20 Kohi- Council Chambers 10.00 am Committee Membership ... · Alison Lash Senior Advisor and Anna Mahoney Communications Advisor accompanied by a powerpoint presentation. Kevin Black

521585

“He toa taki tini taku toa, E hara i te toa taki tahi”

“My strength will only be achieved Because of the efforts of us all.”

Rātū 20 Kohi-tātea 2015 Council Chambers

175 Rimu Road Paraparaumu 10.00 am

Committee Membership: Rupene Waaka (Ngā Hapū o Ōtaki) (Chair) Mahinarangi Hakaraia (Ngā Hapū o Ōtaki) Ann-Maree Bukholt (Te Āti Awa ki Whakarongotai – Charitable Trust)

Cherie Seamark (Te Āti Awa ki Whakarongotai – Charitable Trust)

Carol Reihana (Ngāti Toa Rangatira) Reina Solomon (Ngāti Toa Rangatira) Mayor Ross Church (Kāpiti Coast District Council) Cr Janet Holborow (Kāpiti Coast District Council)

ITEM ORDER PAPER (*denotes paper attached) PAGE

1 Karakia

2 Apologies

3 Public Speaking Time

4 Additional agenda items

5 * Confirmation of Minutes – 7 Hiringa-ā-nuku (October) 2014 3

Strategic Work Programme

6 * Coastal Advisory Group – Terms of Reference (SP-14-1400) (Darryl Lew) 9

7 * 2015 Review of Representation Arrangements – Invitation to nominate iwi member on Working Party (Corp-15-1434) (Vyvien Starbuck-Maffey)

21

8 * Consideration of Funding Application (SP-14-1438) (Monica Fraser) 35

9 Economic Development Strategy

Updates / Other Matters

10 Town Centres and Connectors Transformation Project (Phil Stroud)

11 Local Government Commission Regional Governance Draft Proposal (Darryl Lew)

12 Waste Water Activities: Bio solids (Martyn Cole) (Presentation)

13 * Update 4 on the Proposed District Plan (SP-14-1433) (Darryl Lew) 45

1

521585

ITEM ORDER PAPER (*denotes paper attached) PAGE

14 * Waahi Tapu Project Update (SP-14-1372) (Darryl Lew) 50

15 Long Term Plan process (Kevin Black)

16 Waitangi Day 2016 preparations (Powerpoint)

17 Iwi updates

18 Council update

19 Correspondence

20 Confirming meeting dates for 2015 – 10 March, 14 April, 26 May, 14 July, 25 August, 6 October, 17 November

21 Other Business

2

512605 1

MINUTES MEETING HELD ON TIME

TE WHAKAMINENGA O KĀPITI 7 HIRINGA-Ā-NUKU 2014 10.03AM

MEMBERS Ms A-M Bukholt Te Āti Awa Charitable Trust (A/g Chair) Ms C Reihana Ngāti Haumia / Ngāti Toa Rangatira Ms C Seamark Te Āti Awa kiWhakarongotai Charitable

Trust Ms R Solomon Ngāti Toa Rangatira (from 10.12am) Ms M Hakaraia Ngā Hapū o Ōtaki Cr J Holborow Mema o te Kaunihera Mr R Church Koromatua IN ATTENDANCE Ms J Hewitt Te Kaitohutohu Matua Mr D Te Maipi Kaumātua Mr D Lew Te Kaiwhakahaere Mahere Taiao Mr P Stroud Te Kaiwhakahaere Kaupapa Ms K Dorafaeff Kaiwhakatau Kaupapa Matua Ms A Lash Te Kaitohutohu Matua Ms A Mahoney Kaiwhakapā Matua Ms V Starbuck-

Maffey Te Kaiarahi o te Rōpū Manapori

APOLOGIES Mr R Waaka Ngā Hapū o Ōtaki Mr P Doughtery Tumuaki Ms T Paringatai Te Kaiwhakapakari mo te Hunga Mahi

Mr S McArthur Kaihautū Rautaki me te Rangapū Ms M Fraser Kaiwhakahaere Tairangawhenua

The meeting was held in the Council Chambers, Ground Floor, 175 Rimu Road, Paraparaumu.

The meeting opened with a karakia by Don Te Maipi.

As the Chair Mr Waaka was unable to attend, the meeting voted in an acting Chair.

MOVED (Mayor/Seamark)

That Ann-Maree Bukholt chair the meeting.

CARRIED

The Chair welcomed everyone to the meeting.

3

512605 2

Te Whakaminenga o Kāpiti 14/10/108 TUKU AROHA/APOLOGIES

MOVED (Reihana/Mayor)

That apologies be accepted from Rupene Waaka, Pat Dougherty, Monica Fraser, Te Paea Paringatai, and from Reina Solomon for lateness.

CARRIED

Te Whakaminenga o Kāpiti 14/10/109 PUBLIC SPEAKING TIME

There were no public speakers.

Te Whakaminenga o Kāpiti 14/10/110 ADDITIONAL AGENDA ITEMS There were no additional items. Te Whakaminenga o Kāpiti 14/10/111 CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES: 26 HERE-TURI-KŌKĀ (AUGUST) 2014

Don Te Maipi drew the meeting’s attention to the point on page 4 of the minutes regarding the desirability of including in the Policy on Trees on Council-Owned Land the requirement for karakia to be performed when trees are cut down. This matter was on today’s agenda.

MOVED (Seamark/Holborow)

That the minutes of the Te Whakaminenga o Kāpiti meeting on 26 August 2014 are confirmed as a true and accurate record of that meeting.

CARRIED

Matters arising

Venue for citizenship ceremony

Te Whakaminenga o Kāpiti 14/10/112 i-SITE RATIONALISATION (SP-14-1320)

Reina Solomon arrived at 10.12.am.

Jane Hewitt Senior Advisor Strategic Projects spoke to the report explaining that in late 2013 Council did an independent review of i-Sites and decided as part of the Annual Plan process they would rationalize the sites this financial year. The review had shown that more than half the use of sites is by the local community, not tourists. A stakeholder group had been convened (including iwi representatives) to provide advice to Council on he rationalisation. Te Whakaminenga o Kāpiti was invited today to endorse the recommendations of ART.

Options for proceeding with rationalization were outlined. The stakeholder group had supported using digital information to meet the information needs of the Ōtaki community,

4

512605 3

with the site at Ōtaki then being closed. The site at Paraparaumu would become known as the Kāpiti i-SITE and the funding previously allocated to the site at Ōtaki would be redirected to the Kāpiti site, along with improvements in digital rendition of the local stories. ART had supported Ngā Hapū o Ōtaki being involved in the latter.

MOVED (Holborow/Mayor)

That Te Whakaminenga o Kāpiti receives report SP-14-1320 and endorses the position of ART as set out in paragraph 31 and 32 of the report.

CARRIED

Te Whakaminenga o Kāpiti 14/10/113 MEMORANDUM OF PARTNERSHIP WITH IWI AND PROTOCOL DOCUMENT – FOR ADOPTION (CORP-140-1337)

Vyvien Starbuck-Maffey Democratic Services Team Leader recapped the process; the documents had been considered at a number of Te Whakaminenga o Kāpiti meetings, with an agreement to ratify both together. The Memorandum of Partnership had been considered and approved by ART, and by Council. With both partners being satisfied with the Partnership document it was now time to formally ratify the Memorandum, and the Protocol document, and discuss a signing ceremony for the former. The signing ceremony would take place at Whakarongtai marae and officers would liaise with Te Āti Awa representatives to arrange.

MOVED (Mayor/Solomon)

That Te Whakaminenga o Kāpiti approves:

The Memorandum of Partnership for the 2013-2016 Triennium and agrees that a signing ceremony be held;

The Protocol document which details the rules and processes around membership and meetings for the 2013-2016 Triennium.

CARRIED

Te Whakaminenga o Kāpiti 14/10/114 DISTRICT TREES POLICY - DISCUSSION

Leisure and Open Space Planner Nathan Mourie had presented the policy at a previous meeting. Submissions on the draft policy closed on 10 October but it was confirmed that ART members could have an extension of a couple of weeks. It was explained that the agenda for the recent ART meeting had been too full to give proper consideration to the draft policy but this would be done at the next meeting, with a view to developing a submission as soon as possible.

Don Te Maipi explained the origin of the karakia accompanying the cutting down of trees and also the need for replanting. The meeting agreed that the policy should include the requirement for a karakia to be performed each time a tree was cut down, but asked who would be responsibility for perform these? This would be clarified during the ART discussions.

5

512605 4

Te Whakaminenga o Kāpiti 14/10/115 UPDATE: TOWN CENTRES AND CONNECTORS TRANSFORMATION PROJECT

Phil Stroud Project Manager provided an update on the project. An Open Day had been held at Paraparaumu on 26 September attended by 100 people and feedback that the planning was on the right track. There had been a second round of focus group meetings, including traffic modelling work, and discussions would be held soon with NZTA about prioritizing projects and the question of subsidies. Officers had been working with the Te Āti Awa Working Group and a presentation was being developed for meetings of marae trustees next month. Meetings next week would also be held with the Kāpiti Lights groups and Coastlands, and with the Kāpiti Chamber of Commerce. A ranked options process would eventually be brought back to Council at the end of November. Then detailed costing and implementation would be developed and input to the Long Term Plan.

Te Whakaminenga o Kāpiti 14/10/116 UPDATE: LONG TERM PLAN (LTP)

This update was provided by Kevin Black Corporate Planning and Reporting Manager, Alison Lash Senior Advisor and Anna Mahoney Communications Advisor accompanied by a powerpoint presentation.

Kevin Black explained that the LTP was a key planning document which described Council’s activities, provided a focus for decisions and priorities and a basis for accountability. A set of Council outcomes had been developed and ratified by Council. Alison Lash distributed copies of the draft Council Outcomes approved by Council and thanked Te Whakaminenga o Kāpiti to their contribution to drafting them. Work was continuing on key priorities as well as activity and asset management plans and budgets for presentation to Councillors during November/December. Changes in the Local Government Act had seen a new requirement to produce a shorter more user-friendly consultation document and this would be released in March for public comment with submission hearings in May 2015 and adoption of the final Plan in June.

Alison Lash spoke about engagement principles; that the process was intended to be Elected Member-led, an easy and proactive process using minimal resources and aligning with the communications workstream, Cr Holborow disputed the suggestion the process was led by Elected Members; this belied the equality of the partnership with the community in the engagement process. The Mayor clarified that the words ‘Elected Member-led’ probably reflected the legislative change which gave the Mayor more responsibility in leading the process but he would be happy for the language to be changed to emphasise the partnership nature of engagement and it was agreed.

Anna Mahoney focused on the communications aspect of the LTP; the key objective was that everyone in Kāpiti knows about the LTP and how they can have a say. This would be achieved by building public interest through normal channels (Mayor’s columns, Kāpiti update, Ōtaki update, website, Facebook, supporting Elected Members with briefings and one-pagers, creating an engaging brand for use in consultation documents, and advertising).

Members suggested that newsletters produced by and for local schools could be used to spread the word and marae would be part of the outreach as well. Online channels do work with iwi groups as well as face to face although sometimes there was a risk of too much information coming through.

It would be clarified post-meeting the stage at which community boards would be engaged.

6

512605 5

Te Whakaminenga o Kāpiti 14/10/117 UPDATE 2 ON PROPOSED DISTRICT PLAN (PDP)

Katherine Dorofaeff Principal Policy Planner spoke to the report and provided an update, which included meetings with landowners regarding waahi tapu sites, and a meeting with Greater Wellington Regional Council (GWRC) about achieving consistency between regional docs and Council’s PDP. The list of rules with immediate effect had been revised and released. Some provisions in the PDP were also being withdrawn in response to the independent review. Draft Terms of Reference for a Coastal Advisory Group had been developed.

There was a concern around the provisions for dealing with hazardous substances/facilities being removed but members were assured that there are still rules in the operative plan which are very similar and which provide protection. There is also central government legislation which deals with these situations and so they don’t need to be regulated through a PDP. Mr Lew agreed to provide a copy on request of the draft waahi tapu brochure.

Reina Solomon left the meeting at 11.18am and returned at 11.22am.

MOVED (Holborow/Seamark)

That the update report SP-14-1331 on the Proposed District Plan be received.

CARRIED

Te Whakaminenga o Kāpiti 14/10/118 IWI UPDATES

Ngāti Toa

A Mana Island educational experience for schools had been developed

Pre-school books being developed including trip to Kāpiti Island

Education in te reo strategy had been launched

MPI application proceeding.

Te Āti Awa

AGM being held this weekend

Marae-based studies happening

Marae AGM in November

Koro Don – re tree policy input, thanks to iwi and it should go back to them for consideration and clearance as a mark of respect

Ngā Hapū o Ōtaki

On 30 October the first primary schools’ haka competition would be held with the winners going through to the national competition next year in Palmerston North

7

512605 6

Te Whakaminenga o Kāpiti 14/10/119 COUNCIL UPDATES

The Mayor provided an update which included reflections on his first year in office, PDP and LTP processes being more inclusive and considered than in the past; developing priorities including the development of the Howarth Block. He thanked iwi and Don Te Maipi for looking after him so well during his first year in office.

Cr Holborow mentioned the new Youth Council, and the launch of the beginning of a new cycleway from Paekākāriki to Raumati which would be a great improvement in connectivity.

Te Whakaminenga o Kāpiti 14/10/120 CORRESPONDENCE

There was none.

TeWhakaminenga o Kāpiti 14/10/121 OTHER BUSINESS The Chair thanked the Group for the opportunity to participate in RMA training. She and Cherie Seamark had just passed their course and were congratulated. Regarding the Citizenship ceremony in November, Whakarongotai could not now provide the venue, Raukawa marae would be confirmed as the alternative.

Te Whakaminenga o Kāpiti 14/10/122 IN-COMMITTEE SESSION

The group went into committee at 11.40am to discuss the appointment of the Maori representative on the Environment and Community Development Committee.

The meeting came out of the In-Committee session and closed with a karakia by kaumātua Don Te Maipi at 11.46am

8

SP-14-1400

Page | 1 518033

Chairperson and Committee Members TE WHAKAMINENGA O KĀPITI

20 JANUARY 2015

Meeting Status: Public

Purpose of Report: For Decision

COASTAL ADVISORY GROUP - TERMS OF REFERENCE

PURPOSE OF REPORT

1 The purpose of this paper is to present the draft Coastal Advisory Group (CAG) Terms of Reference, for feedback.

BACKGROUND

2 At the 24 July meeting, Council resolved the following:

That the Council endorse the formulation of a Coastal Advisory Group (CAG) with membership from key statutory agencies, neighbouring councils, submitters, coastal land owners and community representatives with an independent Chair.

That staff develop a draft terms of reference for the Coastal Advisory Group and identify the skills/attributes of potential group members for Council consideration.

3 This paper presents the draft terms of reference for the Committee’s consideration and feedback. A further paper will be drafted requesting an Iwi member for the CAG.

CONSIDERATIONS

Issues

4 The Coastal Advisory Group will be responsible for advising and recommending to Council the problem definition, research programme, policy framework and management approaches for dealing with coastal hazards along the Kapiti coastline.

5 An essential aspect of all coastal management activities by Council is the partnership with Iwi and the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi. Hence Council seeks and values the Committee’s feedback on this document.

6 Once feedback is received from all stakeholders a revised version of this Terms of Reference will be drafted and considered by Council.

Financial Considerations 7 There are no financial considerations for this Committee.

Legal Considerations 8 There are no legal considerations for this Committee.

Policy Implications

9 There are no policy implications.

9

SP-14-1400

Page | 2 518033

SIGNIFICANCE AND ENGAGEMENT

10 This paper has a low level of significance under the Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy.

11 There is no consultation needed, although the staff are seeking feedback from a number of stakeholders on the draft Terms of Reference to ensure they are supported.

Publicity Considerations 12 There are no publicity considerations.

RECOMMENDATIONS

13 That Te Whakaminenga o Kāpiti consider the Coastal Advisory Group Terms of Reference in Attachment 1 of Report SP-14-1400 and provide their feedback.

Report prepared by: Approved for submission by:

Darryl Lew

Stephen McArthur

Environmental Planning Manager Group Manager, Strategy & Partnerships

Approved by submission by:

Sean Mallon Group Manager Infrastructure Services

ATTACHMENTS:

1. Draft CAG Terms of Reference

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

Corp-15-1434

Page 1 of 13

Chairperson and Members TE WHAKAMINENGA O KĀPITI

20 JANUARY 2015



2015 REVIEW OF REPRESENTATION ARRANGEMENTS - INVITATION FOR IWI MEMBER OF WORKING PARTY

PURPOSE OF REPORT

1 This report asks Te Whakaminenga o Kāpiti to consider nominating an iwi representative to the Council’s Representation Review Working Party.

BACKGROUND

2 A representation review is a statutory process which must be undertaken by every council at least every six years, and for the Kāpiti Coast District Council this process must be undertaken in 2015. This will allow Council, in consultation with its community, to consider whether the representation arrangements currently operating are adequate or need to be changed, having regard to legislative principles of fairness and effectiveness of representation. The current structure of ward and districtwide councillors and community boards has been in place in a relatively unchanged way since 2004.

3 The review process is mandated through the Local Government Act (LGA) 2002 and the Local Electoral Act (LEA) 2001. There are key timeframes associated with the steps in the process (Appendix 1). The process entails the Council consulting with its community on key aspects of its representation arrangements, including:

What ‘communities of interest’ exist on the Kāpiti Coast?

What kind of structure is effective in ensuring fair representation of the Kāpiti Coast communities, for example should councillors be elected on a ward basis or a districtwide basis or through a mixed system? (The District currently has a mixed system.)

How many councillors are required to ensure both effective governance and effective representation? (within statutory parameters)

Is there a continuing need for community boards to represent the distinctiveness of their communities and provide for more devolved decision-making/advocacy?

4 Although legislation prescribes factors for consideration and timeframes for consultation/decision-making there is no prescribed process for how the Review is carried out.

5 On 11 December 2014 Council considered options for the process of conducting the Review. Of the two options put forward Council chose to convene a Working Party comprising two Councillors and Council officers, but felt it was also important that the Working Party should have the capacity to invite other

21

Corp-15-1434

Page 2 of 13

members to participate, including iwi or Community Boards. The meeting resolution is below and a copy of the report is at Appendix 2.

That the Council approves the convening of a Representation Review Working Party to manage the Council’s 2015 representation review, comprising Cr Cardiff and Cr Gaylor and relevant Council officers; with the ability to invite additional members including an iwi member.

6 Therefore, iwi are invited to consider nominating an iwi representative to the Working Party to help carry out the Review over the coming months.

Issues

7 Draft Terms of Reference for the Working Party are at Appendix 3. Although it is difficult to estimate how much time the Working Party would need to devote to its tasks, it is estimated that around 30 hours (5-6 days) of work would be entailed. Broadly speaking the programme of activity would include:

Timing Task

Jan/Feb Finalisation of working party membership and terms of reference

March/April Development of representation draft proposal options and pre-consultation on those options with the community

May/June Finalisation of option/s and recommendation to Council

8 Council must release its draft proposal no later than August for public consultation which would include the receipt and hearing of submissions and the issue of a final proposal around November. If there are appeals and objections to this final proposal then the matter is referred to the Local Government Commission who will consider all the input and issues and make a final decision by April 2016 in time for the local body elections in October 2016.

9 Members will be aware of the Local Government Commission’s reorganisation process for the Wellington Region currently unfolding (as presented at today’s meeting). The representation review process must continue regardless until such time as it becomes evident that a change in governance structure at the regional level is inevitable.

CONSIDERATIONS

Financial Considerations

10 Council declined to approve remuneration for any Working Party members.

Legal Considerations 11 The representation review process is mandated under the Local Government Act

2002 (various sections) and the Local Electoral Act 2001 (sections 19A to 19Y of part 1A).

22

Corp-15-1434

Page 3 of 13

Publicity Considerations 12 There will be a communications strategy developed for the review process with

media releases signalling opportunities for community involvement and capturing key decision points along the way.


13 The decision presented here is not significant under Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy. The process is mandated by legislation and allows as much opportunity for the community to have input and appeal the Council’s decision as would have been the case if this matter was considered to meet the significance thresholds in the Policy.

14 Notwithstanding any decision today to nominate an iwi representative to the Review Working Party, Te Whakaminenga o Kāpiti and ART are considered key stakeholders in the process and will be consulted on draft and final proposals as the process unfolds.

RECOMMENDATIONS

15 That Te Whakaminenga o Kāpiti agrees that an iwi member should be appointed to the Council’s Representation Review Working Party and that this nomination process should be ratified through ART.


Approved for submission by:

Vyvien Starbuck-Maffey Stephen McArthur Wayne Maxwell

Democracy Services Manager

Group Manager Strategy and Planning

Group Manager Corporate Services

ATTACHMENTS:

Appendix 1 Timeframes associated with the representation review process

Appendix 2 Copy of Council report Corp-14-1419 and associated appendices

Appendix 3 Working Party Draft Terms of Reference

23

24

Corp-15-1434

Page 4 of 13

APPENDIX 2

Copy of Council report presented on 11 December 2014 following – minus Appendix 3

25

Corp-15-1434

Page 5 of 13

Mayor and Councillors COUNCIL

11 DECEMBER 2014



2015 REVIEW OF REPRESENTATION ARRANGEMENTS FOR THE KAPITI COAST DISTRICT - PROCESS

PURPOSE OF REPORT

16 Council is invited to consider options and approve a process for conducting the mandatory 2015 Review of Representation Arrangements for the Kāpiti Coast District.

BACKGROUND

17 A representation review is a statutory process which must be undertaken by every council at least every six years. It is mandated through the Local Government Act (LGA) 2002 and the Local Electoral Act (LEA) 2001 (primarily section 19). Representation reviews are important because:

They help ensure fair electoral arrangements and equality of access

They enable the community to discuss the nature of effective representation

They contribute to the experience of democracy

18 The timeframes and key milestones of this process are mandated by legislation (see Appendix 1). What this report seeks is the Council’s preferred option for developing the initial proposal. The initial proposal has to be released by August 2015, and there are a number of ways Council could arrive at this point.

19 However Council decides to handle the development of the initial proposal Council has a critical role to play in receiving and considering public submissions, and deciding on a final proposal which is also released for public reaction, by way of appeals or objections. If any appeals and/or objections are received at this point the matter is referred to the LGC who will make the final decision (determination). This may involve further hearings.

20 Consideration of the electoral system and the establishment of Māori Wards are also a preliminary part of the review process and both of these have already been dealt with by this Council. In August 2014 Council decided to retain STV as its preferred electoral system for the 2016 local body elections. Council was willing to consider the establishment of a Māori Ward if iwi supported this however, through Te Whakaminenga o Kāpiti ART members indicated that iwi did not support the concept and so Council did not pursue it.

21 What remains for Council to do now is carry out the rest of the representation review process which involves consulting with its community on:

What kind of structure is effective in ensuring fair representation of the Kāpiti Coast community (all wards? All districtwide? A mixed system?)

26

Corp-15-1434

Page 6 of 13

How many councillors are required (within a legally prescribed range of 6 to 14) to ensure both effective governance and effective representation?

Is there a continuing role for community boards (to capture the distinctiveness of their communities and provide for more devolved decision-making/advocacy)?

22 In carrying out this consultation in accordance with prescribed timeframes Council needs to have regard primarily to the principle of ensuring fair and effective representation for individuals and communities.

23 The previous representation review was carried out by Council in 2009 and resulted in the current representation structure applying to the last two triennial elections including some minor boundary adjustments.

CONSIDERATIONS

Issues

24 Before describing the ways Council could approach the review, it is necessary to allude to the LGC’s release on 4 December of the draft reorganisation model for the Wellington region. The LGC proposal will be subject to a submission process and it is highly likely that the final proposal will trigger a poll. If this scenario eventuates the whole process could take up to a year before the fate of the Wellington Region’s governance arrangements is clear. If the poll is against change the status quo will remain. It is critical then that the Council proceeds with the representation review within the statutory timeframes until such time as the outcome of the LGC process is definitive.

Options for carrying out the review

25 There are a number of ways Council could go about gathering information to shape the initial proposal for public consultation. (The initial proposal must be presented for Council’s consideration in August 2015.) Information at Appendix 2 shows a variety of mechanisms adopted by other councils. Based on this information two options are offered below:

Option 1 – Council to convene an independent review panel made up of one or more Councillors and a number of community representatives

Option 2 – Council to convene a working party comprising one or more Councillors and Council officers from subject-relevant areas.

26 More information and discussion of each option follows:

Option 1 – Convening an independent panel

27 The appointment (by Council) of an independent Panel has been the preferred option for a number of councils (see Appendix 2). Draft Panel Terms of Reference are at Appendix 3. The size of the panel would ideally be 5-7 members and have a broad representation in terms of age, gender, ethnicity, and geography as well as people with relevant skills and a good knowledge of the District. A decision on remuneration would also have to be made.

27

Corp-15-1434

Page 7 of 13

28 Appointing panel members could involve appointing a Councillor or Councillors today to the Panel and calling for expressions of interest from the community, with Council approving final membership at its meeting in January 2015 (including appointment of a Chairperson).

Pros

An independent panel could be perceived by the community as being more representative and objective in its deliberations.

Council has employed this structure satisfactorily for a number of key projects in recent times (the independent review of the PDP, and the LTP Reference Group, most notably), so it is not unfamiliar.

Cons

A high profile process would be confusing as the LGC debate unfolds.

The Panel would be supported by staff coinciding with one of the busiest times in the Council work programme i.e. the first half of the year which is committed to the LTP process.

There would be a cost implication if Council decided to remunerate the members of the Panel.

Option 2 – Convening a Representation Review Working Party

29 An internal working party could be convened comprising one or more Councillors (one Ward Councillor, one Districtwide Councillor?) and relevant staff i.e. the Democracy Services Team, the Electoral Officer, members from the Strategy and Partnerships Group, and a GIS technician. This option is the recommended one.

Pros

This was the path followed for the 2009 review where a number of models were developed internally and offered for consideration by Elected Members in a series of briefings and public workshops as input to an initial proposal.

This option would be more logistically flexible. For this reason this option is the recommended one.

This option would not involve remuneration costs.

Cons

This option would impact on the work programme of staff at a busy time in the work calendar.

Next steps

30 If Council decided to convene a Panel an advertisement would be placed in local newspapers and on Council’s website and Facebook pages calling for expressions of interest which Council would then consider in a public excluded meeting in January.

31 Whichever mechanism Council chooses, an initial proposal must be approved by Council for public submission no later than August 2015.

28

Corp-15-1434

Page 8 of 13

Financial Considerations 32 There are sufficient funds to carry out this activity. If Council chooses Option 1 it

would have to decide whether some or all panel members should be remunerated and at what cost. It is suggested the rate be $150 per person per day, comparable with what Elected Member hearing commissioners for the PDP hearings would be paid. It is difficult to say how many hours the Panel would need to convene, but one other council’s experience was 30 hours (5-6 days) of Panel time. If this Council adopted the $150 fee this would result in a cost of $4,500.

Legal Considerations 33 The representation review process is mandated under the LGA 2002 and LEA

2001.

Delegation

34 Council has the authority to consider this matter.

Policy Implications 35 There are no policy implications.

Tāngata Whenua Considerations 36 If Council decides on Option 1 it may consider whether an iwi member should be

sought through Te Whakaminenga o Kāpiti.

SIGNIFICANCE OF DECISION

37 The decision presented here is not significant under Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy. The representation review process is mandated by legislation which allows ample opportunity for the community to have input and appeal the Council’s decision. In the event of appeals and objections to the final proposal the Local Government Commission (LGC) will make the final decision.

Consultation

38 Once Council has decided on the option for this process a communications strategy will be developed, including consultation with the community as required by the legislation.

Publicity Considerations 39 There is likely to be community interest in this decision and a media release will

be prepared.

29

Corp-15-1434

Page 9 of 13

RECOMMENDATIONS

40 That the Council approves:

a) the convening of a Representation Review Working Party to manage the Council’s 2015 representation review, comprising Cr …………….. and Cr……………. and relevant Council officers;

OR

b) the convening of an Independent Representation Review Panel, comprising Cr…………………, three community representatives and an iwi representative.

c) That the Council approves remuneration for the members of the Review Panel at the rate of $150 per person per day;

d) That the Council approves the Independent Representation Review Panel Draft Terms of Reference with any amendments as at Appendix 3 of report Corp-14-1419.


Vyvien Starbuck-Maffey Mark de Haast Democracy Services Manager Acting Group Manager

Corporate Services Approved for submission by: Stephen McArthur Group Manager Strategy & Partnerships

ATTACHMENTS:

Appendix 1 Statutory timeframes for the process Appendix 2 Approaches by other councils Appendix 3 Draft Terms of Reference for an Independent Review Panel

30

Corp-15-1434

Page 10 of 13

Appendix 2 – Approaches by other councils to carrying out their reviews (a) These councils have appointed an independent review panel:

Council Review date

No of members

Council members

Composition of Panel

Remunerated

Gore 2006 5 1 Mayor, 4 members of the public

Not paid for time.

Invercargill 2009 7 1 Councillor, 6 members of the public appointed by Council

$1,200 flat fee per member

Queenstown Lakes

2012 4 0 4 community members

Expenses only

Timaru 2012 7 2 Mayor, Ward Councillor and 5 members of the public appointed by Council

Not paid

(b) These district councils used a variety of mechanisms (as described in the

resulting LGC determinations):

Reviews carried out for the 2013 local body elections

Council Method

Horowhenua Public workshop to canvass options Gisborne Appointed a committee of the whole (council) to workshop

options Hastings Appointed a review subcommittee comprising councillors,

the Chair of the Rural Community Board and the Chair of the Council-Māori Joint Committee

Hauraki Held a workshop and then appointed a working party comprising the Mayor, the Deputy Mayor, three Ward Chairs who produced a discussion paper. Council then also resolved to engage focus groups from each ward.

Kaipara Two workshops held Matamata-Piako Preliminary consultation with the community on defining

‘communities of interest’ Waikato Held a series of workshops to identify ‘communities of

interest’ and a range of options emerged from these Western Bay of Plenty

Held a series of workshops resulting in a number of options

31

Corp-15-1434

Page 11 of 13

APPENDIX 3 – DRAFT TERMS OF REFERENCE FOR REPRESENTATION REVIEW WORKING PARTY

32

Corp-15-1434

Page 12 of 13

Appendix 3 – Draft Terms of Reference for Representation Review Working Party

Purpose

a) To develop representation options for the Kapiti Coast District Council which address the issues raised in sections 19H and 19J of the Local Electoral Act 2001, having regard to the factors specified in sections 19T and 19V.

b) To present options for consideration by the Council to enable an initial proposal to be adopted for consultation with the community under section 19M of the Local Electoral Act

c) The Council requires that the Review Working Party report will allow the Council to make fully informed decisions on the options, including arguments and implications for each alternative, for the future governance structure of the District for the period 2016 – 2019. The work undertaken by the panel will comply with the requirements of the Local Electoral Act 2001.

Tasks

1) Identify and define communities of interest. 2) Conduct such research, enquiries or other work as considered necessary to

complete this brief. 3) Determine if early community input required and seek input as necessary. 4) Consider and recommend fair and effective representation arrangements

throughout and for the District, including the election of councillors (at large, by ward or mixed) and community boards, if required.

5) Develop the reasonable alternatives available to the Council in regard to governance structures for the period 2016 - 2019 (including Community Boards if required) having regard to the legal tests.

6) Present and explain the panel’s conclusions as necessary in front of the community, the Council and anybody charged with statutory responsibility for this function.

7) Report to Council on the representation options, including community boards, that were developed, the feedback and results of any community consultation, including the communities’ views of the options and their desire (if any) for more or different representation.

8) Recommend options and a preferred structure. 9) Other such tasks as may be identified during the process.

Draft Process

A draft process to be followed by the Working Party may include the following steps:

1) Establishment of a work programme 2) Development of draft options and material for pre-consultation 3) Pre-consultation with community 4) Finalisation of option(s) and recommendation to Council 5) Presentation of options and recommendation to Council.

The Panel will determine the final process to be followed to achieve the tasks outlined above.

33

Corp-15-1434

Page 13 of 13

Panel Makeup

Council has appointed two Councillors to the Working Party which will be supported by appropriate Council officers, primarily by the Democracy Services Team. The Working Party also has the option for inviting additional members including an iwi member.

Estimated Time Involvement

Meetings will be held as required. An estimated time involvement for the process is between 25-30 hours, depending on the process undertaken.

Phase 1: Pre meeting background reading 3 hours

Development of Options, 2 -3 meetings 6 hours

Phase 2: Public consultation, 3 - 4 meetings each 10 hours

Phase 3: Development of report to Council and attendance at Council meeting 6 hours

34

SP-15-1438

Page 1 of 3


20 JANUARY 2015



CONSIDERATION OF FUNDING APPLICATION

PURPOSE OF REPORT

1 The following application to Te Whakaminenga o Kāpiti has been received:

Te Rūnanga o Toa Rangatira

BACKGROUND

2 Each financial year, provision is made for community groups to make application to Te Whakaminenga o Kāpiti for funding to advance one-off activity. This activity is not generally included in the annual work plan. For funding to be approved, applications should:

complement the activity under the broad categories within the Annual Te Whakaminenga o Kāpiti work plan;

only be considered if submitted through a member of Te Whakaminenga o Kāpiti;

is of District-wide relevance;

may be age specific such as kapa haka festivals or reo Māori Competitions but inclusive of the wider community;

builds knowledge and understanding of Te Ao Māori across the Kāpiti community and encourages integration amongst the communities; and

may support groups which represent the District at a national level however, this will only be considered for kapa haka of Ngā Manu Kōrero

CONSIDERATIONS

Issues 3 Members of ART agreed via email to support funding for this activity in advance

of this meeting and proposed it be ratified on the 20th January 2015. This is due to both the Te Whakaminenga o Kāpiti meeting and the intended activity taking place on the same day.

Application to Te Whakaminenga o Kāpiti

4 The application comes from Raelene Bishop on behalf of Te Rūnanga o Toa Rangatatira. The grant seeks the amount of $500 to support rangatahi aged between 12-18 years from both the iwi and the wider community. It is proposed that this group will participate in a wānanga to be held on Kāpiti Island. This wananga will be one of a series of four. The focus will be on ;

35

SP-15-1438

Page 2 of 3

Learning te reo Māori;

waahi tapu sited on the island;

conservation and engagement with DoC rangers to learn more about the management of the island environment; and

promote the significance of the island to rangatahi enriching their knowledge base;

and

act as a wānanga for rangatahi to prepare for their role in the delivery of Waitangi Day 2015.

Financial Considerations 5 Funding for this activity will come from the existing budget of Te Whakaminenga

o Kāpiti. Applications can be considered from one of the following budget line:

Activity Budget Funds Allocated to date

Total remaining

Te Reo Māori * $2,500.00 $500.00 $2,000.00

*activity for this workstream is generally delivered in June/ July

Delegation 6 Te Whakaminenga o Kāpiti has the authority to:

“Consider and approve the allocation of grants as deemed appropriate under agreed criteria for Ad Hoc Funding Process”.

Tāngata Whenua Considerations 7 A key component of this process is that the request must come through a

member of Te Whakaminenga o Kāpiti. This application was submitted through Reina Solomon. The application is endorsed through the Chair, Rupene Waaka.


8 This report is not significant under the Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy.

36

SP-15-1438

Page 3 of 3

RECOMMENDATIONS

9 That Te Whakaminenga o Kāpiti accepts report SP-15-1438;

10 That Te Whakaminenga o Kāpiti approves the amount of $500.00 collectively approved by members of ART in advance of this meeting due to both the meeting and the wānanga occurring on the same day.


Monica Fraser Stephen McArthur

Iwi Relationships Manager Group Manager, Strategy & Planning

ATTACHMENTS:

1 – Te Rūnanga o Toa Rangatira Inc Funding Application

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

SP-14-1433

http://localhost:3579/UCdoc~DM/KCDC_nd528224/KCDC_n528224_SP-14-1433-Update_4_on_proposed_district_plan_(TWOK).DOC

Chairperson and Members TE WHAKAMINENGA O KĀPITI

20 JANUARY 2015


Purpose of Report: For Information

UPDATE 4 ON THE PROPOSED DISTRICT PLAN

PURPOSE OF REPORT

1 This report summarises activities carried out since the last update report on the Proposed District Plan ('PDP'). The last update was included on the agenda for the 18 November meeting of this committee.

BACKGROUND

2 On 24 July 2014, the Council chose Option 4 recommended by the Independent Review of the PDP. This option is to continue with a modified PDP process which addresses the Plan as a whole using the 'basket of tools' available to the Council.

KEY COUNCIL DECISIONS

3 At its meeting of 27 November 2014, the Council further confirmed its decision to continue with the modified PDP process. At this same meeting, in accordance with Section 37 of the Resource Management Act 1991, the Council agreed to an extension of the timeframes for giving its decision on the provisions and the matters raised in submissions on the Proposed District Plan to 29 November 2017

4 At its meeting of 11 December 2014, the Council made several key resolutions relating to the PDP hearings panel. These resolutions were to:

Appoint Alastair Aburn as independent chair of the panel and David McMahon as independent commissioner

Confirm that an iwi commissioner will be appointed to the panel

Defer the appointment of two elected commissioners to the panel until a minimum of 3 months before the commencement of hearings.

5 Following on from the resolution to appoint an iwi commissioner, officers will now commence a formal registration of interest process and develop a shortlist of potential iwi commissioners for the Council to consider and appoint.

EXTERNAL ACTIVITIES

6 The following table lists the external engagement activities have taken place since the last update which recorded activities up to 16 October 2014.

45

SP-14-1433


Date Who Reason for meeting

Status Outcome

Various Submitters To clarify site specific flood hazard issues raised in submissions

Ongoing Independent expert review of issues raised

25 Nov 2014 Submitter and further submitter

Prehearing meeting on landscape matters

Good progress on reaching an agreed outcome

26 Nov 2014 Rural submitters

Rural Issues Group Regular meetings to be held to address submission issues

26 Nov 2014 Tāngata Whenua Working Party meeting

Regular meeting Ongoing Next meeting scheduled for February

9 Dec 2014 Submitter To clarify Waikanae North Development Zone submission points

17 Dec 2014 Rural submitters

Rural Issues Group Regular meetings to be held to address submission issues

7 On the 28 November 2014, the Council lodged a submission on the GWRC's

draft regional plan. The submission was supportive of much of the document, but highlighted ways in which the PDP and the regional plan could be better aligned in areas such as stormwater management, coastal management, biodiversity, wetlands, plantation forestry and earthworks.

INTERNAL ACTIVITIES

8 The key internal activities undertaken by staff since the last update include:

Participation in Town Centres and Connectors meetings to ensure coordination with the PDP.

Continuing the identification of the effects on individual submission points of the withdrawal of the Plan provisions relating to coastal hazards, hazardous substances and hazardous facilities, and priority areas for restoration.

Continuing to identify and retain appropriately qualified and experienced experts to assist with specific issues eg archaeology, waahi tapu, urban design, flood hazards, noise and vibration, retail and commercial economics, network utilities. This includes receiving and considering registrations of interest from law firms and resource management professionals.

46

SP-14-1433


An internal officer workshop held on 28 to 30 October to review potential approaches to key matters raised in submissions, and findings from benchmarking with other District Plans where relevant.

An internal officer workshop with the Council’s appointed urban design expert (Ian Munro) to discuss key submission issues raised in relation to the living and working environment chapters.

COMMUNICATIONS

9 Press releases have been issued as follows:

Advising of Council's decision on 17 November to confirm 'Option 4' as the pathway for the PDP.

Advising of the appointment of the independent chair and independent commissioner, the confirmation of a position for an iwi commissioner, and the deferring of appointment of two elected commissioners until closer to the hearing.

10 Edition 4 of the PDP Update newsletter was issued after the 27 November Council meeting. Topics covered included: the confirmation of the PDP process, the extension of timeframes under s37 of the RMA, the introduction of experts covering urban design, flood hazards, erosion and earthquake hazard, and noise / acoustics.

11 Edition 5 of the PDP Update newsletter was issued after the 11 December Council meeting and advised of the Council's decisions on the appointment of commissioners. The update included information introducing Alistair Aburn, as the independent chair, and David McMahon, as the independent commissioner.

BUDGET UPDATE

12 Costs to date are within budget for the 2014/15 financial year.


13 This matter, being an update report for information, has a low level of significance under Council's Significance and Engagement policy.

14 The Council's Significance and Engagement policy does not cover any engagement process that may be required under the Resource Management Act 1991.

IMPLEMENTATION PLAN UPDATE

15 Appendix 1 contains the PDP Implementation Plan. The timeline is being met.

47

SP-14-1433


RECOMMENDATIONS

16 That the update report be received.


Katherine Dorofaeff Stephen McArthur

Principal Policy Planner Group Manager, Strategy and Partnerships

ATTACHMENTS:

Appendix 1: PDP Implementation Plan. Edocs 498489

48

2019

Aug Sept NovOct AprilMarch AugFeb Nov FebJune July Sept Oct JanDecApril May

Review Policy Evidence Base Research & Investigations

Landscape Ecology

2014

March May

Redraft PDP Provisions (Excluding Coastal)

Jan

Consultations &

Work Shops

First Draft S42A

Report &

S32 Report

June SeptAugJuly

Pre-Hearings

Final S42A

Report &

S32 Report

2015 2016

PDP Implementation Plan

HEARINGS &

DECISIONS

Dec

Edocs 486294

Oct

Review Submission

Scope

2018

Nov Dec

Coastal Advisory Group and Coastal Research Evidence Base Investigations

Coastal Hazard Management Options

Consultation on Coastal Management Options

Draft Coastal

Provisions

Consultation on

Draft Coastal Provisions

Proposed Coastal Plan Change As Per Schedule One Process (2 Year Process)

2017

Go / No Go

Decisions for

Commencement

of

Hearings

Go / No Go

Decision for

Option 3/4

Time Contingency

49

SP-14-1372

Page 1 of 4 515241


20 JANUARY 2015



WAAHI TAPU PROJECT UPDATE

PURPOSE OF REPORT

1 The purpose of this report is to update Te Whakaminenga o Kāpiti on the waahi tapu project.

BACKGROUND

2 In 2002, Council began the waahi tapu project with the aim of identifying waahi tapu sites within the Kāpiti Coast District. A scoping project was undertaken which identified 471 potential waahi tapu sites.

3 The overall intention of the project is to identify waahi tapu sites worthy of protection afforded by the RMA through including them in the District Plan. This gives the sites significantly more legal protection than the “default” accidental discovery protocols administered by Heritage NZ.

4 A submission to the 2009/2012 Long Term Council Community Plan (LTCCP), resulted in funds to appoint a researcher to advance waahi tapu research. In May 2010 Pātaka Moore was contracted to the research project. At the outset of this project, the researcher (Pātaka Moore) was given a map with 471 sites of significance on it, which formed the starting point for this project.

5 To date 40 new waahi tapu sites have been added to the Proposed District Plan (PDP) and the PDP rules surrounding these sites have had effect since the 29 November 2012 notification decision.

6 Since the PDP was notified in November 2012 a further 27 sites have been researched and in 2014/2015, approximately a further 60 sites were planned to be researched for inclusion in the District Plan at a later stage through the plan change process.

7 Of the 40 new waahi tapu sites in the PDP, six have been submitted on opposing their inclusion in the PDP. A submission was also received (from Heritage New Zealand) requesting the addition of Te Pou O Tainui marae as a waahi tapu site in the PDP.

8 The following table lists additional details of these sites and the submissions on them:

Waahi tapu site Submitter

1. WTS0318 – Taewapirau (ĀTI AWA) 3 submitters:

Waikanae Golf Club (Inc)

50

SP-14-1372

Page 2 of 4 515241

Maypole Environmental Ltd

Te Anau Trust

2. WTS0137 – Te Horo Pā (Makahuri) (Ngāti Raukawa)

16 submitters, including:

Louise Trilloe

Peter Brownie

etc

3. WTS0127B – Taumānuka 3F (Ngāti Raukawa)

1 submitter:

Daniel Castle

4. WTS0206 – Kaiwarehou (ĀTI AWA) 2 submitters:

John Rice

Paula Keene

5. W4 – existing site in ODP – Takamore Cemetery – End of Puriri Road, Waikanae (Te Ati Āwa)

1 submitter:

Heritage New Zealand

6. Te Pou O Tainui marae – suggested new site – Ōtaki (Ngāti Raukawa)

1 submitter:

Heritage New Zealand

7. WTS0183A – Waitohu Urupā Pukehou 4C6 (Ngāti Raukawa)

1 submitter:

RNR Trust

CONSIDERATIONS

Issues

9 In order for Council to respond to the submitter concerns, it is proposed that Council appoint an expert witness(s) proficient in waahi tapu matters to review the methodology used for all waahi tapu sites and the site specific evidence. The expert witness would then support Council through consultation, pre-hearings, hearings and possibly Environment Court.

10 It should be recognised that as the PDP process escalates to hearings and possibly Environment Court, the requirement to have an increasingly strong evidential basis to the waahi tapu sites/areas included in the PDP exists.

11 This potentially involves physical archaeology and/or ground penetrating radar investigations to confirm that physical evidence exists, and that an appropriate methodology has been employed.

12 Such additional work is costly but necessary to defend the waahi tapu sites/areas included in the PDP.

13 Council’s waahi tapu researcher has recently resigned and it is now necessary to retain an expert proficient in waahi tapu matters to represent Council throughout the PDP process. As the expert is representing Council in formal RMA processes, Council’s requirements for such an expert are:

51

SP-14-1372

Page 3 of 4 515241

13.1 They have the support of the three iwi to represent their often sensitive waahi tapu information in RMA processes;

13.2 They have sufficient experience, capability and qualifications for potentially contentious hearings and environment court processes; and,

13.3 The charge out rate is market based and competitive.

14 Given the above situation it is recommended that the annual budget of $75,675 (of which $63,055 remains unspent for the 2014/2015 financial year) be used to finance the employment of a waahi tapu expert(s) and any further work or investigations into the existing PDP waahi tapu sites/areas, and a full review of the underlying methodology to the waahi tapu project.

15 Given the above recommendation it is further recommended to defer investigations into new waahi tapu sites for the remainder of this financial year to allow for this focus on the existing sites. If the waahi tapu researcher had not resigned this course of action would have still been recommended to allow the researcher to focus on the submissions opposing the PDP waahi tapu sites. Hence, this does not represent a change to the project.

16 This can be reviewed in July 2015, the start of the next financial year.

Future increase to project scope of work

17 As stated, the waahi tapu project has been ongoing since May 2010 and like all Council activities is subject to reconsideration on the Long Term Plan (LTP) for its continuation.

18 If the project continues to be supported by Council as a result of the LTP process, it is recommended that the project scope be broadened from only waahi tapu to “iwi input to Council policy”. This will enable Te Whakaminenga O Kāpiti to make decisions on allocating funding to waahi tapu or any other policy related project they may wish to support in the future.

19 This issue is brought to the attention of Te Whakaminenga O Kāpiti and is for information only at this stage and will be formally considered during the LTP process.

Financial Considerations

20 There is sufficient funding for what is proposed, as existing budgets are recommended to be utilised in the 2014/15 financial year. Future budget for years 2015/16 and beyond is subject to the LTP process.

Legal Considerations 21 There are no legal considerations at this time.

Policy Implications 22 As indicated the policy implications of Council not being able to successfully

defend the underlying methodology or individual waahi tapu sites within the PDP could put the entire program at risk. Hence it is important to follow the recommended course of action to avoid this risk.

52

SP-14-1372

Page 4 of 4 515241


23 This paper is not significant under the Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy.

Publicity Considerations

24 There are no publicity considerations.

RECOMMENDATIONS

25 That Te Whakaminenga o Kāpiti agree to use the 2014/15 waahi tapu budget to recruit a waahi tapu expert witness to carry out a review of the waahi tapu methodology and any required additional evidence collection to support the Proposed District Plan waahi tapu sites/areas through the pre-hearings, hearings and if necessary Environment Court.

Report prepared by: Darryl Lew ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING MANAGER

Approved for submission by: Stephen McArthur GROUP MANAGER STRATEGY & PARTNERSHIP

Approved for submission by:

Tamsin Evans GROUP MANAGER COMMUNITY SERVICES

53

Documents

20 Kohi- Council Chambers 10.00 am Committee Membership ... · Alison Lash Senior Advisor and Anna Mahoney Communications Advisor accompanied by a powerpoint presentation. Kevin Black