, drainage, kerbing, bridges, culverts, street furniture, parking facilities, vehicle access crossings and cycle tracks.

Water Supply – The Water Supply activity owns and maintains assets, including treatment stations, reservoirs, pump stations plus a pipe network to supply potable water to residential, industrial and commercial properties to protect public health, water for firefighting, support city growth and contribute to the general well-being of the community.

Sewerage – The Sewerage activity owns and maintains assets which include pipes, pump stations and treatment plants for the removal of sewage from residential, industrial and commercial properties in urban areas of Invercargill, Bluff, parts of Otatara and Omaui.Treated effluent is discharged to Foveaux Strait at Bluff, to the New River Estuary at Invercargill, and to land at Omaui.

Stormwater – The Stormwater activity owns and maintains assets which include pipes and pump stations to provide for the removal of stormwater from residential, industrial and commercial properties to reduce the risk of property damage by flooding. Stormwater is discharged to natural waterways including the Waikiwi Stream, Waihopai River, Kingswell Creek, Clifton Channel, Otepuni Stream, the New River Estuary and Bluff Harbour.

Tidal Protection Banks The City is protected by a series of flood protection schemes on the main waterways through the City which includes walls, banks and detention dams The majority of these schemes are owned and managed by Environment Southland, with Invercargill City Council managing tide protection banks at the Waihopai Arm at Stead Street and Cobbe Road. These banks protect again the sea tidal movements and storm surge rather than river flooding.


252

A3009110 Page 9 of 48

3. Background

In the coming years, Invercargill City will experience greater pressures on infrastructure renewals as the existing networks age towards their end of life. During the periods of the 1920s, 1960s and 1970s, large areas of our city and associated infrastructure were developed over short periods reflecting the growth of the City. These assets will require renewal as they reach end of life and the strategies deployed to manage this work will reflect in the cost to the Community.

Council has built good quality asset data over the last 30 years and this is included in its asset management plans. This has enabled Council to establish budgets that work to ascertain the level of expenditure necessary to ensure a reliable and consistent level of service in our infrastructure areas. Council has maintained its assets well and believesthat there is not a large deferred risk on assets from the past but recognise that renewals are essential for service continuity as assets have a finite life.

Roading, Water Supply, Stormwater and Sewerage activities account for 21% of Council’s operating expenditure and 58% of Council’s capital renewal expenditure.

Council has renewal programmes in place; however these programmes are expected toincrease. The increase is to enable Council to meet the end of life needs of the assets which were installed in earlier growth periods. During these times Central Governmentsupported and assisted development and growth, however under current funding structures the renewals are now the financial responsibility of Council (apart from the New Zealand Transport Agency Funding Assistance where applicable). These developmentpeaks need careful and structured renewal strategies to renew assets at the right time to meet well understood future demand. The Water Supply AMP has highlighted an area of the pipe network where asbestos cement (AC) pipes may have to be renewed before their expected end of life, but have served more than 50 years currently. These pipe materials are widely used across New Zealand and most Councils will be experiencing similar responses as pipes become older and failure more likely.

For some of Council’s infrastructure activities a decision has been made to reduce the rate of renewal for some assets. This ‘sweating of the asset’ is now more widely accepted as getting value for money, but has the potential for more risk if the condition of the “sweated” assets is not well known. Sweating of an asset will enable Council to manage change and extend the predicted life cycle of the asset. It also allows Council to use better data and optimisation approaches to predict a just-in-time renewal of the asset. The use of criticality, resilience and risk to balance decisions with experienced practitioners mitigatesthe level of risk the community is exposed to.

For example, Council is proposing to under fund the renewal of the footpath programme as it can be done with low risk and has high visibility for future monitoring. In doing so, Council is hoping to extend the overall life of all footpath assets beyond what has been earlier planned for and signalled in its Roading Asset Management Plan. The opposite approach has been taken with critically important parts of the water reticulation network where replacement is programmed to coincide with scheduled end of life rather than waiting for failure.

Council needs to ensure that it is delivering the right level of infrastructure at a sustainable cost the community can afford, both now and into the future. Investment needs to be managed through business cases which support current evidence and future demands including possible shifts in demand.


253

A3009110 Page 10 of 48

To do this Council has looked closely at the renewals and maintenance of existing infrastructure as well as any planned new infrastructure projects; details of these options are expanded on in the Asset Management Plans. This strategy sets out what Council believes to be the most likely scenario for infrastructure needs in the future and assesses the options available to Council and the Community for addressing these needs.


254

A3009110 Page 11 of 48

4. Key AssumptionsHaving suitable and relevant assumptions is a solid foundation for the Strategy. The following assumptions and potential impacts have been considered while developing and preparing Asset Management Plans and are seen to be the best and most likely influencing factors to consider and where appropriate develop into the strategy and Asset Management Plans. Assumptions are taken from the Long-term Plan Background and Assumptions 2021-31 document and only the assumptions that require an infrastructure response are included here.

Population

Assumption Level of certainty Impact of uncertainty Council response


255

A3009110 Page 12 of 48

Significant Assumption

Population growthAt 30 June 2020, the estimated population of Invercargill was approximately 57,1001,2.

The population growth for Invercargill is around 1%3. This rate has been observed during eight of approximately the past twelve years, making it a reasonable assumption for the current plan.

Based on a 1% growth assumption, the expected population for 2031 is estimated to be around 62,810.

Covid-19 might significantly change the previous growth forecasts for Council. Population growth is expected to be minimal in the short term as a result of Covid-19 limiting the ability of students and migrant workers to travel, along with continued aging of the population.

Medium

Council is not planning for a major change in population during the life of the current plan.

There are multiple uncertainties related to population growth in Invercargill:

∑ While International students currently in New Zealand are able to return to SIT for study, the number of EFTS4 to date for 2021 is only 337. This is compared to 775 in 2020.

∑ Riding out recession impacts of Covid-19 Alert Levels 4 and 3

∑ Proposed Tiwai Aluminium Smelter closure

∑ Mid-range population forecast but noting underlying increase in population that has already surpassed StatsNZ estimates

The critical infrastructure and resources that Council provides were designed for a city with a population larger than we are now. Council has appropriate infrastructure and resources to service our population without significant financial impact as we have plenty of room to grow.

This is in line with the higher forecast of the Southland Regional Development Strategy.

Council will continue to monitor change in population growth during the life of the current long term plan to prepare for/respond to any significant changes realised from the multiple uncertainties identified.


DiversityThe population will continue to become more diverse. The Maori

MediumInterruptions to travel may affect international migration although it is not expected to effect this assumption

Council continues to explore new ways of engaging and ensures a balanced sample in

1 Subnational population estimates (TA, SA2), by age and sex, at 30 June 1996-2020 (2020 boundaries) (stats.govt.nz)2 Stats NZ Overview of data quality ratings, interim coverage and response rates, and data sources for 2018 census3 As above.4 EFTS – Equivalent Full Time Student


256

http://nzdotstat.stats.govt.nz/WBOS/Index.aspx?DataSetCode=TABLECODE7980

https://www.stats.govt.nz/reports/overview-of-data-quality-ratings-interim-coverage-and-response-rates-and-data-sources-for-2018-census

A3009110 Page 13 of 48

population will grow from 17% to 19%5. The Asian population will grow from 6% to 9%6.

significantly. Impact of uncertainty is low.

customer research to ensure it understands changing needs and expectations.


Ageing populationThose aged 65 and older will form 23% of the population in 2031, which is higher than the current aged population in 20207

(estimated at 10,000 of 57,100, or 17.51%)8.

High

The pattern of aging in the population is a long-term trend which is not expected to be disrupted.

The needs of older people and younger people are different from those in the working age and Council will continue to consider the needs of all users of its services.


HouseholdsThe number of households will increase as the population ages.

The size of households will decrease slightly and may vary between 2.35 and 2.25 people over the time of the infrastructure strategy9

Medium

The impact of a potential decline in numbers of students and migrant workers on demand for housing is uncertain.

Council’s infrastructure has sufficient capacity to accommodate the potential increase in population and/or demand.

5 Growth in line with NZ stats estimate of 2% growth in the Southland region (NZ. Stats, population projections)6 Growth in line with NZ stats estimate of 3% growth in the Southland region (NZ. Stats, population projections)7 NZ Census Area unit forecast8 Subnational population estimates (TA, subdivision), by age and sex, at 30 June 2018-20 (2020 boundaries)9 To calculate the projected average occupancy rates we took past and projected population data from Statistics New Zealand and cross referenced this to past and projected number of households. The average occupancy is the total population divided by the total occupied households.


257

http://nzdotstat.stats.govt.nz/wbos/Index.aspx?_ga=2.4027440.1474659112.1614218647-1527384650.1602016605

A3009110 Page 14 of 48

Economy

Assumption Level of certainty Impact of uncertainty Council responseSignificant Assumption

COVID-19 The lockdown and potential future impacts of COVID-19 may negatively impact residents' ability to pay rates. This could lead to a short term cashflow impact and increased rates arrears. Rates arrears could increase further.

Medium

To date there has been little impact on our rates receipts and the response to the new rates postponement and remission policy has led to a number of ratepayers contacting Council to go onto a payment plan for their rates.

Council has adopted an additional policy for postponement and remission of rates. This policy allows ratepayers financially impacted by COVID-19, to delay payment of up to 1 year's rates. Council staff will work with affected ratepayers to set up affordable payment plans.


EconomyA recessionary period is expected for the first five years of the LTP and longer-term structural changes to the economy beyond this time. This will lead to higher unemployment and lower GDP.10 Medium

The shape of the recession (u or v) is as yet unknown. The relative impact across regions, based on industries impacted most by COVID-19, as well as potential impacts of proposed Tiwai closure and SIT becoming a subsidiary of Te Pūkenga needs to be better understood by Council in order to reduce this uncertainty. Significant errors in this area could have a significant impact on Councils budgets over the forecast period11.

Council will focus on efficiency savings. Investment will only be made in activities which can be serviced.

Council will continue to review its work programme and priorities as the level of uncertainty reduces.


Community fundingCouncil can expect to see increased funding applications from groups as a result of Covid-19 and its impact on Community

Medium

The immediate impact of Covid-19 has been seen in the local community, with reduced funding available from major community funders including the Community Trust of Southland and

Council acknowledges the potential community expectation that Council will be positioned to distribute grants to fund community wellbeing

10 BERL Local Government Cost Adjustor Forecasts – Three Scenarios Reference No: #610911https://www.infometrics.co.nz/industry-concentrations-and-the-fall-of-think-big/ ; https://www.infometrics.co.nz/examining-the-nz-industries-hit-hardest-by-the-covid-19-pandemic/ ; BERL Local Government Cost Adjustor Forecasts – Three Scenarios Reference No: #6109


258

https://www.infometrics.co.nz/industry-concentrations-and-the-fall-of-think-big/

https://www.infometrics.co.nz/examining-the-nz-industries-hit-hardest-by-the-covid-19-pandemic/


A3009110 Page 15 of 48

Trust of Southland and Invercargill Licencing Trust’s ability to fund.

Invercargill Licencing Trust and Foundation.

related activities.


Economic diversificationVolatility in the global economy may affect one or more of Invercargill’s key export industries. This will drive diversification but will slow growth. There may be a delayed effect through the risk of impacted industries abandoning properties.

Medium

The relative impact needs to be better understood by Council to reduce uncertainty, as significant errors could have a significant impact on Council budgets over the forecast period12. This may directly impact rates and ability of Council to fund projects.

Council will continue to monitor changes in the global markets.

Activity Report Level

Central Business District Following a period of static activity until 2023 when the City Block development is complete, the CBD will become more vibrant and have increased connectivity.

Council will work in collaboration with others to enable strategic activities and initiatives to support the success of the CBD.

High

The city centre is at the centre of Council’s vision. As with any major investment of this type there is a level of uncertainty as to the impact of the development on future use patterns within the city. If the development does not succeed in drawing people to the city centre it will have an impact on Council strategy.

Council strategic activities and economic development activities delivered through Great South will align to support the success of the city centre projects

Streetscape works will be designed to support connectivity to the city centre. Council will need to plan for the structural change this is anticipated to involve.

Council has support for heritage buildings through the Regional Heritage Strategy and associated funds to support businesses managing high costs of older buildings.

Significant Tourism Low The tourism sector is the hardest hit in Council expects some impact,

12 https://www.infometrics.co.nz/industry-concentrations-and-the-fall-of-think-big/ and https://www.infometrics.co.nz/examining-the-nz-industries-hit-hardest-by-the-covid-19-pandemic/


259




A3009110 Page 16 of 48

Assumption Tourism numbers will slowly increase, returning to 2019 levels by 2031.

the economy and is not expected to fully recover out to 2030.

This may have an impact on the Airport and other infrastructure needs that may or may not be required in short term as tourist numbers reduce.

but tourism is not a major proportion of Invercargill’s GDP so the effect is expected to be relatively minor.


International educationThe numbers of International students studying at the Southern Institute of Technology will slowly increase back to 2019 levels by 2031.

Low

Students are an important part of the economy, creating significant demand. The impact on retail, hospitality and housing could be significant.

Council is working with Great South on economic development.


260

A3009110 Page 17 of 48

Social and cultural

Assumption Level of certainty Impact of uncertainty Council responseActivity Level Māori culture

Māori culture will become more visible in the city. Medium

Increased awareness of the need to recognise Maori culture and tikanga (methodology), with a particular focus on partnership, participation and protection.

Council will invest more in Maori engagement to ensure strategic projects reflect Maori culture in the city.

Activity Level


Socio-economic The impact of COVID-19 is yet to be realised, and there may be changes in Invercargill’s socio-economic patterns over time.

Māori have been disproportionately affected by the economic crisis brought about by the COVID-19 containment measures, and it is expected to continue to play out over the ten year recovery period.13

Medium

With GDP softening the long range economic outlook will hinge largely on the ability for the current and successive governments to provide economic stimulus.

This may have an impact on Council activities that rely on users discretionary spend for revenue

Council acknowledges the potential community expectation that Council will be positioned to distribute grants to fund community wellbeing related activities.

13 BERL (July 2020). Economic Scenarios to 2030. The post-COVID-19 scene.


261

A3009110 Page 18 of 48

Resilience


Community wellbeingThe COVID-19 response measures will have long term impacts on the wellbeing of communities, requiring a long term perspective response.

Medium

The situation is evolving and will continue to be monitored.

Council has tasked Great South, the regional development agency, to focus on resilience and economic diversification. A Community Wellbeing Fund has been established.

Asset/ Activity Plan level

Community resilienceThe amalgamation of Southern Institute of Technology with Te Pūkenga, and the potential loss of zero fees advantage, will have an uncertain long-term effect on Invercargill’s population and economy.

Medium

The effects of COVID-19 on immigration will impact student numbers in the short to medium term.

The risk of losing the zero fees advantage could have an impact on our growth strategy.

Council funds Great South to promote the region and continues to monitor and plan for the impact.


Community resilienceTiwai Point Aluminium Smelter will continue to operate until 31December 2024.

Medium

A transition plan will be developed to prepare for the eventual closure. It is not yet clear where and how the impact will be felt in the community.

Council is working with the Just Transition team and Great South on economic diversification.


Natural disasterNo natural disaster is expected to impact the City during the life of the plan. Medium

The impacts of a disaster will be assessed at the time and an appropriate response prepared.

Infrastructure renewals are undertaken using resilient design practices.

Council has a focus on resilience. Council continues to support and invest in Emergency Management Southland.


262

A3009110 Page 19 of 48

Environment – Climate Change

Climate change impacts will vary across regions in Southland. The following is a summary of impacts taken from the Southland climate change impact assessment, August 2018 report.

Assumption Level of certainty Impact of uncertainty Management responseSignificant Mean annual and extreme

temperatures (days where temp. exceeds 250C) are expected to increase with time:By 2040: mean annual temperature increase of 0.5-10C with 0-10 more hot days per annum.By 2090: mean annual temperature increase of 0.7-30C, with 5-55 more hot days per annum.

High

Water - Longer period of drought may result in increased demand, whilst flood events create turbidity and increase the cost to treat for consumption.

Flood Banks – increased temperature results in more extreme weather events, with a corresponding increase in height and frequency of storm surges.

A planned pathway for the review of these assumptions and the impacts will minimise large impacts upon activities.

Significant Annual rainfall is expected to increase:By 2040: +0-10% By 2090: +5-20% Increased frequency of high rainfall days, i.e. increase in intensity of rainfall.

High

Roading - increased frequency and intensity of rainfall may require extra drainage works in the road network that may alter long-term maintenance costs

Stormwater – increased frequency and intensity of rainfall events resulting in increased demand on the network.

Wastewater - Increased frequency and intensity of rainfall events results in infiltration and inflows that increase volumes to be treated.


Significant Mean sea level is expected to rise.By 2040: 0.2-0.3 m By 2090: 0.4-0.9 m

High

Errors in modelling will have significant impact on capital works programme required

Stormwater – increased tailwater

A planned pathway for the review of these assumptions and the impacts will minimise large impacts upon


263

A3009110 Page 20 of 48

levels require consideration for outfall design.

Flood Banks – Renewals need to consider increased sea level during design life.Sewerage – Clifton outfall may need to be pumped long term.

activities.


264

A3009110 Page 21 of 48

Council operations


Council services and structureCouncil is planning for the current structure to deliver the current set of services, with the exception of water and sewerage.

Medium

If amalgamation does occur, costs to the ratepayer will remain the same, although revenue and financing will be done by a different operator.

Council will proactively engage with neighbouring authorities and central government to ensure that the best result is achieved from any amalgamation.

Asset/Activity Level

Water ReformAs a result of the Central Government directed Waters Reform, it is assumed there will be a change in water reticulation and sewerage delivery services within the life of the plan.

This will result in a structural change for Council in relation to the ownership of assets and associated debt capacity.

The services will continue to be delivered, but these will be provided by another party.

This will include increased regulatory requirements as required by the new regulatory authority.

High

The services will continue to be delivered but these will be provided by another party.

This will be managed in line with Government best practice, and will remain within the Council financial and 10-year assumptions.

Council will assess proposed reform options when Central Government has provided their final recommendations to Local Government entities.

Council will proactively engage with neighbouring authorities and central government to ensure that the best result is achieved from any reforms.

Council is incorporating management of this potential outcome through planning for management of debt.



Legislative changesThere will be changes to legislation that have an impact on how Council will provide services. These changes may affect the Council organizational structure but not change the level of service

High

Changes may affect the Council organizational structure but not change the level of service received by the customer/ratepayer.

Management will continue to engage with Government and plan for changes in services in response to policy and regulation changes as these arise.


265

A3009110 Page 22 of 48

received by the customer/ratepayer.


ConsentsCouncil will continue to carry out legislation-directed ordinary functions while factoring in an increase to required quality for consent conditions.

Medium

If unexpected consent conditions are imposed there may be unexpected costs to compliance.

Council will work with the Regional Council early to minimise the risk of unexpected consent conditions.

The cost of obtaining consents, knowing environmental standards are increasing, will be built into activities.


The Funding Assistance Rate (as advised from Waka Kotahi NZTA) will reduce by 1% each year until reaching 51% funding assistance in the 2023/2024 and then remain at 51% for the life of the plan.

High

Increase in demand on rate funding for roading activities, including the forecast NZTA portion of the city centre streetscape project.

Continue to engage with NZTA on funding assistance.



Asset lifeAssets will remain useful until the end of their average useful life, assuming asset average life expectancy assumptions are correct.14

Infrastructure installed in the 1920s are nearing the end of their lives and require renewal within the term of the Infrastructure Strategy.

High

Assets may need renewal earlier if this assumption is incorrect and change the renewal profile. Or may allow delayed renewal in other cases.

Review the appropriateness of assets at the time of renewal including, where appropriate, whole of life cycle assessment.

Increase knowledge of asset conditions to better predict the average use of life if assumptions are lower than expected.

14 Council will use national standards is asset revaluation.


266

A3009110 Page 23 of 48



Investment Property and ForestryInvestment Property and Forestry Assets are valued on a yearly basis. They are expected to increase in line with inflation. This is reflected in our Financial Strategy, and Accounting policies.

High

Variation in valuations have no cash flow implications for Council.

Continue to value Investment Property and Forestry assets on an annual basis.


267

A3009110 Page 24 of 48


Capital programme deliveryImplementation of a Project Management Office will increase effectiveness of delivery of the capital programme over the Long-term Plan. 70% of the capital programme will be delivered In Year 1, 75% in Year 2, 80% in Year 3.

High

It may take longer to implement the Project Management Office than expected, including as a result of challenges in attracting qualified personnel. Availability of contractors may have a greater impact than expected. Delay in the programme will result in higher costs as a result of inflation.

Active management of project processes, including engaging consultants as required, active and early engagement with contractors. Management of the programme rather than individual projects will enable contractor availability as well as funding levels to be actively managed. The financial risk of higher levels of delivery than expected across multiple areas will be monitored. Any impact of delayed capital expenditure on renewals on maintenance budgets will be actively managed.


268

A3009110 Page 25 of 48

Financial forecasting


InflationOperational forecasts and capital work programmes will increase by the accumulated Local Government Cost Index inflation forecast by BERL.

MediumCost change factors are based on information developed for Council’s by Business and Economic Research Limited(BERL). Significant variations to inflation would have an impact on Council’s financial management.

Council will continue on the planned pathway for the Capital Works programme and review operational revenue & expenses each year.


Asset revaluationAsset values will increase by the accumulated Local Government Cost Index inflation forecast be BERL on the last valuation value. Revaluation occurs in 2021/22 and every third year therefore.

Medium Changes in the valuation or life of Council assets may have a significant impact on Council’s financial management and capital programme.

Council will continue on the planned pathway for the Capital Works programme and monitor with after each revaluation cycle.


Interest rates - BorrowingExpected interest rates on borrowing will be 2.5%.

High The treasury report from Bancorp projects the ICC Borrowing interest rate are currently at 2.20% in 2020, and is expected to fall and remain under 2% for the next 10 years. Significantly higher interest rates would impact Council’s financial position.

2.5% would allow some upside if the situation changed (interest rates increase or credit rating decreases); but Council have potential to go to 2.25% or 2% to lower costs.


Interest rates – Cash and DepositsReturn on cash and term deposits are forecasted to expect a negative rate at some stage within 2020/2021.

Medium Term deposit rates currently vary from 0.5% for under 6 months to a flat 1% for longer. Most forecasts still expect a negative rate at some stage within 2020/2021.

An assumption of 0.5% should be comfortable and if rates do increase again in the future, this will put Council in a more positive position.


Dividends from ICHL will be $4.8m + CPI.

Medium This would have a negative impact on Council’s overall revenue and cash position, which would increase the

Council will consider strategic reliance on dividends noting increased levels of economic


269

A3009110 Page 26 of 48

burden on ratepayers. uncertainty.Activity Report Level

External FundingIt is assumed Council will achieve the level of external funding as estimated.

High The immediate impact of Covid-19 has been seen in the local community, with reduced funding available from major community funders including the Community Trust of Southland and Invercargill Licencing Trust and Foundation.

Council acknowledges the challenge of obtaining external funding at this time.

Should Council not be able to obtain funding as indicated this would impact project scope and in some cases require further consultation.


270

A3009110 Page 27 of 48

5. Significant Challenges and Issues

Like many parts of New Zealand, the area served by Invercargill City Council faces a number of strategic challenges in the years ahead.

5.1 MEETING OUR LONG-TERM RENEWAL EXPECTATIONS FOR INFRASTRUCTURE

Past investment cycles in the 1920’s, 1960s and 1990s, particularly in piped networks,have created an echo of renewal requirements, which means that a significant part of Council’s infrastructure will require renewal within the term of the Infrastructure Strategy, i.e. 30 years. These forecasts are in line with the assessed industry life expectation of the materials used.

The services provided from piped network assets, namely water supply, stormwater and wastewater, will be subject to larger expenditure increases in coming years to meet demand. These increases are due to the pipes reaching the end of their useful life and the need to renew them before significant failure occurs. Due to a change from depreciation funded infrastructure renewal programmes to a programme based on the end of life of individual assets we have identified a backlog of 3 waters pipes that need to be renewed. This has been managed with a smoothing of pipe renewal programmes of up to 7 years. This is reasonable given the ability to sweat assets to some extent, however, there is no overall impact on infrastructure renewals over the 30 year timeframe of this infrastructure strategy.

The magnitude of renewals expected within Invercargill City and the Southland Region may exceed the capacity for the work to be undertaken in the market place. To managed this Council plan to develop a regional forward work plan to allow the contracting market to appropriately for resourcing.

5.2 RESPONDING TO THE CHANGING ENVIRONMENT (BOTH NATURAL AND TECHNOLOGICAL) AND RETAINING INVERCARGILL’S CHARACTER INCLUDING ITS BUILT ENVIRONMENT

Climate change is a significant issue for most activities. The most likely immediate risk to assets is the rise in sea level, coupled with increased intensity of rainfall which raises therisk of flooding, unless properly planned for. There will also be a need to review Invercargill’s tidal flood protection schemes with wider consultation on the future provision or renewal of flood banks alongside Environment Southland on the waterways through the City, or decide whether it is no longer viable to protect parts of the City. These are long term issues but require a planned pathway for considering them.

Policy setting from Central Government will possibly have the most volatility. Responding to regulation can place extra cost pressures on Council, for example in meeting increasing environmental standards for fresh water or new Discharge Consent Conditions requiring improved discharge water quality.

Council has a good road network but has identified problem areas including safety, asset condition and performance, environment and accessibility as key focus areas for future plans. Council has a number of risks (when considered against national peers) particularly for cycling and pedestrians and at intersections) and investment will be focused on safety improvements to reduce crashes, deaths and serious injuries. Additional funding is needed in resurfacing and rehabilitation programmes and Council will promote


271

A3009110 Page 28 of 48

programmes for more cycling and walking (active mode of transport). Resilience against more frequent storm events will require contribution to investment in some stop banking.

More recent trends in technology, particularly around retail, accommodation and vehicle use will have the potential to change our society. This has already been seen in the use of community facilities which are changing to be more social and open spaces.

Monitoring the compliance of existing resource consent conditions will provide a record of compliance for future processes. The renewal of consents is dependent upon the legislative and environmental standards and expectations that exist at that time. If a resource consent was not granted, or failed to be renewed for a major Council activity, this would have significant impacts on both costs and the ability to provide that activity. A major non-renewal may mean an entirely new approach to the activity would be required.This could be an issue for future stormwater and sewerage discharge consents.

An option for operational sustainability of our provision of water is to investigate an emergency water supply and in turn increase the resilience of the network.

5.3 THE CITY’S CHANGING DEMOGRAPHIC PROFILE AND ITS ABILITY AND WILLINGNESS TO PAY

Council’s network assets typically have sufficient capacity to meet the needs of the projected demographic profile. However, the continued and increasing investment required in our renewal programmes to maintain levels of service makes up a significant proportion of Council expenditure. The impact of this is that a relatively static ratepayer base (which is aging) is required to pay for a wave of infrastructure renewals on limited means. The respective Asset Management Plans provide a smoothed renewal plan for infrastructure This is coupled with Council’s Financial Strategy to set out the plan to fund capital and operational expenditure long-term.

Longstanding and slowly advancing issues like population aging are progressively being felt. This can drive increased demand on community infrastructure such as housing care and recreation spaces, including accessibility and capacity at facilities. There is no longer adequate space at Splash Palace due to the current demand on the facility; there is also an increase in disabled users at the facility. As the population ages, Council considers that demand, particularly demand from disabled users, will continue to increase.

5.4 ENSURING COUNCIL WORKS IN A FINANCIALLY PRUDENT MANNER THAT PROMOTES THE CURRENT AND FUTURE INTERESTS OF THE COMMUNITY

The biggest challenge of all is one of funding; the changing demographic will mean a high percentage of our population will be on a fixed income. Based on the best information available, this document, in conjunction with the Financial Strategy, aims to provide a transparent response to the strategic challenges and ensure that the financial cost of providing the necessary infrastructure is predictable.

In the past Council has funded renewals as and when required. Council looks to focus on critical infrastructure assets and allocate capital budgets on renewals at a rate that equals the long-term economic consumption of assets. In some cases, the work is not yet required due to better than expected asset condition. Council is seeking to improve its understanding of asset condition to develop a more mature asset renewal programme. This can lead to smoothing of renewal profiles to minimise yearly variations in asset renewal budgets. This assists in informing the contracting market in order to provide


272

A3009110 Page 29 of 48

appropriate resources over a longer term and also assists in achieving better value for money.

Assets were revalued in June 2019 and will be revalued each three years thereafter. The asset revaluation process informs the financial allocation (the equivalent of economic asset consumption) each year and considers the latest costings and understanding of lives, allowing for renewals undertaken or additional assets acquired during the period, such as assets vested from subdivisions.

Funding assistance from Waka Kotahi New Zealand Transport Agency (NZTA) is important for roading activities; this is the Funding Assistance Rate (FAR). Council’s 2020-2021 rate was 54% but is reducing to 51% by financial year 2023-2024. This will mean more ratepayer funding is necessary as less is contributed by NZTA.

5.5 WATER REFORM

Central Government has signified its dissatisfaction with the current model of delivery of service by Territorial Authorities for potable water and foul sewer. Central Government has suggested that fewer, but larger, organisations would result in an improved level of service. Territorial Authorities in the Southland and Otago region have committed to a study to investigate what form of organisation would best suit the region. Stormwater, at this stage, has been excluded from the reform, however it is likely to be impacted by the new National Environmental Standards for Freshwater. The full impact of the reform cannot be quantified at the time of preparation of this strategy or the associated AMPs. However, the potential impacts upon the individual activities are discussed within the respective AMPs.

5.6 CBD REVITALISATION

The CBD revitalisation is an important challenge for Invercargill. This includes the Invercargill Central development along with CBD master planning which looks at integration of the Invercargill Central development with the wider CBD. While there is limited impact on Council’s 3 Waters (stormwater, foul sewer and water) infrastructure as a result of the CBD revitalisation there is a potential impact on the roading and parks and recreation activities. The master planning work has begun and the roading and parks and recreation activities will respond to the potential impacts once the result of the master plan has been confirmed. Reasonable estimates of the capital programme requirements have been included within this LTP.


273

A3009110 Page 30 of 48

6. Our Strategic Response to the Challenges and Issues

Council has recognised a number of important challenges and issues which will impact the community over the next 30 years and potentially longer given the expected lives of some asset components.

Council has developed a number of key responses which will be utilised in making decisions in day to day operations and the long-term planning for assets. The Strategy for the delivery of Asset Management is listed below.

6.1 MAINTAIN OUR CURRENT ASSET BASE

Council sees that it is important not to encourage wider expansion in providing infrastructure beyond that which is currently serviced or outlined in the Asset Management Plans or District Plan. By limiting future growth of services, the long-term financial responsibility can be better managed. Invercargill has, through the district planningprocess, clearly set where planned growth is desirable and required. Where expansion of infrastructure is acceptable the initial cost of this infrastructure is expected to be met by the development while also ensuring the whole of life cost for the new infrastructure is acceptable. Limiting expansion to align with these processes is appropriate.

6.2 RENEW ASSETS AT THE RATE OF ASSET CONSUMPTION

Over the medium to long-term, Council proposes to renew assets at the rate of asset consumption. This ensures the long-term sustainability of our asset portfolio. Within specific asset types there will be a need to smooth renewal programmes to minimise the impacts of past investment cycles, as noted within the Significant Challenges and Issues section of this strategy.

6.3 FOCUS ON ASSET CRITICALITY

In a move to reduce large and sudden increases in rates on the Community, the strategy looks to balance the risks of failure of some elements of each system (e.g. water pipes).Simply put, pipes with a lower criticality rating will have their replacement delayed. This strategy will enable a reduced financial demand in the short-term but it clearly needs to be understood that this approach increases potential failure risks which must have supporting financial mechanisms. These risks need to be understood and managed by improving our asset management maturity.

6.4 FOCUS ON SOUND EVIDENCE BASED ACTIVITY DECISION MAKING

Council has identified that making better investment decisions is an important response for managing long-term assets. Using tools such as the better business case approach are another way of supporting good asset decisions.


274

A3009110 Page 31 of 48

6.5 UNDERSTAND OUR COMMUNITY

Council has recognised that a better understanding and improved communication with the community will enhance the way in which infrastructural assets are managed. It is vital to align the community’s expectations and needs with the service delivered by the assets,given that they are long life assets and a significant financial investment. The assumptions made in any planning process create tangible inputs to future design and decision making.Council is developing an engagement strategy to assist develop a better understanding.

Other considerations include:

∑ Should unplanned failures occur, use a mix of Council’s financial "good health”, accumulated reserves and/or insurances (where appropriate) to manage risks.

∑ Ensure growth is focused on social, financial and operational sustainability, and aligned to the vision.

∑ Utilise subsidies, user payments, rates and loans to ensure that both current and future communities pay for the asset they are using.

∑ When arranging contracts or significant activities, consider how investment decisions may impact a viable competitive supplier market in the Region.


275

A3009110 Page 32 of 48

7. Our Tools to Deliver the Strategy

7.1 STRENGTHEN OUR ASSET MANAGEMENT

Council has recognised that strengthening its asset management processes will produce more robust long term outcomes.

Responding to this Council has established a whole of organisation approach to Asset Management, and aligned desired outcomes with the Asset Management Policy and Strategy.

Council continues to utilise the International Infrastructure Management Manual 2015 (IIMM) to identify what is achievable through adopting best appropriate international practice and also strengthen internal knowledge and expertise.

Having a strong platform for delivering asset management will allow robust plans to be developed and then delivered. This will require upskilling of asset managers and their support teams with a goal to continually improve asset management knowledge within the organisation. Without this knowledge and ability to know and analyse the networks and assets, future renewals decision-making may be less than optimal. The long term understanding (in its widest context) of the renewal of assets is the key to ensuring assets are being managed at the right level in the most appropriate way.

The Asset Management Policy confirms for Council the asset management objectives and responsibilities, with the high level commitment of Councillors ensuring the appropriate stewardship decisions are developed, understood and through the business case process appropriate investment decisions are being made. Asset management is not just how well the asset is managed, but also understanding the assets and utilising an investment focused approach to decision making for the community in both the short and long term.

The Asset Management Strategy defines a detailed approach to how Council will advance the management of infrastructure assets to appropriate levels of maturity, how the objectives in the Policy will be achieved, and the approach for developing and implementing Asset Management Plans. Council will continue to develop the quality of our asset data, better understand how the assets need to be managed, with these improvements ongoing for the life of the strategy.

Using independent peer reviews of Asset Management Plans, the Asset Manager’s development work has been assessed to ensure that future delivery plans meet legislativerequirements. Where gaps in best or appropriate practice expectations have been identified in the activity, improvements have been noted within the Improvement Plan sections which highlight those future actions needed to strengthen the delivery of the activity.

The following diagram shows how each aspect of asset management contributes to successful delivery. Also important is the “line of sight” from the Long Term Plan to delivery of programmes, with clear linkages between work programmes and the objectives.


276

A3009110 Page 33 of 48

7.2 BETTER INVESTMENT DECISION MAKING

Asset management decisions have both short and long term impacts on the community.This strategy looks to ensure that these decisions are made with the best knowledge available using current thinking in understanding and communicating investment logic.

Government, through Treasury has accepted the “The Better Business Case (BBC) approach” as being a way to ensure that investment is well considered and appropriate decision making can occur. This approach asks questions of the asset areas - what is the problem, what are the benefits of solving it, and how should this occur considering the options available.

7.3 ENGAGE OUR CUSTOMERS TO BETTER UNDERSTAND THEIR NEEDS AND WANTS

Council is currently developing an Engagement Strategy that will shape how each area of Council, including elected members and staff, will engage with our Community in thefuture. It is anticipated that the Engagement Strategy will assist in delivering positive outcomes to the Community by identifying how the different groups within our Community wish to be engaged on different topics.


277

A3009110 Page 34 of 48

8. Linking the Long-term Plan to Activity Plans

8.1 CORE INFRASTRUCTURE

Community Outcome Council’s Objectives How each Activity Contributes

Enhance our city

Invercargill’s economy continues to grow and diversify

Roading provides the vital connections with state highways for the freight task distributing the goods needed for a city and throughout the city.The stormwater activity protects urban areas from flooding.The sewerage activity receives and treats trade waste.The water activity provides a water network with sufficient capacity to meet demand and firefighting requirements.The flood protection and control activity provides protection to the airport and Stead St area from flooding

Invercargill’s business areas are bustling with people, activities and culture.

Roading contributes to accessibility, via integrated networks of connected roads and footpaths. Safe roads allow freedom of movement for residents including appropriate lighting.

Preserve its character

The building blocks for a safe, friendly city are provided for all members of the community

Safe roads allows residents to select a mode of transport they wish to use with confidence. Street lighting allows residents to feel safe at nights.Roading corridor management contributes to ensure events have safe road and pedestrian access.Wide streets and low traffic flows allow ease of movement, together with networks resilient and reliable for all public events.Properties are protected from flooding damage, and receiving waters are not adversely affected by contaminated discharge.The sewerage activity protects public health by the safe collection of sewage.The water activity provides a safe reliable supply of water.

Ease of access throughout the City is maintained.

Roading provides roads to connect people, signs to direct, footpaths for pedestrians, street furniture for streetscape usage.CBD areas have high amenity values.

Strong, collaborative leadership of the City is demonstrated.

Good asset management delivers core infrastructure supporting the City to preserve its character.

Embrace innovation and change

The development of future industry is encouraged

The stormwater activity protects urban areas from flooding.The sewerage activity receives and treats trade waste.

Technology is utilised in both existing and new City services.

Street facilities such as visitor signs, streetscape, seating, and car charging etc. offer high value people space and have flexibility to quickly adapt.


278

A3009110 Page 35 of 48

9. Priority Projects and Options

The focus of Council’s Infrastructure Strategy over the next 30 years is to maintain and renew its current assets to ensure that the assets remain in such a condition as to continue to deliver a reliable and similar level of service to that currently being provided. They will be upgraded where appropriate to enable Council to meet increasingly higher environmental standards. The levels of service and how they are provided will also reflect the changing needs of our ageing population.

Council does not anticipate any significant expansion of the infrastructure networks.The key projects contained within this strategy are outlined below.

- Potable water, foul sewer and stormwater renewals- Roading renewals- Emergency water source- Wastewater treatment plant discharge consent renewals (and the associated

physical works upgrades)- Stead St Stopbank upgrade- City centre streetscape- City reservoir renewal- Waikiwi reservoir renewal- Clifton treatment facility renewal and upgrade- Branxholme treatment station renewal

10. Significant Decisions:

10.1 WATER – EMERGENCY WATER SOURCE

Issue and Consequence

Option Implication Cost

Invercargill City is at high risk being reliant on one open source water supply. If this water supply is contaminated or not useable as a result of a catastrophic event, the City could be without access to water for a significant time.Time frame for decision: June 2023

Develop a new secondary water source.

Invercargill has a resilient supply of water, any event of significance will have a reduced risk to the community.

$ 17,000,000

Increase water storage. Either untreated water at the Branxholme Water Treatment Plant or within the City.

Level of protection will be limited to size of storage. And is likely to mitigate only for short term events. Any storage structure will be subject to being managed as any other constructed asset, i.e. maintenance and renewal plus exposure to damage during seismic events.

Not costed but likely to exceed that for option above.

Do nothing. Invercargill is vulnerable to the potential of having limited water after a

$0


279

A3009110 Page 36 of 48



catastrophic event. Should there be no water supply then evacuation of the city may become necessary.

10.2 SEWERAGE – DISCHARGE CONSENT RENEWALS 2025 & 2029



Wastewater Treatment Plant Discharge Consents require renewal in 2025 for Bluff, and 2029 for Clifton.Timeframe for decision:Bluff Consent – June 2022Clifton Consent – June 2026

Negotiate new consents for discharge to Coastal Marine Area.

Bluff: Impacts on receiving environment are low. Quality improvement may not be required.

Invercargill: Nutrient removal likely to be required to reduce load on estuary.

Bluff: $200,000 for consent renewal.

Invercargill: $10,000,000 plus for nutrient removal.

Remove discharges from Coastal Marine Area. Pump Bluff effluent to Clifton(2025), and discharge Clifton effluent to land (2029).

Bluff: Discharge Consent not required.Receiving water improvement at Bluff, and additional effects at Clifton would both be minor.

Clifton: Effects on estuary would reduce, and may be transferred to catchment in which land disposal area is located. Suitable disposal site has not been identified.

Bluff: $3,100,000 capital plus $164,000 per annumoperational.

Clifton: $28,000,000 capital plus $3,100,000 per annum operational.

Do nothing. Failure to renew consents would result in regulatory action by Environment Southland, and directive to fix.

Unknown cost to defend legal action, and for fines imposed by courts. Court imposed directives to upgrade may also apply.

11. Changes to Levels of Service

Levels of Service (LOS) for asset groups included within this Strategy are not planned to have significant changes implemented. During the Long-term Plan (10 years) and the Asset Management Plan (AMP) (30 years), ongoing consideration of the Levels ofService will be undertaken and where changes are sought these will be included in future plans. This strategy looks to manage our existing assets at the same level of service. As options are selected within the Long-term Plan process, some changes can occur. Where these are different from the recommended programmes within the Asset Management Programme this document would need adjustment.


280

A3009110 Page 37 of 48

Council intends to maintain and renew its infrastructure assets to ensure that the assets remain in such a condition to continue to deliver a reliable and similar level of service to that currently being provided.


281

A3009110 Page 38 of 48

12. Our Approach to Asset Management

Council has recognised that to provide a better service to the community we must strengthen our approach to asset management and the systems we use. We must have and use sound evidence based information for decision making, the risks faced must be quantified in a consistent and formal way, and we must work closely as a coordinated team within Council across all departments.

We will deliver asset management through the following means:

12.1 STATUTORY AND REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS

Asset Managers must ensure that all Statutory and Legislative requirements are known and are covered by the set levels of service which are monitored. Regular reports onperformance against these targets are made through Council Committees and Council structures.

Corporate wide approach to Health and Safety systems for all employees and contractors working on assets is in place and managed outside this strategy.

Council holds a number of consents for its core activities, in particular:

StormwaterDischarge stormwater to waterA discharge consent for stormwater to the coastal marine area is yet to be applied for

SewerageBluff treatment plant discharge consentClifton treatment plant discharge consentOmaui treatment plant discharge consent

WaterAbstraction consentDischarge consent for filter backwash

We assume that we will obtain reasonable consent conditions at the time of renewal of these consents, however, we recognise that the Bluff and Clifton wastewater treatment plant discharge consents may require significant capital upgrades to meet potential consent conditions. These have been flagged as key decisions in Section 10.

12.2 ASSET MANAGEMENT POLICY AND ASSET MANAGEMENT STRATEGY

Council must continue to maintain suitable governance and guidance documents in the form of policies and strategies to direct the delivery of asset management. These documents are considered by Council and when adopted they set the forward governance framework for staff to operate within. These documents also provide a high level plan which Council should expect itself to meet and exceed through having systems and processes which aid delivery. These areas may include the level of maturity Council sets for each asset group, how it is resourced, and the level of expertise it holds in-house. These documents also set the commitment to funding renewals and other activities, and need to be aligned and referenced when reviewing budgets or financial decision making.


282

A3009110 Page 39 of 48

12.3 ASSET MANAGEMENT INFORMATION SYSTEMS (AMIS)

Council will have systems which are capable of storing asset information and data in a coordinated and managed way, which is able to assist with the stewardship of owning assets.

These systems will be nationally recognised and have a low Information Management operational risk.

Currently two systems are utilised being Infor IPS (for piped networks, buildings and Parks) and RAMM for roading. Both are recognised systems and are capable of delivering analytical processes to assist in the development of advanced asset management solutions.

RAMM has been used by Council for nearly 30 years and has high data availability. It is supported in decision-making by dTIMS which has been used in NZ for around 20 years for long term predictive modelling and pavement renewal forecasting. Infor IPS has been recently implemented and updated data is now being sought for identified gaps.

Council’s AMIS systems need to be adequately resourced and funded and will be budgeted within the relevant asset budget.

12.4 PROGRESSIVELY IMPROVE ASSET EVIDENCE

All asset data are collected and maintained accurately using Asset Management Information Systems (AMIS), this data includes:

∑ Asset attributes – e.g. size, material∑ Asset condition∑ Performance∑ Age and expected life∑ Value and cost to replace∑ Criticality

A common criticality framework is planned to be developed which considers risk and resilience in decisions. Predictive models for asset condition will be developed and used to determine preventative maintenance needs and improve renewal programmeswhen and where data is available, and if it is not available, start to gather the data which is required.

12.5 OPERATE IN A PRUDENT MANNER

When assets are added to existing portfolios, lifecycle management and operational costs are considered.

Services will be regularly reviewed to ensure they are being delivered effectively, efficiently and to best practice. Structures will also be reviewed (Section 17A of LGA) to ensure that any opportunities are understood and changes implemented.

When procuring operational and/or maintenance services (in house and outsourced) or renewal works, value for money is attained through competitive procurement processes aligned to best practice. Generally, an open market process is used for contracts with key outcomes being whole of life cost, contractor performance, and Health and Safety.


283

A3009110 Page 40 of 48

Financial performance will be monitored and reported against Annual Plan Budgets aligned with quarterly reports to Council.

12.6 RENEW IN A FINANCIALLY PRUDENT MANNER

Existing assets are maintained and networks are only extended in accordance with the District Plan, Asset Management Plans, or where Council resolves on a case by case basis. It is generally expected that where an extension to the network is required for a subdivision or development, the costs associated with these extensions will be borne by the developer. The strategy suggests that we need to maintain and manage existing assets and not look to grow or expand the services provided by these assets.

Risk, cost, whole of life operating costs and benefits will be considered before accepting any new privately funded assets constructed in association with property development.

Financial inputs are a key element to decision making and working closely with Council’s finance teams is important. Making evidence driven sound investment decisions through the use of advanced asset management and business case analysis is the direction planned.

An organisational approach is taken to prepare for the Long-term, Annual and Asset Management Plans. This approach prioritises renewal projects based on optimised decision making, major expenditure decisions are prioritised in order from the highest benefit cost ratio with consideration of condition, criticality, performance and non-asset solutions being recognised in the process.

The revaluation cycle has been adjusted to ensure it is carried out the year before the review of Asset Management Plans. Therefore the 2019 asset valuations are beingused in the 2021 Asset Management Plans and LTP.

This strategy in conjunction with the Financial Strategy, requires a funding level that allows for the renewal of assets at a rate that is equivalent to their respective asset consumption profiles moderated by criticality, unless agreed otherwise such as in footpaths. The Financial Strategy provides details on how Council will fund these renewals.

This approach allows for a balance between renewal funding and depreciation, but develops an understood and acknowledged risk profile for Council that can be assessed and managed through financial, risk-based and investment-focused tools and techniques.

12.7 LEVELS OF SERVICE AND DEMAND

Levels of service are consulted on and agreed through the Long-term Plan. This is the best time to review demand forecasts, and these are documented in AMPs. We seek to understand customer and community requirements for levels of service and identify any gaps or demands for change by:

∑ Monitoring requests for service ∑ Understanding the utilisation and capacity of our infrastructure∑ Using satisfaction surveys and/or specific focus groups


284

A3009110 Page 41 of 48

Council endeavours to ensure that levels of service are set at agreed sustainable levels and moving forward any change to levels of service will have an evidence based decision (benefit cost ratio or similar assessment factor) developed to demonstrate the impact of the changes.

12.8 IMPROVE THE ASSET MANAGEMENT SYSTEM

Asset Management Plans are developed to agreed maturity levels as outlined within the Asset Management Policy. This policy is reviewed as part of the Long-Term Plan development and more frequently if required.

Each plan is developed using a consistent framework and approach with similar sections and layout. This has been based on the Treasury Better Business Case Model. This approach assists to ensure all components are developed consistently, has similar and high visibility of key areas for readers to compare activities, and uses techniques developed for evidence based decision making.

Asset Management Plans have a 30 year minimum horizon for planning, particularly for renewals. However, many assets, such as piped networks, bridges, kerbing, and buildings have lives in excess of the plan length of 30 years. These assets, with lives sometimes up to 100 years or more are considered over their whole of life with the AMP generally only reporting the 30-year window. Technical analysis is used and wherever possible modelled for impacts over the life cycle. Should a significant impact be identified just beyond the AMP minimum report period, it will be included to show that material aspect of the future planning cycle.

Each plan has an improvement plan and proposed actions are a key area where future advancement needs to occur. The Improvement Plans and Actions are reviewed and ideally reported to the Executive Leadership Team.

The wider Asset Teams co-ordinate to ensure common direction and actions are known and best practice is acknowledged and shared.. Each plan has a specific owner and responsibility.

The Corporate Risk framework is under review with all plans having a specific risk register which is actively maintained and evaluated to reduce impacts.

12.9 SUSTAINABILITY AND RESILIENCE

Environmental effects are considered in operational and renewal planning and decision-making in order to reduce negative impacts wherever possible. Emerging technologies will be considered when appropriate for sustainability and if they can deliver service improvements. Both resilience and vulnerability are considered through corporate lifeline projects and as these plans are strengthened their outputs will be included in current AMPs.

Resilience is planned to be reviewed and improved along with the Corporate Risk framework, which includes contingency planning. When planning asset renewals, resilience is considered in the process of developing options. Further work is planned on understanding specific infrastructure risks, such as liquefaction susceptibility, as this influences renewal strategies for different parts of Invercargill.

The effects of climate change and sea level rise on future renewals and existing infrastructure are also to be considered in order to minimise negative impacts on both infrastructure and Invercargill’s communities.


285

A3009110 Page 42 of 48

13. How We Are Going To Fund Infrastructure

This Infrastructure Strategy develops the asset activities which need to be planned for and delivered over at least the next 30 years. This strategy needs to work and interact with the Financial Strategy and through these connections develop methods and options for the planned works to be funded in the short and long term in a sustainable way.

The Financial Strategy provides details on the methods that Council will use to balance the financial demands from assets with the ability and willingness from ratepayers and users to pay for them.

By getting infrastructure spending right, Council can assist our community and economy in continuing to thrive, while fairly distributing costs across generations of users. This strategy will assist both Council and the Community to make well-informed decisions regarding the future development of any assets, as well as the maintenance and renewal of our existing assets.

Council believes it has a strong financial position which allows a ‘safety net’ if renewals demands are required sooner than anticipated and planned by the strategy timing.


286

A3009110 Page 43 of 48

14. Long Term Financial Estimates

The financial estimates shown below are based upon the Financial Strategy’s inflation model and these estimates include inflation

14.1 CORE INFRASTRUCTURE EXPENDITURE

The two graphs below show, in detail for the first 10 years.


287

A3009110 Page 44 of 48

14.2 CORE INFRASTRUCTURE EXPENDITURE

The two graphs below show the core infrastructure funding anticipated over the next 30 years.

14.3 CORE INFRASTRUCTURE FUNDING FORECAST

The funding strategy for these infrastructure projects is contained with the Financial Strategy.


288

A3009110 Page 45 of 48

14.4 TOTAL INFRASTRUCTURE FINANCIALS

Below are details for the first 10 years, of the total infrastructure financials anticipated over the next 10 years.

2020/21 2020/21 2021/22 2022/23 2023/24 2024/25 2025/26 2026/27 2027/28 2028/29 2029/30 2030/31Annual Plan Forecast LTP LTP LTP LTP LTP LTP LTP LTP LTP LTP

($000) ($000) ($000) ($000) ($000) ($000) ($000) ($000) ($000) ($000) ($000) ($000)OPERATINGRates revenue 27,194 27,194 28,444 29,760 31,136 32,575 33,999 35,485 36,949 38,285 39,572 40,807Subsidies and grants (Capital) 3,743 9,461 10,481 8,597 5,037 4,241 4,942 4,852 4,900 5,006 5,396 5,183Subsidies and grants (Operational) 3,481 3,746 4,163 3,184 3,303 3,404 3,493 3,581 3,720 3,788 3,874 3,975Direct charges revenue 3,455 3,463 3,723 3,878 4,037 4,198 4,355 4,519 4,676 4,817 4,950 5,074Rental revenue 29 86 226 233 224 230 236 242 248 256 262 269 Finance revenue 96 - - - - - - - - - - -Dividends - - - - - - - - - - - -Fines - - - - - - - - - - - -Other revenue 360 360 360 370 379 389 400 409 420 431 443 455 Internal charges and overheads recovered - - - - - - - - - - - -Total revenue 38,358 44,310 47,397 46,022 44,116 45,037 47,425 49,088 50,913 52,583 54,497 55,763

Employee expenses 13 488 498 512 526 538 552 566 580 597 613 628Administration expenses 539 740 740 759 779 800 821 842 861 884 912 936 Grants & subsidies expenses 50 50 - - - - - - - - - -Operational expenses 8,519 9,585 9,467 9,726 10,115 10,321 10,635 10,857 11,178 11,444 12,407 12,694 Repairs & maintenance expenses 4,525 5,386 5,336 5,556 5,735 5,955 6,522 6,263 6,400 6,599 6,750 7,572 Depreciation and amortisation 21,711 21,711 21,765 22,865 22,868 22,870 24,727 24,864 25,056 27,011 27,014 27,017Finance expenses 470 452 413 471 455 349 280 415 657 632 543 460Internal charges and overheads applied 2,395 28 28 29 29 30 30 32 32 34 35 35 Total expenses 38,222 38,440 38,247 39,918 40,507 40,863 43,567 43,839 44,764 47,201 48,274 49,342

OPERATING SURPLUS / (DEFICIT) 136 5,870 9,150 6,104 3,609 4,174 3,858 5,249 6,149 5,382 6,223 6,421CAPITAL EXPENDITURE• to meet additional demand - - - - - - - - - - -• to improve the level of service 132 1,188 232 237 243 9,678 13,672 262 270 277 284• to replace existing assets 17,625 36,464 25,972 18,714 19,270 20,896 23,106 26,083 22,330 24,472 33,724TOTAL CAPITAL EXPENDITURE 17,757 37,652 26,204 18,951 19,513 30,574 36,778 26,345 22,600 24,749 34,008Gross proceeds from sale of assets - - - - - - - - - - -


289

A3009110 Page 46 of 48

Below are details in five year blocks, of the total infrastructure financials anticipated over the next 30 years.

2022-2026 2027-2031 2032-2036 2037-2041 2042-2046 2047-2051LTP LTP LTP LTP LTP LTP

($000) ($000) ($000) ($000) ($000) ($000)OPERATINGRates revenue 155,914 191,098 223,907 261,027 304,291 354,732Subsidies and grants (Capital) 33,298 25,337 28,400 35,346 40,500 42,456Subsidies and grants (Operational) 17,547 18,938 21,226 23,665 26,385 29,421Direct charges revenue 20,191 24,036 27,329 30,923 34,985 39,588Rental revenue 1,149 1,277 1,436 1,601 1,785 1,990 Finance revenue - - - - - -Dividends - - - - - -Fines - - - - - -Other revenue 1,898 2,158 2,427 2,705 3,016 3,364 Internal charges - - - - - -Total revenue 229,997 262,844 304,725 355,267 410,962 471,551

Employee expenses 2,626 2,984 3,357 3,742 4,173 4,653Administration expenses 3,899 4,435 4,990 5,570 6,196 6,919 Grants & subsidies expenses - - - - - -Operational expenses 50,264 58,580 67,756 75,546 84,213 93,921 Repairs & maintenance expenses 29,104 33,584 40,437 45,086 50,268 56,046 Depreciation and amortisation 115,095 130,962 150,172 166,848 185,247 208,451Finance expenses 1,968 2,707 1,252 86 2 -Internal charges 146 168 187 211 237 262 Total expenses 203,102 233,420 268,151 297,089 330,336 370,252

OPERATING SURPLUS / (DEFICIT) 26,895 29,424 36,574 58,178 80,626 101,299CAPITAL EXPENDITURE• to meet additional demand - - - - - -• to improve the level of service 11,578 14,765 1,517 1,691 1,886 2,101• to replace existing assets 121,316 129,715 142,161 145,256 149,325 181,543TOTAL CAPITAL EXPENDITURE 132,894 144,480 143,678 146,947 151,211 183,644Gross proceeds from sale of assets - - - - - -


290

A3009110 Page 47 of 48

Below are details of the capital expenditure planned to be delivered vs. what is required based on age over the next ten years.

2020/21 2020/21 2021/22 2022/23 2023/24 2024/25 2025/26 2026/27 2027/28 2028/29 2029/30 2030/31Annual

Plan Forecast LTP LTP LTP LTP LTP LTP LTP LTP LTP LTP

($000) ($000) ($000) ($000) ($000) ($000) ($000) ($000) ($000) ($000) ($000) ($000)

Capital expenditure required based on age

• to meet additional demand - - - - - - - - - - -

• to improve the level of service200 1,771 309 316 324 9,761 10,005 350 359 369 379

• to replace existing assets37,568 33,749 29,940 24,250 27,133 27,861 30,810 34,780 29,770 32,630 44,963

Total capital expenditure required based on age 37,768 35,520 30,248 24,567 27,458 37,622 40,815 35,130 30,129 32,999 45,341

Capital expenditure planned to be delivered

• to meet additional demand- - - - - - - - - - -

• to improve the level of service132 1,188 232 237 243 9,678 13,672 262 270 277 284

• to replace existing assets17,625 36,464 25,972 18,714 19,270 20,896 23,106 26,083 22,330 24,472 33,724

Total capital expenditure planned to be delivered 17,757 37,652 26,204 18,951 19,513 30,574 36,778 26,345 22,600 24,749 34,008


291

A3009110 Page 48 of 48

14.5 FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS


292

Long-term Plan 2021 – 2031 Assumptions

Population


Population growthAt 30 June 2020, the estimated population of Invercargill was approximately 57,1001,2.

The population growth for Invercargill is around 1%3. This rate has been observed during eight of approximately the past twelve years, making it a reasonable assumption for the current plan.

Based on a 1% growth assumption, the expected population for 2031 is estimated to be around 62,810.

Covid-19 might significantly change the previous growth forecasts for Council. Population growth is expected to be minimal in the short term as a result of Covid-19 limiting the ability of students and migrant workers to travel, along with continued aging of the population.

Medium

Council is not planning for a major change in population during the life of the current plan.

There are multiple uncertainties related to population growth in Invercargill:

∑ While International studentscurrently in New Zealand are able to return to SIT for study, the number of EFTS4 to date for 2021 is only 337. This is compared to 775 in 2020.

∑ Riding out recession impacts of Covid-19 Alert Levels 4 and 3

∑ Proposed Tiwai Aluminium Smelter closure

∑ Mid-range population forecast but noting underlying increasein population that has already surpassed StatsNZ estimates

The critical infrastructure and resources that Council provides were designed for a city with a population larger than we are now. Council has appropriate infrastructure and resources to service our population without significant financial impact as we have plenty of room to grow.

This is in line with the higher forecast of the Southland Regional Development Strategy.

Council will continue to monitor change in population growth during the life of the current long term plan to prepare for/respond to any significant changes realised from the multiple uncertainties identified.


DiversityThe population will continue to become more diverse. The Maori

MediumInterruptions to travel may affect international migration although it is not expected to effect this assumption

Council continues to explore new ways of engaging and ensures a balanced sample in

1 Subnational population estimates (TA, SA2), by age and sex, at 30 June 1996-2020 (2020 boundaries) (stats.govt.nz)2 Stats NZ Overview of data quality ratings, interim coverage and response rates, and data sources for 2018 census3 As above.4 EFTS – Equivalent Full Time Student


293

http://nzdotstat.stats.govt.nz/WBOS/Index.aspx?DataSetCode=TABLECODE7980

https://www.stats.govt.nz/reports/overview-of-data-quality-ratings-interim-coverage-and-response-rates-and-data-sources-for-2018-census


population will grow from 17% to 19%5. The Asian population will grow from 6% to 9%6.

significantly. Impact of uncertainty is low.

customer research to ensure it understands changing needs and expectations.


Ageing populationThose aged 65 and older will form 23% of the population in 2031, which is higher than the current aged population in 20207

(estimated at 10,000 of 57,100, or 17.51%)8.

High

The pattern of aging in the population is a long-term trend which is not expected to be disrupted.

The needs of older people and younger people are different from those in the working ageand Council will continue to consider the needs of all users of its services.


HouseholdsThe number of households will increase as the population ages.

The size of households will decrease slightly and may vary between 2.35 and 2.25 people over the time of the infrastructure strategy9

Medium

The impact of a potential decline in numbers of students and migrant workers on demand for housing is uncertain.

Council’s infrastructure has sufficient capacity to accommodate the potential increase in population and/or demand.

5 Growth in line with NZ stats estimate of 2% growth in the Southland region (NZ. Stats, population projections)6 Growth in line with NZ stats estimate of 3% growth in the Southland region (NZ. Stats, population projections)7 NZ Census Area unit forecast8 Subnational population estimates (TA, subdivision), by age and sex, at 30 June 2018-20 (2020 boundaries)9 To calculate the projected average occupancy rates we took past and projected population data from Statistics New Zealand and cross referenced this to past and projected number of households. The average occupancy is the total population divided by the total occupied households.


294

http://nzdotstat.stats.govt.nz/wbos/Index.aspx?_ga=2.4027440.1474659112.1614218647-1527384650.1602016605


Economy


COVID-19 The lockdown and potential future impacts of COVID-19 may negatively impact residents' ability to pay rates. This could lead to a short term cashflow impact and increased rates arrears. Rates arrears could increase further.

Medium

To date there has been little impact on our rates receipts and the response to the new rates postponement andremission policy has led to a number of ratepayers contacting Council to go onto a payment plan for their rates.

Council has adopted an additional policy for postponement and remission of rates. This policy allows ratepayers financially impacted by COVID-19, to delay payment of up to 1 year's rates. Council staff will work with affected ratepayers to set up affordable payment plans.


EconomyA recessionary period is expected for the first five years of the LTP and longer-term structural changes to the economy beyond this time. This will lead to higher unemployment and lower GDP.10 Medium

The shape of the recession (u or v) is as yet unknown. The relative impact across regions, based on industries impacted most by COVID-19, as well as potential impacts of proposed Tiwai closure and SIT becoming a subsidiary of Te Pūkenga needs to be better understood by Council in order to reduce this uncertainty. Significant errors in this area could have a significant impact on Councils budgets over the forecast period11.

Council will focus on efficiency savings. Investment will only be made in activities which can be serviced.

Council will continue to review its work programme and priorities as the level of uncertainty reduces.


Community fundingCouncil can expect to see increased funding applications from groups as a result of Covid-19 and its impact on Community Trust of Southland and Invercargill Licencing Trust’s ability to fund.

Medium

The immediate impact of Covid-19 has been seen in the local community, with reduced funding available from major community funders including the Community Trust of Southland and Invercargill Licencing Trust and Foundation.


10 BERL Local Government Cost Adjustor Forecasts – Three Scenarios Reference No: #610911https://www.infometrics.co.nz/industry-concentrations-and-the-fall-of-think-big/ ; https://www.infometrics.co.nz/examining-the-nz-industries-hit-hardest-by-the-covid-19-pandemic/ ; BERL Local Government Cost Adjustor Forecasts – Three Scenarios Reference No: #6109


295






Economic diversificationVolatility in the global economy may affect one or more of Invercargill’s key export industries. This will drive diversification but will slow growth. There may be a delayed effect through the risk of impacted industries abandoning properties.

Medium

The relative impact needs to be better understood by Council to reduce uncertainty, as significant errors could have a significant impact on Council budgets over the forecast period12. This may directly impact rates and ability of Council to fund projects.

Council will continue to monitor changes in the global markets.


Central Business District Following a period of static activity until 2023 when the City Block development is complete, the CBD will become more vibrant and have increased connectivity.

Council will work in collaboration with others to enable strategic activities and initiatives to support the success of the CBD.

High

The city centre is at the centre of Council’s vision. As with any major investment of this type there is a level of uncertainty as to the impact of the development on future use patterns within the city. If the development does not succeed in drawing people to the city centre it will have an impact on Council strategy.

Council strategic activities and economic development activities delivered through Great South will align to support the success of the city centre projects

Streetscape works will be designed to support connectivity to the city centre. Council will need to plan for the structural change this is anticipated to involve.

Council has support for heritage buildings through the Regional Heritage Strategy and associated funds to support businesses managing high costs of older buildings.


TourismTourism numbers will slowly increase, returning to 2019 levels by 2031.

Low

The tourism sector is the hardest hit in the economy and is not expected to fully recover out to 2030.

This may have an impact on the Airport and other infrastructure needs

Council expects some impact, but tourism is not a major proportion of Invercargill’s GDP so the effect is expected to be relatively minor.

12 https://www.infometrics.co.nz/industry-concentrations-and-the-fall-of-think-big/ and https://www.infometrics.co.nz/examining-the-nz-industries-hit-hardest-by-the-covid-19-pandemic/


296





that may or may not be required in short term as tourist numbers reduce.


International educationThe numbers of International students studying at the Southern Institute of Technology will slowly increase back to 2019 levels by 2031.

Low

Students are an important part of the economy, creating significant demand. The impact on retail, hospitality and housing could be significant.

Council is working with Great South on economic development.


297


Social and cultural

Assumption Level of certainty Impact of uncertainty Council responseActivity Level Māori culture

Māori culture will become more visible in the city. Medium

Increased awareness of the need to recognise Maori culture and tikanga (methodology), with a particular focus on partnership, participation and protection.

Council will invest more in Maori engagement to ensure strategic projects reflect Maori culture in the city.

Activity Level


Socio-economic The impact of COVID-19 is yet to be realised, and there may be changes in Invercargill’s socio-economic patterns over time.

Māori have been disproportionately affected by the economic crisis brought about by the COVID-19 containment measures, and it is expected to continue to play out over the ten year recovery period.13

Medium

With GDP softening the long range economic outlook will hinge largely on the ability for the current and successive governments to provide economic stimulus.

This may have an impact on Council activities that rely on users discretionary spend for revenue


13 BERL (July 2020). Economic Scenarios to 2030. The post-COVID-19 scene.


298


Resilience


Community wellbeingThe COVID-19 response measures will have long term impacts on the wellbeing of communities, requiring a long term perspective response.

Medium

The situation is evolving and will continue to be monitored.

Council has tasked Great South, the regional development agency, to focus on resilience and economic diversification. A Community Wellbeing Fund has been established.


Community resilienceThe amalgamation of Southern Institute of Technology with Te Pūkenga, and the potential loss of zero fees advantage, will have an uncertain long-term effect on Invercargill’s population and economy.

Medium

The effects of COVID-19 on immigration will impact student numbers in the short to medium term.

The risk of losing the zero fees advantage could have an impact on our growth strategy.

Council funds Great South to promote the region and continues to monitor and plan for the impact.


Community resilienceTiwai Point Aluminium Smelter will continue to operate until 31 December 2024.

Medium

A transition plan will be developed to prepare for the eventual closure. It is not yet clear where and how the impact will be felt in the community.

Council is working with the Just Transition team and Great South on economic diversification.

SignificantAssumption

Natural disasterNo natural disaster is expected to impact the City during the life of the plan. Medium

The impacts of a disaster will be assessed at the time and an appropriate response prepared.

Infrastructure renewals are undertaken using resilient design practices.

Council has a focus on resilience. Council continues to support and invest in Emergency Management Southland.


299


Environment – Climate Change

Climate change impacts will vary across regions in Southland. The following is a summary of impacts taken from the Southland climate change impact assessment, August 2018 report.

Assumption Level of certainty Impact of uncertainty Management responseSignificant Mean annual and extreme

temperatures (days where temp. exceeds 250C) are expected to increase with time:By 2040: mean annual temperature increase of 0.5-10C with 0-10 more hot days per annum.By 2090: mean annual temperature increase of 0.7-30C, with 5-55 more hot days per annum.

High

Water - Longer period of drought may result in increased demand, whilst flood events create turbidity and increase the cost to treat for consumption.

Flood Banks – increased temperature results in more extreme weather events, with a corresponding increase in height and frequency of storm surges.


Significant Annual rainfall is expected to increase:By 2040: +0-10% By 2090: +5-20% Increased frequency of high rainfall days, i.e. increase in intensity of rainfall.

High

Roading - increased frequency and intensity of rainfall may require extra drainage works in the road network that may alter long-term maintenance costs

Stormwater – increased frequency and intensity of rainfall events resulting in increased demand on the network.

Wastewater - Increased frequency and intensity of rainfall events results in infiltration and inflows that increase volumes to be treated.


Significant Mean sea level is expected to rise.By 2040: 0.2-0.3 m By 2090: 0.4-0.9 m

High

Errors in modelling will have significant impact on capital works programme required

Stormwater – increased tailwater levels require consideration for outfall design.



300


Flood Banks – Renewals need to consider increased sea level during design life.Sewerage – Clifton outfall may need to be pumped long term.


301


Council operations


Council services and structureCouncil is planning for the current structure to deliver the current set of services, with the exception of water and sewerage.

Medium

If amalgamation does occur, costs to the ratepayer will remain the same, although revenue and financing will be done by a different operator.

Council will proactively engage with neighbouring authorities and central government to ensure that the best result is achieved from any amalgamation.


Water ReformAs a result of the Central Government directed Waters Reform, it is assumed there will be a change in water reticulation and sewerage delivery services within the life of the plan.

This will result in a structural change for Council in relation to the ownership of assets and associated debt capacity.

The services will continue to be delivered, but these will be provided by another party.

This will include increased regulatory requirements as required by the new regulatory authority.

High

The services will continue to be delivered but these will be provided by another party.

This will be managed in line with Government best practice, and will remain within the Council financial and 10-year assumptions.

Council will assess proposed reform options when Central Government has provided their final recommendations to Local Government entities.

Council will proactively engage with neighbouring authorities and central government to ensure that the best result is achieved from any reforms.

Council is incorporating management of this potential outcome through planning for management of debt.



Legislative changesThere will be changes to legislation that have an impact on how Council will provide services. These changes may affect the Council organizational structure but not change the level of service received by the customer/ratepayer.

High

Changes may affect the Council organizational structure but not change the level of service received by the customer/ratepayer.

Management will continue to engage with Government and plan for changes in services in response to policy and regulation changes as these arise.


302



ConsentsCouncil will continue to carry out legislation-directed ordinary functions while factoring in an increase to required quality for consent conditions.

Medium

If unexpected consent conditions are imposed there may be unexpected costs to compliance.

Council will work with the Regional Council early to minimise the risk of unexpected consent conditions.

The cost of obtaining consents, knowing environmental standards are increasing, will be built into activities.


The Funding Assistance Rate (as advised from Waka Kotahi NZTA) will reduce by 1% each year until reaching 51% funding assistance in the 2023/2024 and then remain at 51% for the life of the plan.

High

Increase in demand on rate funding for roading activities, including the forecast NZTA portion of the city centre streetscape project.

Continue to engage with NZTA on funding assistance.



Asset lifeAssets will remain useful until the end of their average useful life, assuming asset average life expectancy assumptions are correct.14

Infrastructure installed in the 1920s are nearing the end of their lives and require renewal within the term of the Infrastructure Strategy.

High

Assets may need renewal earlier if this assumption is incorrect and change the renewal profile. Or may allow delayed renewal in other cases.

Review the appropriateness of assets at the time of renewal including, where appropriate, whole of life cycle assessment.

Increase knowledge of asset conditions to better predict the average use of life if assumptions are lower than expected.



Investment Property and ForestryInvestment Property and Forestry Assets are valued on a yearly basis. They are expected to increase in line with inflation. This is reflected in our Financial Strategy, and Accounting policies.

High

Variation in valuations have no cash flow implications for Council.

Continue to value Investment Property and Forestry assets on an annual basis.

14 Council will use national standards is asset revaluation.


303



Capital programme deliveryImplementation of a Project Management Office will increase effectiveness of delivery of the capital programme over the Long-term Plan. 70% of the capital programme will be delivered In Year 1, 75% in Year 2 and ongoing.

High

It may take longer to implement the Project Management Office than expected, including as a result of challenges in attracting qualified personnel. Availability of contractors may have a greater impact than expected. Delay in the programme will result in higher costs as a result of inflation.

Active management of project processes, including engaging consultants as required, active and early engagement with contractors. Management of the programme rather than individual projects will enable contractor availability as well as funding levels to be actively managed. The financial risk of higher levels of delivery than expected across multiple areas will be monitored. Any impact of delayed capital expenditure on renewals on maintenance budgets will be actively managed.


304


Financial forecasting


InflationOperational forecasts and capital work programmes will increase by the accumulated Local Government Cost Index inflation forecast by BERL.

MediumCost change factors are based on information developed for Council’s by Business and Economic Research Limited(BERL). Significant variations to inflation would have an impact on Council’s financial management.

Council will continue on the planned pathway for the Capital Works programme and review operational revenue & expenses each year.


Asset revaluationAsset values will increase by the accumulated Local Government Cost Index inflation forecast be BERL on the last valuation value. Revaluation occurs in 2021/22 and every third year therefore.

Medium Changes in the valuation or life of Council assets may have a significant impact on Council’s financial management and capital programme.

Council will continue on the planned pathway for the Capital Works programme and monitor with after each revaluation cycle.


Interest rates - BorrowingExpected interest rates on borrowing will be 2.5%.

High The treasury report from Bancorp projects the ICC Borrowing interest rate are currently at 2.20% in 2020, and is expected to fall and remain under 2% for the next 10 years. Significantly higher interest rates would impact Council’s financial position.

2.5% would allow some upside if the situation changed (interest rates increase or credit rating decreases); but Council have potential to go to 2.25% or 2% to lower costs.


Interest rates – Cash and DepositsReturn on cash and term deposits are forecasted to expect a negative rate at some stage within 2020/2021.

Medium Term deposit rates currently vary from 0.5% for under 6 months to a flat 1% for longer. Most forecasts still expect a negative rate at some stage within 2020/2021.

An assumption of 0.5% should be comfortable and if rates do increase again in the future, this will put Council in a more positive position.


Dividends from ICHL will be $4.8m + CPI.

Medium This would have a negative impact on Council’s overall revenue and cash position, which would increase the burden on ratepayers.

Council will consider strategic reliance on dividends noting increased levels of economic uncertainty.


External FundingIt is assumed Council will achieve

High The immediate impact of Covid-19 has been seen in the local community, with

Council acknowledges the challenge of obtaining external


305


the level of external funding as estimated.

reduced funding available from major community funders including the Community Trust of Southland and Invercargill Licencing Trust and Foundation.

funding at this time.

Should Council not be able to obtain funding as indicated this would impact project scope and in some cases require further consultation.


306

A3430861



AUTHORISED BY: PETE THOMPSON, EXECUTIVE MANAGER – OFFICE OF THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE


SUBMISSION TO THE ENVIRONMENT SOUTHLAND LONG-TERM PLAN

SUMMARY

Council’s submission to the Environment Southland Long-term Plan is provided here for information.

RECOMMENDATIONS


1. Receive the report “Submission to the Environment Southland Long-term Plan”.

2. Note the submission made to Environment Southland (A3425171).

IMPLICATIONS


N/A


N/A


No


N/A


N/A


None

Performance, Policy and Partnerships Committee - Public - Submission to Environment Southland Long-Term Plan (A3430861)

307

A3430861

BACKGROUND

Environment Southland asked for their consultation materials to be circulated to Invercargill City Councillors. Consultation on their Long-term Plan closed on 4 June 2021. While it was not possible to confirm this submission with Council prior to this date, the contents were discussed with Councillors.

Councillors were grateful for the opportunity to submit on issues relevant to the City Council and noted the importance of the relationship with Environment Southland. The strength of collaboration particularly on projects such as the Stead Street Stopbank is noted and Councillors look forward to further fruitful partnerships in the future.

CONCLUSION

The submission to the Environment Southland Long-term Plan is appended for information.


308

A3425171Civic Administration Building l 101 Esk Street l Private Bag 90104 l Invercargill 9840 l New Zealand lTEL 03 211 1777

2 June 2021

Environment SouthlandPrivate Bag 90116INVERCARGILL 9840

Dear Sir / Madam

INVERCARGILL CITY COUNCIL SUBMISSION TO THE ENVIRONMENT SOUTHLAND 2021 –2031 LONG TERM PLAN

Invercargill City Council is pleased to take this opportunity to submit on the Environment Southland Long-term Plan. This submission has been prepared by officers and has been reviewed by Councillors, although not formally received by Council prior to submission. Council notes the valued relationship with Environment Southland and that these submissions are made in a spirit of partnership.

∑ Community resilience. Council welcomes that Environment Southland is focusing on both climate change and flooding as it effects community resilience. We have been pleased to work with Environment Southland to achieve shovel ready investment for Southland. Environment Southland notes that it will be making a $4.8 million investment alongside the Government’s $18.7 million. It is worth noting that Invercargill City Council is contributing $4.1 million of funding for the Stead St Stop Bank element of this project. Invercargill City Council has formed a working group on climate change and looks forward to working with Environment Southland on this issue.

∑ Bluff Boat Ramp Washdown facility. As part of Invercargill City Council’s Long-term Plan we have made allocation for the Bluff Boat Ramp to proceed in line with the agreement made between Environment Southland, South Port and ourselves in February 2019. This work is scheduled to be completed in 2022. Is Environment Southland able to confirm continued commitment to the Bio-security washdown facility part of the project?

∑ Clean Air Loans Scheme. Environment Southland identifies air quality as one of its areas of focus which Council supports. However, we recommend that the Clean Air Loans Scheme, which Invercargill City Council provides administrative support for is reviewed. Use of this scheme has been declining and commercial banks now provide loans for this service. Since 2017 there have been 168 approved loans; of these, only 14 have proceeded in the last two years. As a result we recommend that this scheme is now reviewed.

∑ Innovation. Environment Southland notes it is making investment in technology including data management. We would request that this investment promotes alignment and sharing of data across Southland’s local authorities.

∑ Rates increase. Invercargill City Council does not take a position on whether Environment Southland should proceed with a 16% or 20% rates increase as it is a matter for individual ratepayers to consider. However, we would ask Environment Southland to reconsider whether it has the proportion of rates paid by different groups of ratepayers right. In the examples provided in the consultation document the Invercargill residential ratepayer will be paying 30% more under the preferred option, in comparison to a 21% increase for the ratepayer in Winton and the Commercial ratepayer, and only 12 – 14% increase for the sheep and dairy farmers. While we understand that these are only examples, can Environment Southland explain why it appears that the Invercargill residential ratepayer is paying disproportionally more?


309

A3246868

2

∑ Notified Resource Consent Initial Deposits and Hearing fee. Council is concerned at the significant increase in the fees charged, from $1,740.00, to two lots of $10,000.00. This on face value appears to be hard to justify. While an increase is expected, an increase of this magnitude will not encourage development in Southland or the City where a Consent hearing is required. Indeed, a single dissenting resident could massively increase the costs of an application to such an extent that an applicant will walk away. The fee on face value is unreasonable and Council requests that this significant increase be brought back to a more realistic amount. It is noted that much recent discussion around the Resource Management Act has been focused around cost,and this proposed increase is a striking and concerning example of this.

∑ Incident cost recovery charges. Council submits that this charge be reconsidered. Section150 of the Local Government Act 2002(LGA) does not allow for investigations into breaches of Consent or the Resource Management Act 1991(RMA) to be positioned as an Inspection and charged back under Section 150 of the LGA. Council believes this practice is ultra vires the LGA. The RMA has a very specific cost recovery regime, as noted in the fees and charges. Section 150 LGA states “under any other enactment if the relevant provision does not authorise the local authority to charge a fee. (Section 150(1)(b)(i)). The RMA does authorise for fees to be charged. Investigation costs are awardable by the District Court upon conviction. We suggest that is the correct avenue to seek cost recovery for investigations. Investigations should not be positioned as Inspections to try and work around this to recover costs. Council seeks this fee to removed or reworked to exclude Investigations into consent or RMA breaches.

Council would like to be heard on this submission.

Council values the relationship it has with Environment Southland and looks forward to further opportunities for partnership and collaboration over the next triennium.

Yours faithfully

Clare HadleyCHIEF EXECUTIVE


310

A3417649


FROM: GROUP MANAGERS

AUTHORISED BY: CLARE HADLEY – CHIEF EXECUTIVE


ACTIVITY REPORT

SUMMARY

This report provides an update on a wide range of activities across the Council.

RECOMMENDATIONS

That the Performance, Policy and Partnerships Committee receives the report “Activity Report”.

CUSTOMER AND ENVIRONMENT

The following graphs and supporting commentary provide an overview of the performance to date for the Customer and Environment group’s community facing services.

∑ Numbers of applications for building consents received are tracking normally. Our processing times are always good as we have outsourced this work to a contractor who

82

84

86

88

90

92

94

96

98

100

JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN

92

89

92

100100 100

9899

100 100

96

98

Customer & Environment - Performance 1 Jan 21 - 30 Apr 21Planning & Building

Resource Consents Building Consents > 20 Days % CCC > 20 Days Building Consents > 20 Days % CCC > 20 Days

Performance, Policy and Partnerships Committee - Public - Activity Report (A3417649)

311

A3417649

is well staffed to deal with any major fluctuations in workload/volume of applications. There has been an increase in Resource consent applications beyond that previously seen.

∑ Of the 2717 people who visited the CAB in April 50% used Cashier and Ticketek services, 35% the Help Desk and 15% planning and building services. Interestingly Bluff Service Centre had foot traffic of 3,500 people who used Kiwibank, NZ Post, Lotto, Library and ICC services during April.

∑ In the call centre, building and planning continue to have most enquiries followed by rates and works and services.

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

4500

5000


3420

47024846

3542

914

1406 13351165

2227

4910

29082717

Customer & Environment - Performance 1 Jan 21 - 30 Apr 21Customer Services

Phone Email Walk Ins

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

200


3850 54

2928 2539

18

112

173

187

72

0 4 1 4

Customer & Environment - Performance 1 Jan 21 - 30 Apr 21Property < 10 Days

LIMs Processed Electronic LIM Lodgements Electronic Property File Requests Property File Scan Requests


312

A3417649

∑ April shows a drop in numbers across LIMs and Property File Requests in comparison to previous months this year and is put down to the Easter and Anzac long weekends.

∑ Electronic LIM lodgements have ranged from 50% to 73%, this varies dependent on how the customer searches the website to apply for a LIM, whether the online application option comes up or the option to download a form to complete and email in.

∑ 25 Verifications were completed in April which is slightly down from the previous months. This is normal as food premises a verified at different times of the year.

∑ 7 new food businesses have registered which is up from previous months whereas Alcohol Licenses issued are down from previous months.

∑ Health license inspections have also increased. This is due to the new Health & Hygiene bylaw which, amongst other changes sees Tattoo and body piercers are now included.

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35 3335

30

25

54

67

14

01

14

31

9

32

12

Customer & Environment - Performance 1 Jan 21 - 30 Apr 21Environmental Health

Verifications Completed New Food applications Health Licenses Alcohol Licenses issued

0

50

100

150

200

250


209

230238

79

99 10495

80

13

54 59

71 0 0 00 412

3

3829 28

18

Customer & Environment - Performance 1 Jan 21 - 30 Apr 21Compliance Animal Control

Dog Registrations Complaints Received Infringements Prosecution Rehoming Dogs Returned


313

A3417649

∑ Dog registrations follow the typical curve reflective of registrations being processed before due date.

∑ Rehoming figures fluctuate depending on the number of dogs kept at the rehoming facilities.

∑ Noise complaints spike over the holiday period and long weekends. The numbers follow a trend of gradually reducing as the days are shorter and winter months arrive.

∑ Litter and overgrown sections also follow the same trend as being higher towards the end of the holiday/summer period and drop off closer to winter.

∑ Animal and poultry complaints don’t follow any particular trend, complaints vary from nuisance cats to poultry.

LEISURE AND RECREATION

Invercargill Venues and Events – April 2021

On 12 April 2021 the Southern District Health Board (SDHB) was welcomed into the Civic Theatre with a mihi whakatau in the foyer for the establishment of the COVID-19 vaccination clinic in the Victoria Rooms. The clinic averages foot traffic of around 300 – 340 per day of operation and has increased occupancy in a previously underperforming part of the complex. Media has given some positive coverage on the clinic’s location and public feedback has been encouraging. The increased foot traffic has greatly widened the visitor demographics for the complex and provided opportunities for greater exposure for event advertising. Having the public areas of the Civic open during the day has increased opportunities for casual public visits increasing familiarisation of the Council provided facilities. The long term hire to SDHB provides a consistent occupancy to smooth the natural ebbs and flows of the seasonal nature of the venues industry.

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140


129

95103

91

7 6 3 4

19 20 23

38 5 8 4

Customer & Environment - Performance 1 Jan 21 - 30 Apr 21 Compliance

Noise Litter Overgrown-Untidy sections Animal-Poultry


314

A3417649

Workshops were held with the stakeholders of Rugby Park and Anderson House to encourage involvement in the Long Term Plan process and increase understanding of Council engagement.

Participation and visitation stats – April 2021

Venue No of Hire Half days Participants

Civic Theatre Auditorium 6 816

Civic Theatre Drawing Room 6 85

Civic Theatre Victoria Room* 36 4500

Rugby Park 1 30

Scottish Hall Main 9 300

Scottish Hall Community Room 8 270

Total 66 6001

* It is to be noted that the numbers for the Victoria Rooms are significantly higher due to the venue being used for Covid-19 Vaccinations and that it is expected that the number would reduce once the facility is no longer being used for this purpose.

Looking forwardMay will see the vaccination clinic review its operating hours and a permanent workforce will replace the current seconded SDHB staff. Some minor customer experience improvements will be made to the Civic public spaces to encourage greater public and more efficient event setup. Improvements will include better signage including Te Reo, where appropriate, as well as wayfinding and storage improvements. Customer experience improvement programme will be rolled out to the Scottish Hall and Rugby Park sequentially over the next financial year.

Invercargill Library Report – April 2021

Collections


315

A3417649

Invercargill Public Library collaborated with Southland Museum and Art Gallery to digitise the Library’s copies of The Nokomai Herald, which was published weekly from 1871 to 1872. This is a unique piece of Southland’s history, being the only known handwritten newspaper from this region. Its fragility means access to the original is not possible, but the digitised version will, in time, be available for the community to view in detail online.

A review was completed of the puzzle and board game collections over the most recent year, as this is an area growing in circulation activity. Recently we trialled lending out some small LEGO kits, as they fit our policy of providing community access to a variety of educational and entertainment resources. These have proved very popular and are hardly ever on the shelf, so we are investing more in this area. Perhaps fittingly, in our city, with so many wheeled attractions, the most borrowed kit so far is the “Race buggy transporter”.

As part of our commitment to providing a range of materials to support te reo Māori learners (whether beginner or fluent) we have launched access to Lingogo. Lingogo is an app you can download onto your iOS or Android device and log into with your library card number to explore a collection of epic indigenous stories with interactive translations. Lingogo currently offers eBooks in Māori and Samoan, with Tongan and Niuean eBooks to come. New titles are added monthly

Programmes

Staff Sergeant Christopher Cubitt from the New Zealand Army was part of a session in the April school holiday programme called ‘Meet a Soldier”. The kids and parents loved meeting him and learning about what he does in the army including a question and answer session. Then the children got photos with him like he was a star. Feedback from one parent said that Chris was friendly and informative and thanked the Library for the opportunity to meet him.

Strength and Balance

Invercargill Public Library runs free strength and balance classes for seniors. This class started 13 April 2021 and is provided as part of the Live Stronger for Longer programme in association with ACC and the Ministry of Health. While the class is targeted at 65+, anyone can attend. It is a great opportunity to improve one’s strength and balance and socialise in a friendly environment afterwards. This programme aims to bring seniors to the library and highlight services and collection resources for this age group which they may not be aware of.

Community Weaving Project

Invercargill Public Library hosted a series of community weaving workshops by Harakeke Down South in April and May 2021. In these workshops the community are weaving a landscape that celebrates Southland nature. The landscape will be hung at the Library at the completion of the work as part of the Matariki programme at the Library in July 2021.


316

A3417649

Southland Museum & Art Gallery and He Waka Tuia – April 2021

He Waka Tuia - Visitor Numbers

Month Total visitors Total Open Hours

November 2020 772 148

December 2020 893 136

January 2021 1068 144

February 2021 613 144

March 2021 980 158

April 2021 1030 156

From 1 April 2021 opening hours at He Waka Tuia were varied and increased by 7 hours per week. Note in April, open hours were varied due to Easter and ANZAC day. This has coincided with focused public programmes, which has resulted in a small increase in visitornumbers.

Minerva

The restoration of Minerva has now been completed two month earlier, with an initial undercoat of paint having been applied. Minerva has now been returned to SMAG for storage.

Mataatua

The Mataatua carving is currently being researched by Otago Museum, with a view to completing research and enabling the return of the carving to Te Runanga o Ngati Awa later in 2021.

Exhibitions

A series of three exhibitions, including 100 Women, 100 Words, which was provided by Otago Museum at no cost, were installed during April and opened on 16 April 2021. A series of public programmes were initiated by staff to support the exhibitions.


317

A3429331


FROM: PATRICIA CHRISTIE, MANAGER – FINANCIAL SERVICESJAIMEE BOTTING, INTERIM TEAM LEADER FINANCE



QUARTERLY FINANCIAL REPORT - 31 MARCH 2021

SUMMARY

This report is to update the Council on the spending and revenue for the nine months ended 31 March 2021 and the forecast Council’s financial position as at 30 June 2021.

RECOMMENDATIONS

That Performance, Policy and Partnerships Committee

1. Receive the report “Quarterly Financial Report – 31 March 2021”.

2. Notes for the quarter ending 31 March 2021∑ Council has recorded an operating deficit of $0.04 million∑ Capital programme is running below forecast

3. Notes that the changes to the forecast as outlined in the schedule of forecast changes section of the report were approved as part of the LTP deliberations.

IMPLICATIONS


Yes


Yes


No


No


No required

Performance, Policy and Partnerships Committee - Public - Quarterly Financial Report - 31 March 2021 (A3429331)

318

A3429331

REPORT

Presented is the Council’s quarterly performance report for the 3rd quarter ended 31 March 2021, including a forecast for the year ended 30 June 2021.

The quarter reporting format include the following content:

∑ Commentary ∑ Total Council Financial Snapshot∑ Performance Summary

- Key Indicator Graphs- Consolidated Financial Performance- Net operating surplus by activity group- Capital expenditure by activity group

∑ Treasury Report∑ Statement of Comprehensive Revenue & Expenses∑ Statement of Cash Flows∑ Statement of Financial Position∑ Funding Impact Statement - Council∑ Schedule of Forecast Changes∑ Detailed Key Performance Indicators ∑ Bancorp Treasury Report

Our new finance system “Technology One” was launched on the 1st November 2020. The loss of key finance staff after the launch and further staff changes since, coupled with the focus needed to deliver the Long Term Plan have impacted the Finance team’s ability to deliver ‘normal’ reporting.

The delays identified in the December quarterly report are being addressed and the finance team resources continue to be allocated to reviewing and validating the financial data withinthe system.

We had planned to have a full version of the quarterly report available for March, this has not been possible. While advances have been made, these have not been sufficient for the full report to be provided. As such, the following sections have been excluded from this report:∑ Detailed performance by activity group∑ Key capital projects over $250,000 summary. ∑ Funding Impact Statements for each activity group


319

INVERCARGILL CITY COUNCIL QUARTERLY REPORT TO 31 MARCH 2021

TOTAL COUNCIL FINANCIAL SNAPSHOT

$4.9m favourable YTD

Full year forecast of $-0.4m

$3.9m unfavourable YTD

Full year forecast of $47.111m

$8.1m favourable YTD

Full year forecast of $76.2m

$29.3m favourable to LTP year endLTP year end of $57.2m

$0m

$27m

$49.2m

$27.9m

0

20

40

60

Sep Dec Mar JunForecast YTD Actual YTD

NON-RATES REVENUE ($Millions)Fees and charges, grants, interest and dividends.

27.0 30.9

47.1

ACTUAL YTD FORECAST YTD TOTAL FORECAST


0

20

40

60

80

Sep Dec Mar Jun

Forecast YTD Actual YTD

49.2 57.3

76.2


OPERATING EXPENDITURECost to deliver existing levels of service.

OPERATING EXPENDITURE ($Millions)Cost to deliver existing levels of service.

OPERATING EXPENDITURE ($Millions)Cost to deliver existing levels of service.

39.6% 43.3%58.1%

ACTUAL YTD TOTAL FORECAST LTP 2020/21

17.7

30.0

39.9


CAPITAL EXPENDITURE ($Millions)To provide new and replacement assets.

NET DEBT/REVENUE RATIOCouncil's Net Debt/Operating Revenue and Rates.


NET DEBTTotal debt less total cash and cash investments.

OPERATING SURPLUS / (DEFICIT)

A3429360

Appendix 1Performance, Policy and Partnerships Committee - Public - Quarterly Financial Report - 31 March 2021 (A3429331)

320


PERFORMANCE SUMMARY

Financial performance YTD ($000)

Non-financial performance

Unfavourable

On Target

Favourable

Net operating surplus

Unfavourable

On Target

Favourable

Income

Underspent

On Target

Overspent

Expenditure

Underspent

On Target

Overspent

Capital expenditureActual: $(40)Forecast: $(4,989) Variance: $4,949 or 99% favourable

Actual: $ 17,710Forecast: $ 29,953Variance: $ 12,243or 41% underspent

Actual: $70,374Forecast: $73,447Variance: $3.073 or 4% unfavourable

Actual: $ 70,414Forecast: $ 78,436 Variance: $ 8,022 or 10% underspent

6

8

5

1

3

1

2

3

1

8

1

1

6

1

3

5

1

4

3

1

2

2

1

1

1

2

1

1

1

1

1

4

3

General

Stormwater

Sewerage

Roading

Water supply

Solid waste

Regulatory

Social and cultural

Not available Target exceeded by 5% Target achieved Target within 10% Target not achieved

A3429360


321


PERFORMANCE SUMMARY

Consolidated financial performance

Actual YTD Forecast YTD VarianceFull year forecast

Annual plan

($000) ($000) ($000) ($000) ($000)

Rates and penalties 43,412 42,589 823 56,767 56,767

Income from activities 22,074 27,416 (5,342) 42,528 31,453

Rental revenue 2,176 2,631 (455) 3,502 3,013

Investment revenue 2,712 811 1,901 1,081 7,202

Total income 70,374 73,447 (3,073) 103,878 98,435Employee expenses 16,859 19,167 2,308 25,521 25,433

Other operating expenses 30,374 35,803 5,429 47,533 43,448

Finance expenses 1,975 2,350 375 3,133 3,140

Depreciation and amortisation 21,206 21,116 (90) 28,119 28,124

Total expenditure 70,414 78,436 8,022 104,306 100,145

Net operating surplus / (deficit) (40) (4,989) 4,949 (428) (1,710)

Net operating surplus by activity group

Actual YTD Forecast YTD VarianceFull year forecast

Annual plan

Activity group ($000) ($000) ($000) ($000) ($000)

Roading (2,221) 194 (2,415) 281 2,131

Sewerage 188 (361) 549 (471) (221)

Solid waste (71) (201) 130 (261) 343

Stormwater 114 3,002 (2,888) 4,009 (833)

Water supply 2,893 882 2,011 1,194 1,399

Regulatory 934 2,362 (1,428) 3,175 2,324

Social and cultural (863) 1,099 (1,962) 1,500 716

General (1,014) (11,966) 10,952 (9,855) (7,569)

Council (40) (4,989) 4,949 (428) (1,710)

A3429360


322


PERFORMANCE SUMMARY

Capital expenditure by activity group

Actual YTDForecast

YTD Variance Percentage of full yearFull year forecast

Annual plan

Activity group ($000) ($000) ($000) spent ($000) ($000)

Roading 6,192 5,400 (792) 86% 7,198 10,860

Sewerage 2,387 5,413 3,026 33% 7,215 6,993

Solid waste 3 57 54 4% 76 158

Stormwater 870 6,799 5,929 10% 9,064 3,791

Water supply 2,606 5,546 2,940 35% 7,393 8,434

Regulatory 19 357 338 5% 413 355

Social and cultural 2,686 2,387 (299) 71% 3,763 10,155

General 2,947 3,994 1,047 61% 4,798 8,622

Total Programme 17,710 29,953 12,243 44% 39,920 49,368

(10,439)

17,710 29,953 12,243 44% 39,920 38,929

Many areas are classed as "green" due to spending less than YTD forecast. A review of the capital expenditure forecast for the year was carried out in April 2021 to inform the LTP.

Adjustment for expected uncompleted projects

Total completed programme for 2020/21

A3429360


323


STATEMENT OF COMPREHENSIVE REVENUE AND EXPENSE

YTD Actual YTD Forecast Full Year Forecast

Annual Plan

Mar 2021 Mar 2021 2021 2021($000) ($000) ($000) ($000)

REVENUE

Rates and penalties 43,412 42,589 56,767 56,767

Fines 349 456 606 502

Subsidies and grants 6,726 10,674 15,350 9,217

Direct charges revenue 13,939 14,755 21,686 21,734

Other revenue 1,060 1,531 0 0

Rental revenue 2,176 2,631 3,502 3,013

Finance revenue 1,220 811 1,081 1,902

Dividends & subvention revenue 1,492 0 4,886 5,300

Total revenue 70,374 73,447 103,878 98,435

EXPENSES

Employee expenses 16,859 19,167 25,521 25,433

Other operating expenses 30,374 35,803 47,533 43,448

Finance expenses 1,975 2,350 3,133 3,140

Depreciation and amortisation 21,206 21,116 28,119 28,124

Total expenses 70,414 78,436 104,306 100,145

Net operating surplus (deficit) (40) (4,989) (428) (1,710)

Other gains/(losses) 7 0 964 964

Surplus / (deficit) before tax (33) (4,989) 536 (746)

Income tax expense 0 0 0 0

Surplus (deficit) after tax (33) (4,989) 536 (746)

Total other comprehensive revenue and expense 0 0 0 0

TOTAL COMPREHENSIVE REVENUE AND EXPENSE (33) (4,989) 536 (746)

A3429360


324


STATEMENT OF CASHFLOWS

YTD Actual Full Year Forecast

Annual Plan

Mar 2021 2021 2021($000) ($000) ($000)

CASH FLOWS FROM OPERATING ACTIVITIES

Net surplus from operations (40) (428) (1,710)

Reverse depreciation and non cash provisions 21,206 28,119 28,124

Change in current assets (8,206) 0 0

Change in current liabilities 7,732 0 0

Net cash flows from operating activities 20,692 27,691 26,414

CASH FLOWS FROM INVESTING ACTIVITIES

Proceeds from sale of property, plant and equipment 7 0 194

Proceeds from sale of investments 0 30,000 12,322

Purchase of property, plant and equipment (16,554) (24,172) (38,748)

Purchase of biological assets 0 0 0

Purchase of intangible assets (478) (554) (78)

Purchase of investment property (962) (1,845) (104)

Purchase of investments (27,555) (15,681) 0

Net cash flows from investing activities (45,542) (12,252) (26,414)

CASH FLOWS FROM FINANCING ACTIVITIES

Proceeds from borrowings 13,186 0 0

Repayment of borrowings 0 (35,439) 0

Net cash flows from financing activities 13,186 (35,439) 0

Net (decrease) increase in cash and cash equivalents (11,664) (20,000) 0

Cash and cash equivalents at the beginning of the year 26,505 26,505 14,738

Cash and cash equivalents at the end of the year 14,841 6,505 14,738

A3429360


325


STATEMENT OF FINANCIAL POSITION

YTD Actual Full Year Forecast

Annual Report

Mar 2021 2021 2020($000) ($000) ($000)

ASSETS

Cash and cash equivalents 14,841 6,505 26,505

Trade and other receivables 19,995 11,789 11,789

Inventories 825 825 825

Property, plant and equipment 847,730 848,514 852,382

Intangible assets 1,697 1,694 1,219

Biological assets 3,618 3,701 3,618

Investment property 37,480 39,244 36,518

Investment in CCOs and similar entities 61,069 76,569 61,069

Other financial assets - other investments 95,970 38,596 68,415

TOTAL ASSETS 1,083,225 1,027,437 1,062,340

LIABILITIES

Trade and other payables 24,547 13,937 13,937

Provisions 928 928 928

Employee benefit liabilities 1,159 4,037 4,037

Borrowings 138,700 90,075 125,514

Derivative financial instruments 3,492 3,493 3,493

Total liabilities 168,826 112,470 147,909

TOTAL EQUITY

Retained earnings 366,763 366,865 366,796

Restricted reserves 50,177 50,644 50,177

Hedging reserves (3,492) (3,493) (3,493)

Carbon credit revaluation reserves 815 815 815

Asset revaluation reserves 500,136 500,136 500,136

Total equity 914,399 914,967 914,431

TOTAL LIABILITIES AND EQUITY 1,083,225 1,027,437 1,062,340

A3429360


326

FUNDING IMPACT STATEMENT - INVERCARGILL CITY COUNCIL

YTD Actual YTD Forecast Full Year Forecast

Annual Plan

Mar 2021 Mar 2021 2021 2021

($000) ($000) ($000) ($000)

SOURCES OF OPERATING FUNDING

Rates and penalties 43,412 42,589 56,767 56,767

Subsidies and grants for operating purposes 3,706 4,348 5,791 4,711

Fees and charges 15,922 17,386 23,158 17,781

Interest and dividends from investments 2,712 811 6,381 7,202

Internal charges and overheads recovered 11,169 6,200 8,258 12,881

Local authorities fuel tax, fines, infringement fees, and other receipts 1,387 1,987 2,636 7,467

Total operating funding (A) 78,308 73,321 102,991 106,809

APPLICATIONS OF OPERATING FUNDING

Payments to staff and suppliers 48,024 54,970 73,054 68,881

Finance costs 1,975 2,350 3,133 3,140

Internal charges and overheads applied 10,378 6,644 8,845 12,880

Other operating funding applications 0 0 0 0

Total applications of operating funding (B) 60,377 63,964 85,032 84,901

Surplus (deficit) of operating funding (A - B) 17,931 9,357 17,959 21,908

SOURCES OF CAPITAL FUNDING

Subsidies and grants for capital expenditure 3,020 6,326 8,429 4,506

Development and financial contributions 20 0 0 0

Increase (decrease) in debt 13,500 0 (21,374) 0

Gross proceeds from sale of assets 7 0 0 194

Lump sum contributions 0 0 0 0

Other dedicated capital funding 0 0 0 0

Total sources of capital funding (C) 16,547 6,326 (12,945) 4,700

- to improve the level of service 0 2,328 3,102 867

- to replace existing assets 17,710 27,625 36,818 36,326

Increase (decrease) in reserves 0 0 (5,087) (12,322)

Increase (decrease) of investments 13,604 0 (29,819) 0

Total applications of capital funding (D) 31,314 29,953 5,014 24,871

Surplus (deficit) of capital funding (C - D) (14,767) (23,627) (17,959) (20,171)

FUNDING BALANCE ((A - B) + (C - D)) 3,164 (14,270) 0 1,737

Depreciation expense (not included in the above FIS) 21,206 21,116 28,119 28,123

A3429360


327


TREASURY REPORT

Debt Actual YTD Forecast to

31 Mar 2021 30 Jun 2021Statement of borrowings ($000) ($000)

Borrowings at the start of the year 125,514 125,514

New loans raised 13,186 0

Loan repayments 0 (35,439)

Borrowings at the end of the period 138,700 90,075

Borrowing facility

Invercargill City Council funding lines consist of:

Bank of New Zealand* 10,000 10,000

LGFA 50,000 29,375

LGFA - On lent to ICHL 28,500 0

LGFA - CBD development 25,000 40,500

ANZ Issued Bond 20,000 20,000

ANZ Issued Bond - On lent to ICHL 15,000 0

Environmental Southland (Clean air Loan Scheme) 200 200

Total borrowing facility 148,700 100,075

Facility headroom at the end of the period 10,000 10,000

*The BNZ call loan facility was renewed on the 1st February 2021 for a further two years

Borrowings were used to advance funds ($13.5m) and increase shareholding ($25m) within Invercargill City Holdings Limited so they can invest into the CBD development via Invercargill Central Limited. These were not included in the Long-term Plan 2018-2028. $35 million of debt was repaid in April with a further $15 million to be repaid in June.

0102030405060708090

100110120130140150

Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun

BORROWINGS ($Millions) 12 Month trend of external debt levels and 3 month forecast compared to closing LTP

A3429360


328


TREASURY REPORT

Cash & Cash Investments

InvestmentAmount ($000) Interest Rate Date Invested

Maturity Date

SBS Term Deposit 4,072 1.00% 30 Nov 2020 28 Jul 2021

SBS Term Deposit 4,067 1.10% 30 Oct 2020 28 Jul 2021

SBS Term Deposit 4,043 1.95% 29 Jun 2020 29 Jun 2021

SBS Term Deposit 6,600 1.79% 08 Jul 2020 29 Jan 2022

BNZ Term Deposit 4,068 0.38% 29 Jan 2021 28 Apr 2021

BNZ Term Deposit 6,600 1.81% 08 Jul 2020 29 Apr 2021

BNZ Term Deposit 4,030 1.27% 28 Aug 2020 28 Jul 2021

BNZ Term Deposit 4,048 0.57% 02 Oct 2020 28 Jul 2021

Westpac 5,050 0.86% 29 Jan 2021 30 Aug 2021

Westpac 7,099 0.86% 29 Jan 2021 30 Aug 2021

SBS - Staff Welfare Fund 121 1.00% 29 Jan 2021 28 Jul 2021

Invercargill City Holdings Limited - Fixed 15,000 3.66% 08 Apr 2016 08 Apr 2021

Invercargill City Holdings Limited - Floating 15,000 0.97% 09 Dec 2020 08 Jun 2021

Invercargill City Holdings Limited - Floating 13,500

Cash and cash equivalents 14,841

Shares & Miscellaneous 2,671

Total 110,811

Cash investments are higher than planned in the Long-term Plan 2018-2028 due to funds being advanced to Invercargill City Holdings Limited to invest into the CBD development ($13.5m) and additional funds being placed on term deposit from deferred capital projects and cash surpluses. Note this excludes shares in Invercargill City Holdings Limited.

Term Deposits and a loan to ICHL are due to mature in April to fund the maturing debt with further investments and loans maturing in June.

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

110

120

130

140

150


CASH & CASH INVESTMENTS ($Millions) 12 Month trend of cash & cash investments levels and 3 month forecast compared to closing LTP

A3429360


329


TREASURY REPORT

Net Debt Balance Actual YTD Forecast to

31 Mar 2021 30 Jun 2021($000) ($000)

Borrowings 138,700 90,075

Less: Cash & Cash Investments (110,811) (45,101)

TOTAL NET DEBT BALANCE 27,889 44,974

Debt ceiling cap 159,695

Debt ceiling cap is set at 2.5 times total revenue less a provision for uncalled capital of $100m

The Councils net debt balance is lower than planned in the Long-term Plan 2018-2028. This is due to a higher amount of funds being held on term deposit than anticipated from deferred capital projects and cash surpluses. The increase in June relates the Council purchasing shares in Invercargill City Holdings Limited.

0102030405060708090

100110120130140150160


NET DEBT BALANCE ($Millions) 12 Month trend of net debt levels and 3 month forecast compared to closing LTP

A3429360


330


KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATORS

Social and cultural

Description YE 2020 Actual Q 1 Q 2 Q 3 Q 4 KYE 2021 Target

Variance

Library items issued 613,139 150,956 303,280 439,159 0 K 600,000 (2%)

Number of library visits 524,292 129,020 224,715 323,442 0 520,000 (17%)

Number of reference enquiries 90,432 25,704 48,892 76,343 0 85,000 20%

Library membership as % of total population 72% 72% 72% 71% 0% > 65% 6%

Number of pool visits per head of Invercargill City population

8 7 7 7 0 > 6.5 11%

Survey of Swim School customers rating good or very good

78% 86% N/A N/A 0% 85% 1%

Time when a minimum of four 25m public lanes are available for swimming

95% 99% 97% 98% 0% 90% 8%

Housing care rental does not exceed 30% of gross superannuation benefit

23% 22% 22% 22% 0% < 30% 8%

Passenger transport numbers are increasing 182,627 N/A 87,960 123,351 0 K ↑ (10%)

% of passengers satisfied with the level of fares 83% N/A N/A N/A 0% K 82% N/A

% of passengers satisfied that the fare system is easy to understand

89% N/A N/A N/A 0% K 82% N/A

Council administers and supports the Total Mobility Scheme

Yes N/A N/A N/A 0% K Yes N/A

Queens Park is accredited as a "Garden of National Significance"

Yes Yes Yes Yes 0% Yes 0%

% of requests actioned within 4 working days N/A 76% 83% 87% 0% 100% (13%)

Number of justified complaints received relating to safety within parks and cemeteries

3 2 4 12 0 0 (1200%)

Policies around pest management are included in Reserve Management Plans

Yes Yes Yes Yes 0% Yes 0%

Increasing use of targeted reserves as measured by visitor counters at access points

757,396 225,785 406,702 625,512 0 ↑ 10%

Regulatory

Description YE 2020 Actual Q 1 Q 2 Q 3 Q 4YE 2021 Target

Variance

Building consents are issued within 20 working days 64% 60% 97% 100% 0% 100% 0%

Non-notified resource consents not requiring a hearing are issued within 20 working days

100% 86% 85% 90% 0% K 100% (10%)

Food applications are issued within 20 working days 99% 100% 100% 100% 0% 100% 0%

Alcohol licences not requiring a hearing are issued within 30 working days

88% 100% 100% 100% 0% 100% 0%

% of LIM applications lodged electronically 50% 55% 60% 64% 0% 80% (16%)

% of resource consent applications lodged electronically 12% 24% 33% 26% 0% 80% (54%)

A3429360


331



Solid waste


Variance

Increase in kerbside recycling (tonnes) 3,307 789 1,673 2,532 0 ↑ 2%

Decrease in kerbside rubbish collection (tonnes) 10,672 2,660 5,475 8,213 0 K ↓ (3%)

Decrease in solid waste to landfill (tonnes) 19,705 5,262 11,099 16,737 0 ↓ (13%)

Increase in diverted material (tonnes) 9,062 3,472 6,046 8,558 0 ↑ 26%

Regional discarded materials rate per person per annum (kgs)

710 n/a n/a n/a 0 K 650 N/A

Water supply

Description YE 2020 Actual Q 1 Q 2 Q 3 Q 4 K

YE 2021 Target

Variance

Number of breaches of part 4 of the drinking-water standards

0 0 0 0 0 0 0%

Number of breaches of part 5 of the drinking-water standards

0 0 0 0 0 0 0%

% of real water loss from the networked reticulation system

9.9% NA NA NA 0.0% K < 30% N/A

Number of complaints received by Council per 1,000 connections about any of the following:

- Drinking water clarity 0.24 0.15 0.10 0.10 0.00 ≤ 0.45 per month

78%

- Drinking water taste 0.05 0.15 0.05 0.05 0.00 ≤ 0.45 per month

89%

- Drinking water odour 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ≤ 0.45 per month

100%

- Drinking water pressure of flow 0.05 0.05 0.14 0.14 0.00 ≤ 0.45 per month

69%

- Continuity of supply 0.14 0.00 0.14 0.24 0.00 ≤ 0.45 per month

47%

- Council's response to any of these issues 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ≤ 0.45 per month

100%

Median time for service personnel to reach site for urgent events

0h 26m 0h 22m 0h 26m 0h 23m 0h 00m ≤ 4 hours N/A

Median time for the resolution of urgent events 0d 1h 17m 1h 30m 1h 43m 1h 53m 0d 0h 00m ≤ 24 hours N/A

Median time for service personnel to reach site for non-urgent events

5d 19h 48m 5d 1h 11m 4d 23h 12m 5d 0h 55m 0d 0h 00m K≤ 5

working days

N/A

Median time for the resolution of non-urgent events 7d 4h 05m 5d 0h 58m 5d 1h 05m 5d 18h 40m 0d 0h 00m ≤ 10

working days

N/A

Average drinking water consumption (litres per resident per day)

462 412 435 374 0 < 700 47%

The Invercargill water supply is safe to drink as measured by the Ministry of Health grades

Aa Aa Aa Aa 0 Aa 0%

The Bluff water supply is safe to drink as measured by the Ministry of Health grades

Ab Ab Ab Ab 0 Aa (100%)

Notification of planned shutdowns is given at least 24 hours beforehand by letter drop

1 1 1 1 0 90% 9%

Duration of planned shutdowns is no more than 8 hours 1 1 1 1 0 100% 0%

% of hydrants tested that exceed a flow rate of 12.5 litres per second

100% NA 1 1 0 97.5% 3%

A3429360


332



Roading


Variance

Damaged signs are responded to within 48 hours of notification

77% 67% 67% 84% 0% K > 85% (1%)

Traffic signal faults are responded to within 1 hour for emergency work, 4 hours for serious faults and 12 hours for minor faults

100% 100% 100% 100% 0% > 85% 15%

% of customer service requests responded to within 5 days

76% 80% 82% 80% 0% K 82% (2%)

Decrease in the annual number of fatalities and serious crashes on the local road network

18 Annual Annual Annual 0 K ↓ N/A

Higher than the national average quality of ride on a sealed local network - Urban

89% Annual Annual Annual 0% K 90% N/A

Higher than the national average quality of ride on a sealed local network - Rural

96% Annual Annual Annual 0% K 98% N/A

% of the sealed local road network that is resurfaced 6% Annual Annual Annual 0% K > 6.25% N/A

% of footpaths in very poor condition 1% Annual Annual Annual 0% K < 8% N/A

Street lighting is compliant with AS/NZS 1158 to agreed levels

74% Annual Annual Annual 0% 74% N/A

Number of unplanned road closures N/A Annual Annual Annual 0% K < 8 N/A

The overall annual cost per km and vkt of routine maintenance on each road network

N/A Annual Annual Annual 0% K< Peer Group

Average N/A

Sewerage


YE 2021 Target

Variance

Number of dry weather sewerage overflows per 1,000 properties

0.49 0.22 0.67 0.85 0.00 < 4 72%

Compliance with the Council's resource consents for discharge from its sewerage system, measured by the number of:

0 0 0 0 0 0 0%

- Abatement notices 0

- Infringement notices 0

- Enforcement orders 0

- Convictions 0

Total number of complaints received by Council about sewerage odour

0 2 0 1 0 0 (100%)

Total number of complaints received by Council about blockages and faults per 1,000 connections

2.50 0.58 1.07 1.98 0.00 < 4 34%

Service personnel reach site within 1 hour for emergency events

91% 97% 94% 91% 0% 90% 1%

Temporary repairs completed within 4 hours for emergency events

95% 97% 92% 93% 0% K 95% (2%)

Service disruptions for individual properties are less than 12 hours

100% 100% 100% 99% 0% K 100% (1%)

Trade waste consent applications are responded to within 10 working days

100% 100% 100% 100% 0% 80% 20%

A3429360


333



Stormwater


Variance

Number of flooding events 0 0 2 2 0 0 (200%)

Compliance with the Council's resource consents for discharge from its sewerage system, measured by the number of:

0 0 0 0 0 0 0%

- Abatement notices 0

- Infringement notices 0

- Enforcement orders 0

- Convictions 0

Number of complaints received by Council about stormwater system performance per 1,000 properties

0.45 0.76 1.52 2.15 0.00 < 4 28%

Service personnel reach site within 1 hour for emergency events

93% 100% 100% 100% 0% 90% 10%

General


YE 2021 Target

Variance

Number of households involved in Neighbourhood Support

1,290 N/A N/A N/A 0 K ↑ N/A

Number of groups involved in Neighbourhood Support 130 N/A N/A N/A 0 K ↑ N/A

Number of residents participating in funded programmes 31,160 N/A N/A 26,857 0 10,000 169%

Number of events, agencies and businesses achieving the use of the friendly brand

15 N/A N/A N/A 0 K 12 N/A

Number of young people participating in initiatives 514 N/A N/A 25 0 400 (92%)

Automated toilets are available 24 hours 98% 97% 96% 87% 0% K 95% (8%)

% of surveyed residents satisfied or greater with opportunities Council provides for Community involvement in decision-making

28% N/A N/A N/A 0% K 50% N/A

Number of alternative methods of communicating to and receiving information from the community introduced

1 N/A N/A N/A 0 K 1 N/A

Investment property's net rate of return ≥ current market interest rate

4% N/A N/A N/A 0% K 2% N/A

A3429360


334


TOTAL COUNCIL - SCHEDULE OF FORECAST CHANGES

Item Name Nature Of Change Quarter 1 ($000)

Quarter 2 ($000)

Quarter 3 ($000)

Quarter 4 ($000)

30 Jun 2021 ($000)

STATEMENT OF COMPREHENSIVE REVENUE AND EXPENSES

Revenue

Fines Re-forecast fines to align with current trends 104 104

Subsidies and grants Increase funds forecast to be received from the Shovel ready projects and 3 waters allocations

4,830 4,830

Subsidies and grants Re-forecast NZTA subsidies to align with roading expenditure forecast

173 173

Subsidies and grants Increase of grants funding received relating to NZTA, 3 Waters and shovel ready funding

1,130 1,130

Direct charges revenue Additional revenue for recycling contract from SDC 576 576

Direct charges revenue Re-forecast fees revenue to reflect current trends and reclassification with other revenue

(2,654) (2,654)

Other revenue Re-forecast other revenue to reflect current trends and reclassification with direct charges revenue

2,030 2,030

Rental revenue Re-forecast rental revenue to reflect higher rental and occupancy rates

489 489

Finance revenue Re-forecast of net debt interest revenue based on funds invested and interest rate assumption of 0.5%

(821) (821)

Dividend and subvention revenue

Reduction in expected dividend from ICHL (414) (414)

-

Total Forecast Adjustments to Revenue - 4,727 716 - 5,443

Expenses

Employee expenses Re-forecast to reflect current staffing levels 88 88

Other operating expenses Additional consultancy (including Council DIA, independent governance review, processing applications for planning & building, LTP, iwi, Simpli)

1,616 1,616

Other operating expenses Re-forecast of repairs and maintenance to reflect higher requirement on ageing infrastructure

438 438

Other operating expenses Additional cost for recycling contract solid waste 950 950

Other operating expenses Re-forecast of various other operating expenses 1,081 1,081

Finance expenses Re-forecast of net debt interest expenses based on funds drawndown and interest rate assumption of 2.5%

(7) (7)

Depreciation and amortisation

Re-forecast of Depreciation expense based on current asset pool

(5) (5)

-

Total Forecast Adjustments to Expenses - 4,161 - - 4,161

Adjustments to Surplus / (Deficit) After Tax - 566 716 - 1,282

A3429360


335




Quarter 2 ($000)

Quarter 3 ($000)

Quarter 4 ($000)

30 Jun 2021 ($000)

STATEMENT OF FINANCIAL POSITION

Assets

Other financial assets - other investments

Additional investment into the city block 15,500 15,500

Cash and cash equivalents Re-alignment of opening balances with the Annual report 2019/20

11,767 11,767

Cash and cash equivalents Re-forecast to reflect additional funds used to repay borrowings

(20,000) (20,000)

Trade and other receivables

Re-alignment of opening balances with the Annual report 2019/20

2,417 2,417

Inventories Re-alignment of opening balances with the Annual report 2019/20

(856) (856)

Property, plant and equipment


(9,840) (9,840)

Property, plant and equipment

Re-forecast capital expenditure profiles to reflect revised programme

9,818 (13,686) (3,868)

Intangible assets Re-alignment of opening balances with the Annual report 2019/20

(450) (450)

Intangible assets Re-forecast capital expenditure profiles to reflect revised programme

475 475

Biological assets Re-alignment of opening balances with the Annual report 2019/20

298 298

Biological assets Re-forecast capital expenditure profiles to reflect revised programme

83 83

Investment property Re-alignment of opening balances with the Annual report 2019/20

(2,814) (2,814)

Investment property Re-forecast capital expenditure profiles to reflect revised programme

2,389 337 2,726

Investment in CCOs and similar entities


25,000 25,000

Investment in CCOs and similar entities

Conversion of ICHL advance for the city centre development into shares

15,500 15,500



(15,476) (15,476)


ICHL advance repayment (30,000) (30,000)


Conversion of ICHL advance for the city centre development into shares

(15,500) (15,500)


181 181

-

Total Forecast Adjustments to Assets 15,500 (27,008) (13,349) - (24,857)

Liabilities

Borrowings Funding for additional investment into the city block 15,500 15,500

Trade and other payables Re-alignment of opening balances with the Annual report 2019/20

1,981 1,981

Employee benefit liabilities Re-alignment of opening balances with the Annual report 2019/20

785 785

Borrowings Re-alignment of opening balances with the Annual report 2019/20

10,309 10,309

Borrowings Repayment of borrowings drawdown from ICHL advance repaid funds

(30,000) (30,000)

Borrowings Repayment of borrowings from excess cash and cash equivalents funds

(20,000) (20,000)

Borrowings Re-forecast borrowings drawndown to fund revised capital programme

13,126 (14,065) (939)

Derivative financial instruments


1,033 1,033

- -

Total Forecast Adjustments to Liabilities 15,500 (22,766) (14,065) - (21,331)

A3429360


336




Quarter 2 ($000)

Quarter 3 ($000)

Quarter 4 ($000)

30 Jun 2021 ($000)

Equity

Retained earnings Re-alignment of opening balances with the Annual report 2019/20

(1,401) (1,401)

Retained earnings Movements in additional operating surplus (deficit) & transfers with Restricted reserves

(11,756) 716 (11,040)

Restricted reserves Re-alignment of opening balances with the Annual report 2019/20

(2,662) (2,662)

Restricted reserves Movements with Retained earnings 12,322 12,322

Hedging reserves Re-alignment of opening balances with the Annual report 2019/20

(1,033) (1,033)

Carbon credit revaluation reserves


288 288

-

Total Forecast Adjustments to Equity - (4,242) 716 - (3,526)

A3429360


337

CONFIDENTIAL

TREASURY REPORT

FOR

AS AT 31 MARCH 2021

AUCKLAND • CHRISTCHURCH

A3429360


338

Page i

CONTENTS

1. MARKET ENVIRONMENT ................................................................................................. 1

1.1 GLOBAL – OVERVIEW (FOR THE MARCH 2021 QUARTER) ..................................................................... 1 1.2 NEW ZEALAND – OVERVIEW (FOR THE MARCH 2021 QUARTER) ............................................................ 2 1.3 LOCAL AUTHORITY FUNDING ............................................................................................................ 3

2. CURRENT POSITION ....................................................................................................... 5

2.1 SUMMARY OF CURRENT POSITION ...................................................................................................... 5 2.2 PROJECTED INTEREST RATES ................................................................................................................ 8

3. POLICY COMPLIANCE REPORT ...................................................................................... 9

This document has been prepared by Bancorp Treasury Services Limited (“BTSL”). Whilst all reasonable care has been taken to ensure the facts stated are accurate and the opinions given are fair and reasonable, neither BTSL nor any of its directors, officers or employees shall in any way be responsible for the contents. No liability is assumed by BTSL, its directors, officers or employees for action taken or not taken on the basis of this document.

A3429360


339

Page 1

1. MARKET ENVIRONMENT

1.1 GLOBAL – OVERVIEW (FOR THE MARCH 2021 QUARTER)

Interest rates were the centre of attention for much of the March quarter as the successful vaccine

rollout in the US has re-focused attention on economic re-openings, enhanced growth and an

increase in inflationary expectations. This drove international interest rates back to pre-COVID-19

levels, and steepened bond and interest rate curves, as market participants attempted to front-run

the data. Meanwhile, the Dow Jones and the S&P500 equity indexes reached record highs yet

again at the end of the quarter. The Nasdaq even closed the month in positive territory as fund

managers re-balanced portfolios away from tech and towards those stocks that will ultimately

benefit from a re-opening of the US economy.

In March, the Federal Reserve (“Fed”) sharply ramped up its expectations for economic growth

stating, “following a moderation in the pace of the recovery, indicators of economic activity and

employment have turned up recently,” although they maintained there will be no change in rates

until 2024 as per Fed Chairman, Jerome Powell’s, statement that “inflation may rise this year on

base effects/demand, but the impact on inflation won’t be very large or persistent.” With US GDP

expected to grow 6.0-8.0% in 2021, it will be interesting to see if the Fed maintains this narrative.

The Fed, the Reserve Bank of Australia (“RBA”), and the Reserve Bank of New Zealand (“RBNZ”),

essentially all sung the same tune. Simply put, all three central banks highlighted the risks to their

respective recoveries and, as such, they retained all of their stimulatory options. They all

emphasised that they are prepared to let inflation overshoot for an extended period of time,

although they do not anticipate hitting their inflation and employment targets until 2024.

With the successful implementation of the US vaccine roll-out heightening the expectations of

reopening of the US economy, bond markets have spent 2021 focusing their attention solely on

the reflation trade. This has seen the US curve become the lead driver for interest rate curves

globally, forcing yields higher and curves steeper, regardless of the likelihood of central bank

hikes. The 10 year US bond yield finished the March quarter at 1.72%, up sharply from the

December quarter closing level of 0.93%.

In China, the National People's Congress announced an annual GDP growth target of "above

6.0%," and pledged to keep the unemployment rate below 5.5%, while the Chinese Premier,

Li Keqiang, reiterated that “we need to seek a balance between growth, income, and employment,

and we cannot pursue economic growth based on high energy consumption and heavy

pollution.” Interestingly, the World Bank predicted that China would outperform the USA

again this year with its forecast suggesting the Chinese economy will expand by 8.1% in 2021,

which fits in with the PBoC’s forecast that China will grow between 5.0% and 5.7% over the

next 5 years.

A3429360


340

Page 2

1.2 NEW ZEALAND – OVERVIEW (FOR THE DECEMBER 2020 QUARTER)

OCR 90 day 2 years 3 years 5 years 7 years 10 years

31 Dec 2020 0.25% 0.27% 0.28% 0.36% 0.54% 0.74% 0.99%

31 Mar 2021 0.25% 0.35% 0.48% 0.66% 1.10% 1.54% 1.91%

Change 0 bps +8bps +20bps +30bps +56bps +80bps +92bps

The RBNZ’s February Monetary Policy Statement (“MPS”) was broadly in line with market

expectations, but not dovish enough to reverse the trends we have seen in interest rate and FX

markets. The RBNZ expects a short term unsustainable period of rising inflation before the

stimulatory sugar rush wears off in 2021, with inflation underperforming until 2024. Therefore,

the positive numbers we have seen in the employment and inflation space recently have been

‘looked through’ by the RBNZ, and it will wait for sustainable levels in its mandate before

changing its stance on interest rates.

The February MPS implied that short term rates are not going anywhere until sustainable levels of

inflation and employment are reached, which is, based off the RBNZ forecasts, sometime in 2024.

However, the long end of the yield curve is at the mercy of international bond markets and has

continued its strong upwards rally as the 10 year swap rate reached 2.19% - a level not seen since

June 2019.

Ultimately, central banks are not playing into the market’s hands and are happy to let the market,

in our opinion, get carried away. At some stage, central banks will start to upgrade their CPI and

interest rate expectations, or bond markets will have to self-correct. It is interesting to note that,

while the Fed, RBA and RBNZ all expect an uplift in inflation in the coming months, all expect a

correction later in the year. From the RBNZ’s perspective, even at its most aggressive, it only

anticipates inflation reaching 2.5%, which is hardly overshooting its 1.0%-3.0% band.

The December quarter GDP showed a surprising 1.0% drop in economic activity during the

quarter to give an annual fall of 0.9%. At the industry level, seven out of sixteen industries

declined. The three largest contributors to the drop were construction, retail trade and

accommodation. All three industries saw strong September 2020 quarter results. Falls in

construction services, commercial building, and infrastructure were partially offset by continued

growth in residential building activity.

Markets were ignited when the Government announced a series of measures aimed at

diluting the housing market squeeze by targeting investors. These included the extension of

the Bright-line test from 5 to 10 years, and the 4-year phase out of interest deductibility on

investment properties. However, while investors are just one contributing factor, the domestic

A3429360


341

Page 3

market remains short on 80,000 houses, and this is the issue that will ultimately need to be

resolved.

These changes knocked the fixed income and currency markets, with the perception that a

reduction in investor activity in the housing market will ultimately reduce the need for the RBNZ

to lift interest rates. This saw the futures market reduce the pricing of a 25 bps hike in July 2022

from 100% to 60%, while the belly of the swaps curve, the 4 and 5 year rates, immediately fell

8 points. The 10-year swap rate, which topped out at 2.19% at the end of February, fell to a low

of 1.72%, but has since climbed and finished the quarter at 1.91%. In amongst this, with long-

end yields starting to grind higher, and the domestic financial system awash with cash, it has been

a little surprising to see 3-month BKBM firm to 0.35%.

The following chart shows the changes in the shape of the yield curve over the past year, with the

change most pronounced over the last six months.

1.3 LOCAL AUTHORITY FUNDING

Listed on the following page are the credit spreads and applicable interest rates as at 31 March

for Commercial Paper (“CP”), Floating Rate Notes (“FRN”) and Fixed Rate Bonds (“FRB”), at

which Invercargill City Council (“ICC”) could source debt from the Local Government Funding

Agency (“LGFA”).

A3429360


342

Page 4

Maturity Margin FRN (or CP) Rate FRB

3 month CP 0.20% 0.55% N/A

6 month CP 0.20% 0.55% N/A

May 2021 0.22% 0.57% 0.53%

April 2022 0.28% 0.63% 0.63%

April 2023 0.30% 0.65% 0.74%

April 2024 0.36% 0.71% 0.99%

April 2025 0.41% 0.76% 1.26%

April 2026 0.46% 0.81% 1.56%

April 2027 0.54% 0.89% 1.79%

April 2029 0.55% 0.90% 2.25%

April 2033 0.70% 1.05% 2.76%

April 2037 0.74% 1.09% 3.15%

Margins for LGFA debt decreased over the March quarter with markets awash with cash. The

decrease in floating rate debt has been offset by an increase in the 3 month BKBM rate to 0.35%.

However, there have been sharp increases in the yields for fixed rate bonds, especially at the

longer end of the curve, with the 2029 yield up from 1.49% to 2.25%, the 2033 up from 1.92%

to 2.76% and the 2037 up from 2.35% to 3.15%.

A3429360


343

Page 5

2. CURRENT POSITION

2.1 SUMMARY OF CURRENT POSITION

As at 31 March, ICC had $138,523,000 of debt. Core debt is $95,000,000 and

$43,523,000 has been on-lent to Invercargill City Holdings. The details for the core debt are

highlighted below:

The debt maturity profile incorporating the core debt of $95,000,000 is depicted in the

following chart.

Issuer/Type Amount Maturity Margin Rate

LGFA CP $10,000,000 29-Apr-21 20 bps 0.49%

LGFA FRB $10,000,000 29-Apr-21 24 bps 1.86%

LGFA FRB $10,000,000 14-Apr-22 55 bps 1.01%

ICC FRN $20,000,000 29-Oct-22 60 bps 0.90%

LGFA FRN $10,000,000 29-Apr-24 48.75 bps 0.76%

LGFA FRB $15,000,000 15-Apr-25 80 bps 1.49%

LGFA FRB $10,000,000 15-Apr-26 63 bps 1.09%

LGFA FRB $10,000,000 15-Apr-27 70 bps 2.62%

Total $95,000,000

A3429360


344

Page 6

Details of the on-lending to Invercargill City Holdings are as follows:

The debt maturity profile incorporating the core debt and the on-lending to ICH is depicted in the

following chart.

The policy parameters under which ICC manages its interest rate risk on this debt are detailed

below.

Fixed Rate Hedging Percentages

Minimum Fixed Rate Amount Maximum Fixed Rate Amount

0 - 2 years 50% 100%

2 - 5 years 30% 80%

5 - 10 years 0% 60%

As at 31 March 2021, the core debt of $95,000,000 and associated hedging profile using the

above policy parameters is depicted in the chart on the following page. The chart shows that as

at 31 March ICC was not policy compliant.

Issuer/Type Amount Maturity Margin Rate

LGFA CP $15,023,000 08-Apr-21 20 bps 0.47%

ICC FRB $15,000,000 08-Apr-21 70 bps 3.16%

ICC FRB $5,000,000 15-Oct-23 43 bps 0.44%

ICC FRB $8,500,000 15-Oct-25 50 bps 0.59%

Total $43,523,000

A3429360


345

Page 7

The intention is to rectify the breach in the June quarter once future debt projections have been

finalised as part of the LTP process.

The debt and cover profile using a debt figure of $138,500,000 which incorporates the

on-lending to ICH is depicted in the following chart.

A3429360


346

Page 8

2.2 PROJECTED INTEREST RATES

The following chart shows the interest rate projections including margins for the next eight

years. This assumes debt remains at $95.0 million as forecast, that the 90 day rate bank bill rate

will move in line with the futures market’s prevailing projected track, and that margins remain

unchanged on the rolling over of debt facilities. The chart shows that the all-up interest rate

will maintain around the 2.21% mark before increasing as the futures market prevailing track

of the floating rate increases.

ICC’s cost of funds is one of the lowest in the local government sector, for borrowers who have

historical legacy debt, that Bancorp Treasury is aware of.

A3429360


347

Page 9

3. POLICY COMPLIANCE REPORT

Core debt for ICC as at 31 March 2021: $95.0 million

Total swap cover is detailed in the table below.

Total cover (including fixed rate bonds): $85.0 million

Current fixed rate cover as percentage of core debt: 89.5%

POLICY BREACH

Fixed rate cover bands

0 - 2 years 50% - 100% ✓

2 - 5 years 30% - 80%

5 - 10 years 0% - 60% ✓

Average rate of fixed rate swaps* 3.06%

Average rate of FRBs (excluding margin) 1.60%

Floating rate at last roll date 0.32%

Weighted average cost of debt 1.58%

Weighted average borrowing margin 0.63%

Weighted average cost of debt including margin and line fee** 2.21%

* Does not include forward starting swaps

**This is the weighted average rate as at 31 March 2021 and does not represent a cumulative

average rate for the current financial year.

Start Date Maturity Date Rate Amount Market Value

29-Oct-2020 31-Oct-2022 2.830% 6,000,000 ($297,870)

29-Jul-2016 31-Jul-2023 2.580% 5,000,000 ($257,315)

20-Jun-2016 29-Jul-2024 2.650% 5,000,000 ($336,968)

29-Jan-2019 29-Jan-2025 3.965% 5,000,000 ($622,033)

30-Oct-2017 29-Jan-2026 3.220% 5,000,000 ($532,524)

29-Jul-2020 29-Jul-2026 3.200% 4,000,000 ($438,298)

Total current hedging 30,000,000

TOTAL ($2,485,008)

Swaps

A3429360


348

A3404784

TO: PERFORMANCE, POLICY AND PARTNERSHIPS

FROM: LIZ WILLIAMS, EXECUTIVE OFFICER

AUTHROISED BY: CLARE HADLEY, CHIEF EXECUTIVE


COUNCIL REPRESENTATION AT LGNZ AGM

SUMMARY

Council will attend the LGNZ AGM on Saturday, 17 July 2021 and needs to appoint a Presiding Delegate, and an Alternate Delegate who can vote on behalf of the local authority and observers.

RECOMMENDATION


1. Receive the report titled “Council Representation at LGNZ AGM”; and

2. Note that Cr Ludlow be registered as Council’s Presiding Delegate and Councillor Crackett as the Alternate Delegate for the Local Government New Zealand AGM.

IMPLICATIONS


N/A


No


No


No


No

At the time of writing, Council has four representatives registered for the Local Government New Zealand Conference. They are His Worship the Mayor Sir Tim Shadbolt, Councillors Ludlow, Pottinger and Crackett, and Chief Executive, Mrs Clare Hadley.

Performance, Policy and Partnerships Committee - Public - Council Representation at LGNZ AGM (A3404784)

349

A3404784

The LGNZ constitution that governs these matters, states in clause G15:

“Every Member Authority must appoint one of its delegates as its presiding delegate and may appoint one or more alternate delegates; provided that the number of alternate delegates does not exceed the number of delegates appointed”.

This issue was raised at a meeting of the Chairs held on 25 May 2021 and it was agreed that Cr Ludlow be registered as the Presiding Delegate and that Cr Crackett would be designated as the Alternate Delegate, with voting rights if the Presiding Delegate is absent.

Council is entitled to be represented at the AGM by four delegates, and the Presiding Delegate is the person responsible for voting on behalf of Council.

The registration form for the LGNZ AGM needs to be completed and returned by 5.00 pm on Friday 25 June 2021. Apologies must also be received by that time.

Performance, Policy and Partnerships Committee - Public - Council Representation at LGNZ AGM (A3404784)

350

Date post:	29-Apr-2023
Category:	Documents
Upload:	khangminh22
View:	0 times
Download:	0 times