Agenda of Regional Council Meeting

Meeting of the Hawke's Bay Regional Council

Date: Wednesday 31 May 2017

Time: 10.15am

Venue:

Council Chamber

Hawke's Bay Regional Council

159 Dalton Street

NAPIER

Agenda

Item Subject Page

1. Welcome/Apologies/Notices

2. Conflict of Interest Declarations

3. Confirmation of Minutes of the Regional Council meetings held on 26 April 2017 and 10 May 2017

4. Follow-ups from Previous Regional Council Meetings 3

5. Call for Items of Business Not on the Agenda 9

6. Te Kahu O Te Amorangi - Matatini Presentation

Decision Items

7. Recommendations from the Environment and Services Committee 11

8. Recommendations from the Finance, Audit and Risk Sub-committee 17

9. Capital Structure Review – Scope and Process 19

10. Recommendations from the Corporate and Strategic Committee 21

11. Resource Consents Delegations 23

12. Operational Efficiency Review Report 25

13. Report from the Regional Planning Committee 45

14. Affixing of the Common Seal 47

Information or Performance Monitoring

15. Update on Havelock North Water Contamination Government Inquiry 49

16. HBRC Staff Work Programme through June 2017 55

17. Chairman's Monthly Report (to be tabled)

18. Items of Business Not on the Agenda 61

Decision Items (Public Excluded)

19. Confirmation of Public Excluded Meeting held on 26 April 2017 63

20. Confirmation of Public Excluded Meeting held on 10 May 2017 65

HAWKE’S BAY REGIONAL COUNCIL

Wednesday 31 May 2017

Subject: Call for Items of Business Not on the Agenda

Reason for Report

1. Standing order 9.12 states:

“A meeting may deal with an item of business that is not on the agenda where the meeting resolves to deal with that item and the Chairperson provides the following information during the public part of the meeting:

(a) the reason the item is not on the agenda; and

(b) the reason why the discussion of the item cannot be delayed until a subsequent meeting.

Items not on the agenda may be brought before the meeting through a report from either the Chief Executive or the Chairperson.

Please note that nothing in this standing order removes the requirement to meet the provisions of Part 6, LGA 2002 with regard to consultation and decision making.”

2. In addition, standing order 9.13 allows “A meeting may discuss an item that is not on the agenda only if it is a minor matter relating to the general business of the meeting and the Chairperson explains at the beginning of the public part of the meeting that the item will be discussed. However, the meeting may not make a resolution, decision or recommendation about the item, except to refer it to a subsequent meeting for further discussion.”

Recommendations

1. That Council accepts the following “Items of Business Not on the Agenda” for discussion as Item 18:

1.1. Urgent items of Business (supported by tabled CE or Chairpersons’s report)

Item Name

Reason not on Agenda

Reason discussion cannot be delayed

1.2. Minor items for discussion only

Item	Topic	Councillor / Staff
1.
2.
3.

Leeanne Hooper

GOVERNANCE MANAGER

Liz Lambert

GROUP MANAGER
EXTERNAL RELATIONS

HAWKE’S BAY REGIONAL COUNCIL

Wednesday 31 May 2017

Subject: Recommendations from the Environment and Services Committee

Reason for Report

1. The following matters were considered for approval by the Environment and Services Committee meeting on 17 May 2017, and additional detail sought in relation to the Regional Pest Management Plan review and Biosecurity Working Party is provided following.

Regional Pest Management Plan (RPMP) Review and Discussion Document

2. Due to constrained timeframes, Council is being asked to agree to the Terms of Reference for the Biosecurity Working Party, and the RPMP Review discussion document (attached) with agreed amendments having been incorporated by staff.

3. Feedback from the Committee requested that a section on Biodiversity Protection be included in the Discussion Document and that the BWP Terms of Reference have an added clause “To provide guidance on the alignment of the Regional Pest Management Plan and the objectives of the Hawkes Bay Biodiversity Strategy”

Decision Making Process

4. These items were specifically considered at the Committee level, and the following proposed recommendations from the Committee have been amended in line with the additional information provided by staff.

Recommendations

The Environment and Services Committee recommends that Council:

1. Agrees that the decisions to be made are not significant under the criteria contained in Council’s adopted Significance and Engagement Policy and that Council can exercise its discretion and make decisions on these issues without conferring directly with the community.

Transforming Biodiversity In Hawke’s Bay

2. Endorses the principle of Hawke’s Bay being the first region to align itself to the Predator Free NZ 2050 goal.

3. Requests that staff seek community feedback on this aspirational goal through the Regional Pest Management Plan review and discussion document.

4. Requests that staff bring a detailed proposal for consideration to Council through the 2018-28 Long Term Plan development process, discussing the regional rollout of predator control alongside associated leveraged funding partners.

Regional Pest Management Plan Review and Discussion Document

5. Adopts the Terms of Reference for the Biosecurity Working Party, incorporating the agreed amendments requested by the Environment and Services Committee on 17 May 2017.

6. Accepts the Regional Pest Management Plan Review discussion document, incorporating the agreement amendments as requested by the Environment and Services Committee on 17 May 2017.

Biosecurity 2017-18 Operational Plans

7. Accepts the Biosecurity 2017-18 Operational Plans as the basis for HBRC Biosecurity Operations through the 2017-18 financial year.

Processing of Water Bottling Resource Consent Applications

8. Provides clarification of the Council policy position on the taking of water for water bottling to staff by:

8.1. Amending the definition of water bottling to read “taking and using water for bottling in bottles, bladders or other containers for human consumption, where the water taken makes up at least 90% content of the container.”

8.2. Amending the Hearings Committee Terms of Reference to include the delegations to hear and decide applications for lapse date extensions for water bottling resource consents.

8.3. Advising that all applications to change any of the conditions of a water take resource consent for water bottling will be publicly notified.

8.4. Advising that all applications to transfer a water bottling resource consent, in part or in full, from site to site will be publicly notified.

Reports Received

9. Notes that the following reports were provided to the Environment and Services Committee on 17 May 2017:

9.1. Implementation of the Hawke’s Bay Biodiversity Strategy (presentations by Jan Hania and Dr Charles Daugherty)

9.2. OECD Environmental Performance Review and Public Perception Survey of NZ’s Environment 2016

9.3. Feedlot and Feedpad Management Update (resolved: requests that staff work on a rule change in order to properly control Feedpads and Feedlots and refer to Regional Planning Committee)

9.4. Stormwater Management (resolved: asks staff to respond to the next Environment and Services Committee with an update on compliance processes, environmental issues and resource consent processes)

9.5. Clive River Dredging

9.6. Regulation and Operational Update.

Authored by:

Leeanne Hooper

Governance Manager

Approved by:

Graeme Hansen

Group Manager
Asset Management

Iain Maxwell

Group Manager
Resource Management

Attachment/s

⇩1	Biosecurity Working Party Terms of Reference
⇩2	Discussion Document Addition

HAWKE’S BAY REGIONAL COUNCIL

Wednesday 31 May 2017

Subject: Recommendations from the Finance, Audit and Risk Sub-committee

The Corporate and Strategic Committee, at its meeting on 24 May 2017, resolved that this matter be referred to the Regional Council meeting to be held on 31 May 2017

Reason for Report

1. The following matters were considered by the Finance, Audit and Risk Sub-committee on 10 May 2017.

Decision Making Process

2. These items were specifically considered by the Sub-committee, and the following proposed recommendations resolved.

Recommendations

The Finance Audit and Risk Sub- Committee recommends that Council:

1. Agrees that the decisions to be made are not significant under the criteria contained in Council’s adopted Significance and Engagement Policy, and that Council can exercise its discretion and make decisions on this issue without conferring directly with the community and persons likely to be affected by or to have an interest in the decision.

Progress on HB LASS Tender for Internal Audit Provision

2. Requests that staff report to a future Corporate and Strategic Committee meeting on the Internal Audit process, terms of engagement with HB LASS Ltd and participating councils, and advantages that flow through to this Council.

Reports Received

3. Notes that the following reports were provided to the Finance Audit and Risk Sub-committee.

3.1 Operational Efficiency Review (referred to the Corporate & Strategic Committee, including recommendations).

3.2 Capital Structure Review (referred to the Corporate & Strategic Committee including recommendations re Advisory Committee membership and adding Napier Port Ownership examination to the Scope)

3.3 2017 Sub-Committee Work Programme

3.4 Proposed 2017-18 Council Insurance Programme

3.5 Internal Audit Report - Taxation Compliance Review.

Authored by:

Judy Buttery

Governance Administration Assistant

Approved by:

Paul Drury

Group Manager
Corporate Services

Greg Woodham

Interim Chief Executive

Attachment/s

There are no attachments for this report.

HAWKE’S BAY REGIONAL COUNCIL

Wednesday 31 May 2017

Subject: Capital Structure Review – Scope and Process

The Corporate and Strategic Committee, at its meeting on 24 May 2017, resolved that this matter be referred to the Regional Council meeting to be held on 31 May 2017

1. Councillors, at the 26 April Regional Council meeting, requested a formal, documented process for the nomination of candidates as independent members of the Capital Structure Review Advisory Committee so that there are opportunities for nominations to be made and the integrity of the process is transparent. This item provides the process undertaken to date, to identify potential nominees for independent membership, and the opportunity for further debate on nominations.

2. Further, the Finance Audit and Risk Sub-committee meeting on 10 May resolved:

2.1. recommends to the Corporate and Strategic Committee, that the following is added to the Review Scope and Terms of Reference:

2.1.1. Examines the arguments for and against retaining ownership of Napier Port in HBRIC Ltd or moving to direct ownership by Council, with such arguments to include but not be limited to tax considerations.

2.2. recommends that the Corporate and Strategic Committee reconsiders the membership of the Capital Structure Review Advisory Committee.

3. This item enables the addition of the Napier Port ownership examination to the scope of the review by way of Council resolution.

Sponsorship and Governance of the review

4. Council, on 29 March 2017, resolved:

4.1. Forms a Capital Structure Review Advisory Committee comprising the HBRC Chairman, Rex Graham, Chairman of the HBRC Corporate & Strategic Committee, Neil Kirton, the Chairman of Hawke’s Bay Regional Investment Company Ltd Board of Directors, the Chairman of the Napier Port Board of Directors and two suitably qualified independent members to be confirmed by Council at its 26 April meeting.

5. Concerns were raised about the level of ‘elected representation’ on the Advisory Committee, with the suggestion that Council considers whether there should be more than two elected representative members on the Committee.

6. The process undertaken to appoint two independent members has been:

6.1. The Chairman of the Corporate and Strategic Committee emailed councilors in April 2017 requesting that they consider nominations of suitably qualified candidates.

6.2. At the Council meeting on 26 April, councilors left the matter of appointments of the independent members of the Advisory Committee to lie on the table pending provision of a proper process for appointment of the independent membersto ensure suitably qualified candidates were appointed and to allow potential appointees to be considered formally by Council.

6.3. An additional 2-3 weeks has been provided to councilors so as nominations could be secured from possible candidates

6.4. The Committee formally resolved a recommendation to Council for the appointment of 2 independent members of the Capital Structure Review Advisory Committee in Public Excluded session on 24 May, and that recommendation is included in the Corporate and Strategic Committee Recommendations to Council item on the 31 May 2017 Regional Council agenda.

Timing

7. It is anticipated that the Review will be initiated by the end of May with a view to providing inputs to the LTP process by no later than August of 2017.

Decision Making Process

8. Council is required to make every decision in accordance with the requirements of the Local Government Act 2002 (the Act). Staff have assessed the requirements in relation to this item and have concluded:

8.1. The decision does not significantly alter the service provision or affect a strategic asset.

8.2. The use of the special consultative procedure is not prescribed by legislation.

8.3. The decision does not fall within the definition of Council’s policy on significance.

8.4. The decision is not inconsistent with an existing policy or plan.

8.5. Given the nature and significance of the issue to be considered and decided, and also the persons likely to be affected by, or have an interest in the decisions made, Council can exercise its discretion and make a decision without consulting directly with the community or others having an interest in the decision.

Recommendations

That Council:

1. Receives and notes the “Capital Structure Review – Scope and Process” staff report

2. Agrees that the decisions to be made are not significant under the criteria contained in Council’s adopted Significance and Engagement Policy, and that Council can exercise its discretion and make decisions on this issue without conferring directly with the community and persons likely to be affected by or to have an interest in the decision.

3. Amends the Capital Structure – Scope and Process document to include:

3.1. Examines the arguments for and against retaining ownership of Napier Port in HBRIC Ltd or moving to direct ownership by Council, with such arguments to include but not be limited to tax considerations.

Either

4. Confirms the membership of the Capital Structure Review Advisory Committee comprises the HBRC Chairman, Rex Graham, Chairman of the HBRC Corporate & Strategic Committee, Neil Kirton, the Chairman of Hawke’s Bay Regional Investment Company Ltd Board of Directors, the Chairman of the Napier Port Board of Directors and two suitably qualified independent members

4. Appoints an additional elected representative to the Capital Structure Review Advisory Committee, being Councillor x, and bringing the membership to a total of seven.

Authored and Authorised by:

Paul Drury

Group Manager
Corporate Services

Attachment/s

There are no attachments for this report.

HAWKE’S BAY REGIONAL COUNCIL

Wednesday 31 May 2017

Subject: Recommendations from the Corporate and Strategic Committee

Reason for Report

1. The following matters were considered for approval by the Corporate and Strategic Committee meeting on 24 May 2017 and are now presented for Council’s consideration and approval.

2. In addition to the recommendations for Council to consider, the Committee resolved to refer the following items to Council for consideration and decision.

2.1. Recommendations from the Finance, Audit and Risk Sub-committee (item x)

2.2. Capital Structure Review – Scope and Process (item x)

2.3. Operational Efficiency Review Report (item x)

Decision Making Process

3. The following items were specifically considered at the Committee level.

Recommendations

The Corporate and Strategic Committee recommends that Council:

Ruataniwha Water Storage Scheme Next Steps

2. Requests the Board of HBRIC Ltd considers extending the moratorium on further RWSS expenditure to one month after the DoC land transfer matter has been resolved.

3. Requests that the existing agreement between HBRIC Ltd and HBRC relating to the moratorium is modified to include Council’s support for HBRIC Ltd incurring necessary expenditure to roll over Foundation Water User Agreements and to review the existing RWSS Environmental Management Package.

4. Requests that staff incorporate the status of the June 2014 Conditions Precedent and any recommended modifications and additions, into the 31 May 2017 recommendations to Council, including:

4.1. Agrees to modify the condition precedent for investment in the RWSS on water sales from 40 M m³ to 50 M m³ by financial close.

4.2. Agrees to the introduction of a new condition precedent that “Council investment in the RWSS is subject to the further review of the existing Environmental Management Package for the RWSS, including approaches to managing nitrogen and phosphorus under Farm Environment Management Plans and flushing flows, and that any proposed changes to the Environmental Management Package for the RWSS meet the satisfaction of the Council at least 2 months prior to financial close”.

5. Requests staff provide advice on the implementation plan for Plan Change 6 across the wider catchment, in parallel with the further review of the existing Environmental Management Package for the RWSS, to enable the Council to consider how both plans together might achieve the objectives of Plan Change 6.

6. Requests staff provide advice to the Regional Planning Committee on 7 June 2017 on the implementation issues arising for Plan Change 6 and the costs and benefits of a plan change to Plan Change 6, including an assessment of the financial and work programme implications for the Council.

7. Requests that staff engage with the Environmental Defence Society and Fish and Game New Zealand, and invite HBRIC Ltd to participate, on the scope of a potential application to the Environment Court for a ruling on the interpretation of any Plan Change 6 provisions and/or any Ruataniwha Water Storage Scheme consent conditions, and reports to the Regional Planning Committee on 7 June 2017.

8. Seeks feedback from HBRIC Ltd on the recommendations contained in this paper for Council consideration alongside the Corporate and Strategic Committee RWSS recommendations of 31 May 2017.

Capital Structure Review – Scope and Process

9. Confirms the appointments of Mr David Shand and Mr Jim Scotland as independent members of the Capital Structure Review Advisory Committee.

Reports Received

10. Notes that the following reports were provided to the Corporate and Strategic Committee meeting:

10.1. Chief Executive Appointment (resolved as Decision of Council)

10.2. HB Tourism Update

10.3. Quarterly Council Communications Update

10.4. Health and Safety Update Report for the Period 1 January through 30 April 2017.

Authored by:

Leeanne Hooper

Governance Manager

Approved by:

Liz Lambert

Group Manager
External Relations

James Palmer

Group Manager
Strategic Development

Attachment/s

There are no attachments for this report.

HAWKE’S BAY REGIONAL COUNCIL

Wednesday 31 May 2017

Subject: Resource Consents Delegations

Reason for Report

1. A recent realignment of responsibilities among the HBRC Executive team means that, from 1 June 2017, the Consents Team will be reporting through to the Group Manager, External Relations.

2. It will be necessary for the Delegation Manual for Resource Consent Processes (adopted by Council 16 December 2015) to be changed to reflect the change in Group Managers.

Discussion

3. There are several legislative and operational changes that will necessitate a more complete review of the Consents Delegations Manual in coming months. These pending changes arise from the Gravel Strategy review and from changes to the RMA.

3.1. When the HBRC Gravel Strategy has been finalised there will be no need for any consent related delegations to the Group Manager Assets Management and staff if this is adopted as proposed.

3.2. The Resource Legislation Amendment Act gained Royal Assent on 18 April 2017. Most of the changes affecting the Regional Council generally do not take effect until October 2017 so there is time to review these and consider any delegation changes once the full effect of the changes are understood. There are workshops on this proposed over the next few weeks that will assist in this.

4. It is proposed that the Group Manager External Relations (GMER) be delegated the same functions as held currently by the Group Manager Resource Management (GMRM). It is proposed that the GMRM retain his delegations, at least until the delegations are more comprehensively reviewed.

5. It is proposed that this change of delegation be recorded and attached to the current manual but that the manual remain unchanged until other changes that are pending are ready for inclusion when a more comprehensive change will be brought to Council.

Decision Making Process

6. Council is required to make every decision in accordance with the requirements of the Local Government Act 2002 (the Act). Staff have assessed the requirements in relation to this item and have concluded:

6.1. The decision does not significantly alter the service provision or affect a strategic asset.

6.2. The use of the special consultative procedure is not prescribed by legislation.

6.3. The decision does not fall within the definition of Council’s policy on significance.

6.4. The decision is not inconsistent with an existing policy or plan.

6.5. Given the nature and significance of the issue to be considered and decided, and also the persons likely to be affected by, or have an interest in the decisions made, Council can exercise its discretion and make a decision without consulting directly with the community or others having an interest in the decision.

Recommendations

That Council:

2. That pursuant to s34A(1) of the Resource Management Act 1991 the Council delegates all the powers, duties and functions that are delegated to the Group Manager Resource Management also to the Group Manager External Relations.

Authored by:

Malcolm Miller

Manager Consents

Approved by:

Liz Lambert

Group Manager
External Relations

Attachment/s

There are no attachments for this report.

HAWKE’S BAY REGIONAL COUNCIL

Wednesday 31 May 2017

Subject: Operational Efficiency Review Report

The Corporate and Strategic Committee, at its meeting on 24 May 2017, resolved that this matter be referred to the Regional Council meeting to be held on 31 May 2017

Reason for Report

1. The key findings of the Operational Efficiency Review undertaken, recommendations, observations and comments made in the Report are provided for consideration by the Committee.

Background

2. In early February 2017 I met with Andrew Newman, Neil Kirton and Paul Drury to discuss the terms of reference and scope of an Efficiency and Effectiveness review.

3. The terms of reference were agreed on 15 February and on 23 February Andrew Newman announced his resignation with his last day being 31 March.

4. I commenced work on this review on Monday 27 of February.

5. On Tuesday 14 March, after a candidate selection and interview process, I was offered (and accepted) the job of Interim CEO to commence on Monday 3 April.

Comments

6. The terms of reference for the review stated that its first draft would be given to the CEO for discussion and feedback.

7. As I was now the Interim CE I provided the first draft to my executive team and the councillors for discussion and feedback.

8. Based on feedback received (mainly from my executive) I changed my report to account for errors of fact and other suggestions for emphasis or de-emphasis.

Decision Making Process

9. Council is required to make every decision in accordance with the requirements of the Local Government Act 2002 (the Act). Staff have assessed the requirements in relation to this item and have concluded:

9.1. The decision does not significantly alter the service provision or affect a strategic asset.

9.2. The use of the special consultative procedure is not prescribed by legislation.

9.3. The decision does not fall within the definition of Council’s policy on significance.

9.4. The persons affected by this decision are all of the ratepayers of Hawke’s Bay

9.5. The decision is not inconsistent with an existing policy or plan.

9.6. Given the nature and significance of the issue to be considered and decided, and also the persons likely to be affected by, or have an interest in the decisions made, Council can exercise its discretion and make a decision without consulting directly with the community or others having an interest in the decision.

Recommendations

That Council:

1. Receives and notes the “Operational Efficiency Review” report.

3. Accepts the recommendations made by the Operational Efficiency Review report and, where appropriate, initiates the work programmes necessary to implement the efficiencies or benefits to be achieved.

Authored and Approved by:

Greg Woodham

Interim Chief Executive

Attachment/s

⇩1

Effectiveness and Efficiency Review Report

HAWKE’S BAY REGIONAL COUNCIL

Wednesday 31 May 2017

Subject: Affixing of the Common Seal

Reason for Report

1. The Common Seal of the Council has been affixed to the following documents and signed by the Chairman or Deputy Chairman and Chief Executive or a Group Manager.

Seal No.

Date

1.1

Leasehold Land Sales

1.1.1 Lot 381

DP 11103

CT B2/1284

- Transfer

1.1.2 Lot 86

DP 13096

CT G1/271

- Transfer

1.1.3 Lot 59

DP 14224

CT F4/1497

- Agreement for Sale and Purchase

- Transfer

1.1.4 Lot 47

DP 14224

CT F4/1490

- Transfer

4114

4115

4116

4117

4118

26 April 2017

11 May 2017

17 May 2017

19 May 2017

Decision Making Process

2. Council is required to make every decision in accordance with the provisions of Sections 77, 78, 80, 81 and 82 of the Local Government Act 2002 (the Act). Staff have assessed the requirements contained within these sections of the Act in relation to this item and have concluded the following:

2.1 Sections 97 and 88 of the Act do not apply

2.2 Council can exercise its discretion under Section 79(1)(a) and 82(3) of the Act and make a decision on this issue without conferring directly with the community or others due to the nature and significance of the issue to be considered and decided

2.3 That the decision to apply the Common Seal reflects previous policy or other decisions of Council which (where applicable) will have been subject to the Act’s required decision making process.

Recommendations

That Council:

1. Agrees that the decision to be made is not significant under the criteria contained in Council’s adopted Significance and Engagement Policy and that Council can exercise its discretion and make this decision without conferring directly with the community and persons likely to be affected by or to have an interest in the decision.

2. Confirms the action to affix the Common Seal.

Authored by:

Diane Wisely

Executive Assistant

Approved by:

Greg Woodham

Interim Chief Executive

Attachment/s

There are no attachments for this report.

HAWKE’S BAY REGIONAL COUNCIL

Wednesday 31 May 2017

Subject: Update on Havelock North Water Contamination Government Inquiry

Reason for Report

1. This report provides an update to Councillors in relation to the August 2016 Havelock North water contamination event and Council expenditure related to the Government Inquiry.

The Government Inquiry

Stage 1 report

1. The stage one report was released on 10 May. Council was given a verbal briefing from staff at the Environment and Services committee meeting on 17 May.

2. Staff have reviewed the Stage 1 report and accept the Inquiry’s findings. Staff are focused on resolving issues identified, addressing systemic problems and preparing for Stage 2.

3. Key findings and staff responses are:

3.1. (a) SOE monitoring needs to be more detailed and focused on particular forms of risk, and adverse SOE monitoring results should be more thoroughly investigated and a more concerted communication with relevant organisations should occur where there are adverse results, especially if drinking-water sources are involved

3.1.1. A region wide review of our entire SOE network is currently being tendered. We are seeking competent experts to review and advise changes. Additional groundwater monitoring bores have been budgeted for and are in the process of sites being identified for them. We are working with HDC to see if the sites chosen can assist with understanding risks to drinking water supplies. We will also work with other drinking water suppliers to see how our network can be adapted to suit multiple purposes.

3.2. (b) HBRC may not rely on the information submitted by an applicant for a resource consent – HBRC must independently satisfy itself as to any contamination risks (e.g. the risk that water abstraction will draw contaminants into groundwater)

3.2.1. This represents a significant practice change for the sector and the application/need for this will be tested in Stage 2 of the inquiry.

3.3. (c) a more robust consideration of the NES Regulations will be required. On the one hand HBRC will need to have a comprehensive system of template consent assessment forms that mandate consideration of whether the NES Regulations apply and, if so, how. On the other hand, in terms of actual interpretation of the NES Regulations, HBRC will need to conduct thorough investigations, collaborate with a wider range of persons, and treat a drinking water bore as being “upstream” of itself and therefore subject to the NES Regulations

3.3.1. We have updated and improved our process mapping and changed consenting templates to more accurately and consistently reflect the NES requirements. The question about if/how to consider the effect of an activity on itself reflects a significant practice change for the sector and is an example of a matter that we will seek clarification on through Stage 2.

3.4. (d) new clauses relating to the condition of bore heads will be required to be drafted and inserted into new consents to take water, physical monitoring of that condition will need to occur

3.4.1. This work will commence soon. We plan to work across all regional councils, the well drillers and bodies like Irrigation New Zealand and WaterNZ to develop an appropriate approach to this, particularly in light of HBRC’s current consent conditions being the same or similar to those used by other councils. One option being considered is a risk based matrix.

3.5. (e) stricter rules for dealing with uncapped and/or disused bores may be required in the Regional Resource Management Plan

3.5.1. This will form current and future policy reform, including the TANK plan change process

3.6. (f) HBRC will need to implement a programme for physical monitoring of both active and disused bores, which may involve physical monitoring by HBRC itself and/or HBRC placing an obligation on consent holders to submit periodic confirmations that relevant bores are in compliance with conditions of consents that relate to the physical state of the infrastructure

3.6.1. The requirement to monitor bore security has been taken very seriously and is being addressed on two levels. An initial article was circulated in the Irrigation NZ monthly magazine, which is sent to all consent holders who take from ground or surface water describing what is considered to be best practice nationally for bore security. This was published in October 2016. An assessment has since been carried out to establish which bores should be considered to be at highest risk of cross contamination as a result of inadequate bore security. There are around 8000 bores that we are aware of, and it was as a result of the Havelock experience that we chose to target as a priority bore owners within 1000 metres of municipal supply bores. Permits holders are being asked to update information on their bores, confirm they are meeting bore security requirements and to tell us if there are unused or abandoned bores on their property that we do not have records for. If we do not hear from permit holders we will be conducting a site visit at their cost. We envisage that in future this will require significantly greater resourcing and staff. Staff will be bringing either a proposal for the LTP process or if deemed urgent enough a proposal for unbudgeted expenditure.

3.7. (g) and HBRC may need to become more active in deploying its range of enforcement tools in response to uncapped/disused bores and operational bores, especially those that present a risk of contamination (whether localised or more systemic)

3.7.1. See above

3.8. (h) it is possible that the grazing of sheep and other permitted activities will need to be regulated more thoroughly in the HBRC Regional Resource Management Plan

3.8.1. This will be addressed through the TANK and other policy processes.

3.9. (i) HBRC will need to work with HDC and the DHB to put in place a seamless notification process so that those other two organisations are informed when applications for consent are lodged which may have some adverse effect on drinking water or which may otherwise be of interest to HDC and/or the DHB.

3.9.1. We currently have a process whereby HDC Water staff and DHB staff are advised of ALL consents lodged with HBRC. This has been in place for well over a decade. We will be looking to ensure that through the water safety Joint Working Group any consent that may be relevant to drinking water safety is specifically flagged to this group. Issues remain in terms of the potential conflict with regards to notification requirements. These are matters that can be traversed through Stage 2.

Stage 2

4. Staff have engaged resource management experts Dr Phil Mitchell and Stephen Daysh from Mitchell-Daysh to assist with the development of the Stage 2 submission. Given the strong focus of Stage 2 on RMA related matters we have also instructed Michael Holm a very experienced barrister with a wealth of capability in Inquiry processes and RMA matters. Chen Palmer are retained but will not be doing any work during Stage 2.

5. Members of the Executive and the Chair recently met with the Mayor of Hastings and the Hastings District Council Chief Executive and members of his executive. The meeting was a first step towards addressing the concerns of the Inquiry about the relationship between the councils.

6. The meeting was very productive and agreement was reached to work very collaboratively with HDC staff in the development of a joint response and submission to Stage 2, emphasising much closer cooperation and coordination between the organisations in managing drinking water. More recent discussions with the Chief Executive of the HBDHB has expanded the collaboration to include the HBDHB.

7. The proposal is to take a broad and holistic view of the issues that caused the Havelock North incident and look to develop solutions that may not necessarily fit with the current model or convention but provide the best possible solution in future. It may require the development of new tools, processes or legislation.

8. The collaboration on Stage 2 will not preclude each agency submitting on matters that are unique or specific to them.

9. Staff of the three agencies are developing high-level principles and objectives for Stage 2. These will be provided to council for input and confirmation.

10. The Stage 2 hearings are broken into two parts, for the sake of convenience I have called them 2a and 2b.

11. Stage 2a is due to be held in late June (27-29^th) in Hastings. It will, in essence be a continuation of the ‘Issue 8’ matters that involve the ongoing safe supply of drinking water to Havelock North and Hastings. It will also involve partnerships and collaboration between the agencies. Submissions are being called for but evidence is not required. It is anticipated that key staff will need to attend the hearing and answer questions of the Inquiry.

12. Stage 2b issues have been circulated for comment. There were 26 of them proposed by the Inquiry. This may be rationalised in time. At this stage the hearing for Stage 2b is proposed for 7-11 August.

13. It is not proposed that evidence over and above any submission will be required for Stage 2b. The Inquiry has instead asked that a senior participant of each agency be available to speak to the submission and answer questions.

Financial and Resource Impacts

14. This immediate past period has seen virtually no cost associated with the Inquiry.

15. Nonetheless there remains a significant total cost all of which has now been fully invoiced.

16. The costs are detailed in the attached table, Attachment 1. Note that the Investigation has concluded and while those costs are shown, there are no further costs associated with this to come.

17. As stated, Stage 1 is now complete.

18. We anticipate further costs for the development of a submission for Stage 2. These costs will however be significantly less than Stage 1. The use of a shared consultancy means that costs will be shared among the three participating agencies with any unique or specific costs to lay where they fall.

19. Legal counsel time will be minimised given the participation of two very senior and experienced resource management consultants. Nonetheless there will be some legal cost associated with Stages 2a and 2b. All costs will be actively managed to ensure they are kept to as low a level as is reasonable without compromising council’s involvement.

Decision Making Process

21. Staff have assessed the requirements of the Local Government Act 2002 in relation to this item and have concluded that, as this report is for information only, the decision making provisions do not apply.

Recommendations

That Council receives and notes the “Update on Havelock North Water Contamination Inquiry” report.

Authored by:

Iain Maxwell

Group Manager
Resource Management

Approved by:

Liz Lambert

Group Manager
External Relations

James Palmer

Group Manager
Strategic Development

Attachment/s

⇩1

Investigation & Inquiry Costs to Date

HAWKE’S BAY REGIONAL COUNCIL

Wednesday 31 May 2017

SUBJECT: HBRC Staff Work Programme through June 2017

Reason for Report

1. The table below is provided for Councillors’ information, to provide them with an indication of issues and activities of interest over the next couple of months in each area of Council.

Group	Area of Activity	Activity Status Update
External Relations	Communications	1. June monthly focus: coastal marine environment 2. Water Symposium (1-2 June) 3. Billboard – Farm Plan focus, location: Otane 4. National Horticulture Field Day (29 June)
	Transport	5. Regional Transport Committee meeting 9 June, where Regional Land Transport Plan strategic direction will be reviewed. 6. Installation of the new bus ticketing system is commencing in earnest over the next few month, in conjunction with eight other regional councils. The first step is to rewire all the buses, which will be done progressively. The system will go live around May 2018. 7. An electric vehicles promotional plan is under development, after a successful meeting was held with a number of stakeholders in late May.
	Governance	8. Admin associated with submissions hearings and deliberations on 12 June for Annual Plan adoption 28 June. 9. Continued support for adoption of updated Regional Planning Committee and Maori Committee Terms of Reference. 10. Receipt, registration and collation of LGOIMA requests
Resource Management	Hydrology	11. Complete installation of Telemetered recorders in Papanui and Tutaekuri-Waimate streams. Complete routine site visits at all sites. Install backup recorders where necessary. 12. SOURCE modelling of surface water flow and transport of nitrogen will continue during June, to inform the TANK Stakeholder Group. 13. A draft report will be completed during June on the location of springs in Heretaunga Plains, along with flow losses from spring-fed streams to groundwater
Resource Management	Groundwater Science	14. The transient Heretaunga groundwater model has been recalibrated to more accurately simulate observed trends in spring discharges. The groundwater model will then be re-integrated with the SOURCE (surface water) model, for full simulation of groundwater and surface water interaction. 15. The Heretaunga groundwater model is being used to simulate stream depletion scenarios and mitigation options. Augmentation from groundwater to lowland streams is being simulated for the Heretaunga Plains and further results will be presented to TANK stakeholders in June. 16. Development of the Heretaunga groundwater nutrient transport model continues under contract to GNS Science. In June, the model will be calibrated using the NeSI supercomputer cluster. 17. A presentation on the Heretaunga aquifer system will be delivered to the Water Symposium on 1 June. This will include modelling results that have previously been presented to the TANK Stakeholders. 18. GNS have used the HBRC groundwater model to simulate the effects of sea level rise on the groundwater resource. A presentation of results has been proposed for 15 June at HBRC (to be confirmed). 19. A draft report on a region-wide survey of shallow groundwater quality is scheduled to be completed in June.
	Water Quality and Ecology	20. Chasing up macroinvertebrate sampling which summer floods have prevented 21. Preparing Tutira Water Quality Update Report 22. Producing water quality and land management options for TANK stakeholder discussion 23. Preparing lakes and river data for upcoming LAWA update 24. LakeSPI report being reviewed and finalised 25. Maintenance and fill-in planting of shading trial sites being undertaken, along with development of weeping willow pole trial for shading along council maintained Louisa drain 26. Finalising website publishing of Tutira webcameras 27. Appointing senior water quality and ecology technician and finding a replacement junior technician 28. Sandy Haidekker promoted to senior scientist, Heli Wade moved into junior science position 29. US interns arriving to help with monitoring riparian plantings and identifying fish barriers
Resource Management	Marine & Coastal Science	30. Finalising the publication of the National Estuarine Trophic Index Tool (HBRC Championed this project). The online calculators are now available. 31. Completing sediment monitoring of Hawke Bay, which has been delayed by poor weather opportunities. 32. Continuing to support policy through the TANK stakeholder discussions in terms of estuarine health. 33. Replace HAWQi coastal monitoring buoy out to sea after its biennial servicing. 34. Appointing senior water quality and ecology technician and finding a replacement junior technician. 35. Continuing work on the HBMaC group strategy. First draft for July 1. 36. Continuing support to the Napier City Councils stormwater team, and the TANK Stormwater working group.
	Air & Climate Science	37. Roadside air quality monitoring of traffic related pollutants starts in Napier and Hastings in late June and finishes at the end of August. 38. Ambient concentrations of arsenic and lead are being monitored at Marewa Park for a period of one year. Samples collected are sent to GNS for analysis.
	Land Science	39. S-map (new regional soil data base/soil map) continuing into northern area of region. Total regional coverage by June 2018 40. SedNetNZ (Sediment model) continuing coverage in to northern area of region. Total regional coverage by August 2017. 41. Update of nutrient transport model for Mohaka Catchment. 42. Continuing support/advice for TANK stakeholder group. 43. Annual soil quality monitoring report (this year looking at extensive pasture) being reviewed. Available by the end of June. 44. Start investigating critical source areas for phosphorus in Tutira Catchment. 45. Preliminary discussion with LINZ regarding possible regional LiDAR coverage. 46. Land use satellite mapping project across Heretaunga plains and surrounds, report being reviewed. 47. Shelter belt mapping project underway. 48. Quantification of wind erosion severity across plains areas. Project in early stages. 49. Regional wetland inventory continuing. One more year until regional coverage. 50. Regional wetland summary report underway. 51. Regional peat/organic soil characterisation project 52. Critical source area (N&P) investigation in Ahuriri catchment. 53. Regional ecosystem mapping and prioritisation project. 54. Frost flat (northern Mohaka catchment) survey. 55. We welcome replacement resource analyst Jamie Wu to Land Science team.
Strategic Development	RMA Planning	56. Next TANK Collaborative Stakeholder Group meetings scheduled for 14 June and 27 July. 57. Still awaiting announcements from Special Tribunal about its next steps for considering application for the Ngaruroro/Clive Rivers Water Conservation Order. 58. June/July staff reports to RPC likely to cover: a. framework for outstanding waterbodies in HB b. scope of Regional Resource Management Plan effectiveness reporting c. Update on applications made under Marine and Coastal Areas (Takutai Moana) Act for customary recognition d. Overview of recent amendments to the RMA by the Resource Legislation Amendment Act. 59. Environment Court date to be confirmed to hear part of last remaining appeal (by Fish & Game) relating to wetlands in the RRMP and Plan Change 5. 60. Ongoing involvement in HDC District Plan review appeals. 61. Ongoing support to Stage 3 community engagement programme on Clifton to Tangoio Coastal Hazard Management Strategy project as required. 62. Supporting joint working group for drinking water safety, including preparing preliminary ‘white paper’ advice. 63. HBRC Councillor workshop on HPUDS 2016 Review scheduled for 21 June. 64. Strategic Plan review continues – refer to separate item on Council meeting agenda.

Decision Making Process

2. Council is required to make every decision in accordance with the Local Government Act 2002 (the Act). Staff have assessed the requirements in relation to this item and have concluded that as this report is for information only and no decision is required, the decision making requirements of the Act do not apply.

Recommendation

That Council receives the HBRC Staff Work Programme through June 2017 report.

Authored by:

Drew Broadley

Community Engagement and Communications Manager

Dr Andy Hicks

Team Leader - Water Quality and Ecology

Gavin Ide

Manager, Strategy and Policy

Dr Kathleen Kozyniak

Principal Scientist Climate & Air

Dr Barry Lynch

Principal Scientist / Team Leader - Land

Anne Redgrave

Transport Manager

Dr Jeff Smith

Team Leader/Principal Scientist – Hydrology/Hydrogeology

Oliver Wade

Environmental Scientist WQ&E

Thomas Wilding

Senior Scientist

Approved by:

Liz Lambert

Group Manager
External Relations

Iain Maxwell

Group Manager
Resource Management

James Palmer

Group Manager
Strategic Development

Attachment/s

There are no attachments for this report.

HAWKE’S BAY REGIONAL COUNCIL

Wednesday 31 May 2017

SUBJECT: Confirmation of Public Excluded Minutes of the Regional Council meeting held 10 May 2017

That the Council excludes the public from this section of the meeting being Confirmation of Public Excluded Minutes Agenda Item 20 with the general subject of the item to be considered while the public is excluded; the reasons for passing the resolution and the specific grounds under Section 48 (1) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 for the passing of this resolution being:

GENERAL SUBJECT OF THE ITEM TO BE CONSIDERED

REASON FOR PASSING THIS RESOLUTION

GROUNDS UNDER SECTION 48(1) FOR THE PASSING OF THE RESOLUTION

Plan Change 5 Appeal - Confidential Settlement Offer

7(2)(c)(ii) That the public conduct of this agenda item would be likely to result in the disclosure of information where the withholding of that information is necessary to protect information which is subject to an obligation of confidence or which any person has been or could be compelled to provide and would be likely otherwise to damage the public interest

7(2)(g) That the public conduct of this agenda item would be likely to result in the disclosure of information where the withholding of the information is necessary to maintain legal professional privilege

7(2)(i) That the public conduct of this agenda item would be likely to result in the disclosure of information where the withholding of the information is necessary to enable the local authority holding the information to carry out, without prejudice or disadvantage, negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiations)

The Council is specified, in the First Schedule to this Act, as a body to which the Act applies.

Authored by:

Leeanne Hooper

Governance Manager

Approved by:

Liz Lambert

Group Manager
External Relations