Agenda of Regional Council Meeting

	Agenda Item	Action	Person Responsible	Status Comment
1	Minor Items not on the Agenda	LGOIMA response information provided to NKII to be provided to Councillors	E Lambert	Information sent 10 December 2014

Follow-ups from Previous Regional Council Meetings

Attachment 1

LGOIMA Requests Received between 20 November and 10 December 2014

Request Status	Received	Response Due	Request ID	Requested By	Request Summary
Active	10/12/2014	21/01/2015	OIR-14-086	Transparent Hawke's Bay (Pauline Elliott)	1) What entity carries, monitors, and regulates water user agreements? HBRIC; Ruataniwha Limited Partnership; Ruataniwha General Partnership; or something else? 2) Who, or what entity, monitors, manages and regulates consents for water take from the scheme? 3) What volume of water has unconditional, signed agreements for water take? 4) A number of farmers have indicated a commitment (conditional) for 5 years at 10c per m3. What proportion of water volume at this rate, will contribute to the required 40m m3, and what is the impact on projected revenue? 5) Are farmers being offered incentives to sign a water user agreement? 6) What is the cost to taxpayer/ratepayer per year in subsidising irrigation water? (HBRIC Business Case suggests 24c per m3 as peer reviewed by Deloittes) 7) What is the cost to taxpayer/ratepayer per year in subsidising irrigation water? (HBRIC Business Case suggests 24c per m3 as peer reviewed by Deloittes) 8) At what point over the life of the scheme could ratepayers reasonably expect a return on investment? 9) As an investment in economic development, were any alternatives for ratepayers $80million considered before proceeding with feasibility of the dam structure? 10) What is the legal accountability/liability of Regional Councillors and Investment Company Directors for the scheme?
Active	1/12/2014	8/01/2015	OIR-14-085	Kevin Rose	Names of the HBRC Councillors appointed to: 1 Greater Heretaunga Plan Change (TANK) 2 TB free Hawkes Bay Committee 3 HB Sport Council Please advise; from 01 Nov 2013 to 01 Dec. 2014; Number of meetings held by these bodies (& if possible dates) and the attendance record of appointed HBRC Councillors (if possible the dates of the meetings attended) Please advise: From 01 Nov 2013 to 01 Dec 2014 The dates of meetings of the Council's Dairy Liaison Committee Names of Councillors who attended (& dates they attended).
Active	1/12/2014	7/01/2015	OIR-14-084	Joel Benjamin	Info relating to development of RWSS by HBRC/ HBRIC. Specifically: 1) The registered declaration of financial interests of Senior Management and Board Members tasked with developing the Ruataniwha Dam project by HBRC/ HBRIC 2) Records of meetings or communications where potential conflicts of interest associated with developing the Ruataniwha Dam were discussed by HBRC/ HBRIC managers. 3) Internal or external correspondence which details how Dr Andrew Pearce's role as HBRIC Chairman, and as a non-executive director of BNZ could be practically managed, given BNZ are in line to provide project finance to Ruataniwha Dam, and Dr Pearce has a fiduciary duty to BNZ shareholders to maximise shareholder profits. 4) copies of opinion or advice HBRC/HBRIC has obtained re how proposed merger of regional local government in HB may result in the transfer of risk, and or debts from the Ruataniwha Dam project, onto Hawkes Bay rate payers.
Completed	24/11/2041	3/12/2014	OIR-14-083	Marty Sharpe - Dom post	Can you please tell me how many infringement notices, abatement notices and enforcement orders your council has issued in 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013 and in the year to date.

HAWKE’S BAY REGIONAL COUNCIL

Wednesday 17 December 2014

SUBJECT: Affixing of 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 23 DP 6391 CT D4/1433 - Transfer 1.1.2 Lot 18 DP 13039 CT E2/1217 - Transfer	3818 3819	24 November 2014 25 November 2014
1.6	Memorandum of Agreement Part Kakiraawa No 2B Sec 2 X Bock and Section 56-57 Block III Te Mata Survey District CT 349400 (Upgrade of existing stopbank along Awanui Stream to reduce erosion – part Te Aute Road)	3820	26 November 2014
1.7	Staff Warrants 1.2.1 G. Clark (Delegations under Soil Conservation and Rivers Control Act 1941; Resource Management Act 1991; Land Drainage Act 1908; Civil Defence Act 1983 (s.60-64); Civil Defence Emergency Management Act 2002 (s.86-91)and Local Government Act 2002 (s.174)) 1.2.3 K. Muir (Delegations under Biosecurity Act 1993; Civil Defence Act 1983 (s.60-64); Civil Defence Emergency Management Act 2002 (s.86-91)and Local Government Act 2002 (s.174))	3821 3822

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 decisions to be made are not significant under the criteria contained in Council’s adopted policy on significance and that Council can exercise its discretion under Sections 79(1)(a) and 82(3) of the Local Government Act 2002 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 due to the nature and significance of the issue to be considered and decided.

2. Confirms the action to affix the Common Seal.

Diane Wisely

Executive Assistant

Liz Lambert

Chief Executive

Attachment/s

There are no attachments for this report.

HAWKE’S BAY REGIONAL COUNCIL

Wednesday 17 December 2014

Subject: Legal Review of RWSS Water User Agreement

Reason for Report

1. The purpose of this report is to present a legal review of the Water User Agreement document for the Ruataniwha Water Storage Scheme, as prepared by Sainsbury, Logan and Williams for Council.

2. Stuart Webster and Lauren Hibberd of Sainsbury, Logan and Williams will be present at the meeting to answer questions from councillors on their review.

Background

3. In making its decision in June 2014 to invest up to $80million in the Ruataniwha Water Storage Scheme the Council stipulated a number of actions that must occur, including HBRC receiving and being satisfied with its own legal advice on the RWSS documents and all related legal matters.

4. HBRC has previously considered legal reviews of the Concession Deed and the Project Agreement - two key documents that set up the framework for the RWSS and ensure that the public good elements of the RWSS such as the environmental benefits, water access price and asset condition are embedded in the scheme.

5. The Water User Agreement is a legal agreement between the Hawke’s Bay Regional Investment Company Ltd (or its nominee) and any party that wishes to sign up to take water from the Ruataniwha Water Storage Scheme. Copies of the agreement were distributed to councillors in August 2014.

6. HBRC has requested that a review of the Water User Agreement be carried out on behalf of HBRC and questions have been raised by councillors for response from HBRC’s legal adviser.

7. The legal opinion from Sainsbury Logan and Williams is attached as Attachment 1.

Decision Making Process

8. Council is required to make a decision in accordance with the requirements of the Local Government Act 2002 (the Act). Staff have assessed the requirements contained in Part 6 Sub Part 1 of the Act in relation to this item and have concluded the following:

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. Council specifically requested that Council’s legal counsel Stuart Webster carry out the legal review and therefore no other options have been considered.

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

8.6. 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. Agrees that the decision to be made is not significant under the criteria contained in Council’s adopted policy on significance and that Council can exercise its discretion under Sections 79(1)(a) and 82(3) of the Local Government Act 2002 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.

2. Receives, and is satisfied with, the legal review of the Foundation Water User Agreement prepared by Stuart Webster of Sainsbury, Logan and Williams.

Liz Lambert

Chief Executive

Attachment/s

Sainsbury Logan & Williams Legal Review of Foundation Water User Agreement

HAWKE’S BAY REGIONAL COUNCIL

Wednesday 17 December 2014

Subject: Hawke's Bay Regional Planning Committee Bill

Reason for Report

1. The Hawke’s Bay Regional Planning Committee Bill was introduced into Parliament on 5 November 2014, and is open for public submission until 30th January 2015.

2. The purpose of this report is to ascertain whether or not the Hawke’s Bay Regional Council wishes to make a submission to the Select Committee considering the Bill. A copy of the Bill is provided as Attachment 1.

Background

3. The Hawke’s Bay Regional Planning Committee was established as Treaty of Waitangi redress for the Tangata Whenua Groups. These are the Crown recognised mandated groups within the Hawke’s Bay region, mandated for the purpose of negotiating with the Crown for a settlement of claims under the treaty of Waitangi (or their post settlement governance entities). The Committee has an equal number of regional councillors and Tangat Whenua group representatives and is the co-governance model for the management of natural and physical resources in Hawke’s’ Bay.

4. The permanent establishment of the Committee through legislation fulfils an obligation of the Crown to the Tangata Whenua Groups to operate the co-governance model.

5. The drafting of the legislation has been a collaborative process between the Office of Treaty Settlements (and the Crown Law Office), the Tangata Whenua Groups and the Hawke’s Bay Regional Council. It provides for the membership, purpose and functions of the Committee while recognising that the operation of the Committee should be dealt with through Terms of Reference outside the legislation. This allows for flexibility of the parties to amend the Terms of References in relation to matters such as quorums, the basis of voting and other procedural matters subject to the approval of all parties.

6. This collaborative process has resulted in legislation which is supported by the Hawke’s Bay Regional Council and the Tangata Whenua Groups. It would be appropriate for Council to recognise this formally through a submission to the Maori Affairs Select Committee.

Decision Making Process

7. Council is required to make a decision in accordance with the requirements of the Local Government Act 2002 (the Act). Staff have assessed the requirements contained in Part 6 Sub Part 1 of the Act in relation to this item and have concluded the following:

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

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

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

7.4. The persons affected by this decision are the residents of the Hawke’s Bay region.

7.5. Options that have been considered include not making a submission

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

7.7. 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. Lodges a submission to the Maori Affairs Select Committee in support of the Hawke’s Bay Regional Planning Committee Bill.

Liz Lambert

Chief Executive

Attachment/s

Hawke's Bay Regional Planning Committee Bill

HAWKE’S BAY REGIONAL COUNCIL

Wednesday 17 December 2014

SUBJECT: Recommendations from the Environment and Services Committee

Reason for Report

1. The following matters were considered by the Environment and Services Committee on 10 December 2014 and are now presented for consideration and approval.

Decision Making Process

2. These items have been specifically considered at the Committee level.

Recommendations

The Environment and Services Committee recommends that Council:

East Coast LAB Project

2. Agrees to contribute $25,000 (from project 877-2395 (contributions)) toward assisting with the rebranding of the education room at the National Aquarium, including understanding tsunami risk, in collaboration with other partners involved in the mutli-agency East Coast LAB initiative.

Petroleum Exploration Proposed Block Offer 2015

3. Agrees to forward the comments, with suggested amendments as approved by the Environment and Services Committee on 10 December 2014, to New Zealand Petroleum and Minerals on the proposed Block Offer 2015.

Open Spaces - Individual Park Plans

4. Adopts the draft Individual Park Plans for Pekapeka, Pakowhai and Waitangi Regional Parks.

Te Matau A Maui - Cape To City Project

5. Approves the funding of $1.5m, including $300,000 of staff time for project management, over the next five years from existing biosecurity budgets to implement Te Matau A Maui project.

Feral Goat Management

6. Instructs staff to scope out the options and value of a Rule for managing the externality effects of feral goats within the region through the Regional Pest Management Plan review.

Reports Received

7. Notes that the following reports were received at the Environment and Services Committee meeting.

7.1. Works Group Background and Financial Presentation

7.2. Twyford Global Consent Update

7.3. Central Hawke’s Bay Wastewater Treatment

7.4. Long Term and Integrated View of the Hawke's Bay Hill Country

7.5. Statutory Advocacy Update

Mike Adye

Group Manager
Asset Management

Iain Maxwell

Group Manager
Resource Management

Attachment/s

There are no attachments for this report.

HBRIC Ltd December 2014 Update

Attachment 1

HAWKE’S BAY REGIONAL INVESTMENT COMPANY LIMITED (HBRIC Ltd)

Report to Hawke’s Bay Regional Council

17 December 2014

Summary

This report covers the following issues:

· Progress report on each RWSS workstream

· The RWSS work programme through to March 31 2015

· HBRIC Ltd November 2014 Financial Report

RWSS development

Consent Work-stream

The appeals on the BoI final decision on plan change 6 and the RWSS Consent’s were heard by Justice David Collins in the Wellington High Court on November 10-12. Justice Collins indicated that the decision may be out in February or possibly earlier. We like all other parties are awaiting his decision.

The consent application for “tranche two” water was lodged with the Regional Council on November 23^rd. This consent application is for 10 million m3 of water with the application area being northern zone A in the Ruataniwha basin. The consent was lodged after having conducted a formal engagement exercise with the Ruataniwha Water User Group (RWUG). Of significance is that the complexities of accessing this water, providing for supplementation flows and meeting other compliance requirements illustrated to RWUG members the complexities and costs associated with accessing this water. Accordingly the real interest in accessing this water has been muted and there is a general understanding groundwater access is limited across a very large proportion of the Ruataniwha Basin.

EPA Board of Inquiry costs

Post the last budget forecast for the Regional Council we received further unexpected invoices from the EPA for the Tukituki proposal, totalling $156k. This is frustrating after we had been informed on a number of occasions that the billing was up to-date and final. In part the miscommunication reflects on high staff turnover in the EPA, we have dealt with 6 different staff over accounting and billing issues, and in part, that the EPA itself is simply transferring on invoices as they turn up that we have no control over. We have strongly questioned these increases with senior EPA staff and a final invoice of $22k was written off.

We will assess the impact of this issue on the overall financial position once we have clarity on the High Court appeals process.

Design and Construction

This workstream has largely been in a holding pattern with most of the core commercial terms agreed but awaiting financial close. Work has continued on conditional land acquisition transactions associated with both the reservoir and headrace and we expect to have these completed by March. Some of the work has been quite iterative especially in the case of the headrace where alignments have been optimised to meet landowner’s needs within engineering constraints.

Water uptake

Progress in this area is good considering we are still awaiting the consent decision.

We are running the following detailed process

We have built a Client management database built on FMI (Farm management ID) Process

Each property has been allocated a FMI number unique to that property. This means that parties with multiple properties will have a multiple FMI’s, we currently have 322 FMI’s identified above 20 ha in size. The advantage with this process is we are able to capture specific property dates including irrigable area, likely farming system, current and future demand and limiting factors including, topography, land use capability etc.

So far we have visited approximately 2/3rds of these properties and the total potential irrigable area of across the properties within our 5 zones and a few on the margins visited so far is estimated at 28,000 ha. We are running a staged process structured as follows (noting that this has been preceded by the expression of interest phase specific zone by zone meetings).

0 – Opportunity

1 – Individual Visit

2 – Second Visit

3 – Water User Agreement requested by the water user (Information provided)

4 – Final contract terms agreed contract signed by HBRIC Ltd

5 – Agreement with Water User and their Professionals

6 – Signed/Returned

NP – Not progressing

Status as at December 8

Stage 6 – 5.425m

Stage 3 and above – 19.34m

Stage 1 and above – 40.5m

Providing the specific property information and requesting the Contract (stage 3) to be populated is a big step, farmers need to have confirmed their irrigated area and water volume. Farmers are only doing this when they have decided they want to be a water user with all that entails in terms of changes to their farming business which are significant in investment, management, and succession planning terms We are currently focusing on the 40m of water identified and are on track to achieve 25m at stage 3 or above by the end of this month. Whist ensuring we convert the balance early in the New Year we will be focusing on building more properties and irrigable areas into the base of the pipeline ie stage 1 & 2. As we move towards stage 3 we expect the pipeline number will build considerably beyond the 40 million m3 currently reflected. Similarly we will turn more attention to the final stage of the transactions i.e., contract signing in February.

We have been using a consultant (Tony Davoren, Hydroservices) to help farmers understand their irrigated area, infrastructure and volumes required to be a successful irrigator. Tony is regarded as New Zealand’s expert in this field and is therefore in hot demand. This has resulted in the report production has been a constraint to moving the transactions more quickly from stage 2 to 3. We currently have over 5 million m3 of potential water demand sitting in this bracket awaiting the report before progressing.

A few other stats of interest

Approximately 25% of the water at stage 3 and above is “deep water transfers” and we expect the final figure to be at 10 million m3 or slightly above.

Average water use per ha per year is tracking at 3100 m3 per ha but we expect this figure to rise as many water users are hedging on their water demand at this point which is to be expected. Many irrigators are similarly taking the view that they will expand their irrigated footprint in stages. The land-use pattern is following a similar trajectory to the MacFarlane forecast.

Uncertainty around the appeals process is a barrier with some farmers as they would prefer to have the regulatory regime (consents and plan change) confirmed prior to completing a contract.

Of the properties visited some 13 or approx 5% have indicated that they are not proceeding with the reasons either being they are looking to change the property tenure and in a couple of cases simply due to physical constraints associated with irrigation, i.e., property shape etc.

Other water uptake related initiatives

We have met with water users potentially affected by the minimum flow regime under plan change 6 in the lower reaches of the Tukituki to have preliminary discussion about the RWSS opportunity. The next step for irrigators in this situation is to receive information from the HBRC regulatory team providing them with a preliminary assessment of their consent status under PC6. It is only then that they can assess what their water need maybe under the revised minimum flows and what their options are including the RWSS.

We have started to assess additional irrigable area that could be readily serviceable from the RWSS including the Mangatarata basin, Mangamahaki basin and land along the main river corridor which is not overly flood prone. We believe there is approximately 10,000 ha of additional land in these areas noting though the some form of distribution network will be required in the two basins in particular if opened up and that that assessment is top down not ground truthed as yet.

Financing

It was agreed the HBRIC Ltd Board meeting on December 1 that the current level of uptake progress was sufficient to now commence the due diligence and investor selection processes, and that commencing these processes now was also necessary to ensure the ability to reach financial close in a timely fashion (subject to the outcome of High Court appeals)."

The Board has also resolved to re –energise the development of the information memorandum for eligible investors.

All this work is necessary if a March 31 financial close date is to be met noting that there remains some uncertainty due the consent appeals process and timing.

As a consequence the financial close date will be reviewed once we have some clarity on the consent status.

RWSS work programme to March 31

A project plan is attached and is available to be discussed at the meeting.

HBRIC Ltd Financial REPORT

Table 1 sets out the November 2014 Financial Report for HBRIC Ltd.

The report sets out the actual costs incurred for both the month and the year to date against the full year budget to 30 June 2015 (operating) and project budget to 31 March 2015 (RWSS phase 2 development expenditure).

A summary of the key elements outlined in the report for the month of November is as follows:

OPERATING INCOME & EXPENDITURE

There was a total of $33,169 of operating expenditure in the month of November with a breakdown of these costs set out as follows:

- $14,500 for Board Fees for the Chairman and four non-executive Directors.

- $10,599 for Management Services provided by HBRC staff.

- $2,500 for Consultancy Fees which includes taxation services provided in relation to the preparation of the HBRIC Ltd 2014 Income Tax Return as well as fees for the independent RWS Board Committee member for the month of November.

- $5,570 for other expenditure which includes meeting expenses, travel and expenditure for Directors and the independent RWS Board Committee member, and accruals for audit fees and insurance.

DIVIDEND PAID TO HBRC

A dividend of $54,629 was paid by HBRIC Ltd to Council on 20 November 2014 which was an additional dividend for the year ended 30 June 2014.

For the year ended 30 June 2014 the HBRIC Ltd Parent Company made a Net Profit after Tax (NPAT) of $6.608m. Total dividends paid to the shareholder for the same period totaled $6.553m, leaving $54,629 of the 2013/14 NPAT in retained earnings at the end of the financial year.

The 2014 additional dividend of $54,629 was declared and paid in accordance with HBRIC Ltd’s 2014 Statement of Intent which states that HBRIC Ltd will distribute no less than 100% of the Parent Company’s annual NPAT to Council annually by way of dividend.

RWSS PHASE 2 DEVELOPMENT EXPENDITURE

The total RWSS Phase 2 Development Expenditure budget to 31 March 2015 reflects the most recent reforecast budget approved by Council on 27 August 2014.

Details of the expenditure for the month of November are set out below:

RWSS Phase 2 Costs ($248,062)

The $68,935 of HBRC internal staff time for November covers a number of work streams including:

- Ongoing landowner liaison meetings with dam, reservoir and Zone M landowners.

- Ongoing investor negotiations.

- Ongoing negotiations with OHL-Hawkins with respect to condition of contract and Principals requirements.

- Work associated with new consent applications, nutrient modeling and the Tranche 2 groundwater consent.

- Work associated with identifying and quantifying downstream user opportunities.

- Ongoing project management.

$10,952 for Commercial Legal & Tax Advisory services for the month of November.

The $168,175 of Other Consultants costs covers off a number of pieces of work including:

- Various landowner negotiations which includes meeting and negotiating with landowners and receipts of letters of intent.

- Development of phase 3 construction and commissioning work programme for Technical Advisor role.

- Review of construction contract conditions.

- Water contract and sales advisory costs.

- Work associated with new consent applications, nutrient modeling and Tranche 2 groundwater consent.

- Other miscellaneous expenditure including meeting and travel expenses.

EPA Process Costs ($63,318)

The $63,318 of costs for the High Court Appeal includes costs for the RMA Legal Advisors associated with reviewing submissions and summary tables in preparation for the hearing, final preparation for the hearing, attendance at hearing on 10, 11 and 12 November 2014, debriefing meeting with Council staff, and preparation of letter advising hearing outcomes

RWSS Phase 2 Development Expenditure - Actual v Budget

The financial report set out in Table 1 compares the actual costs incurred to November 2014 against the latest project budget which was approved by Council on 27 August 2014.

As at the end of November there are currently two major work streams where actual expenditure has exceeded budget. These are identified as follows:

EPA Board of Inquiry Costs

As set in the previous section of the report there have been costs overruns for the EPA Board of Inquiry Process of $134k over and above the approved budget.

High Court Appeal

As part of the August 2014 budget reforecast an additional budget of $125k was approved by Council for costs associated with the High Court Appeal. This budget amount was provided for on the advice of the RMA Legal Team based on details of the appeals at that time.

Since then there have been a number of issues that have arisen, including the hearing being extended from two to three days, which has resulted in an additional $35k of expenditure being identified. This budget is to be funded on a 50/50 basis between Council and HBRIC Ltd.

HAWKE’S BAY REGIONAL COUNCIL

Wednesday 17 December 2014

SUBJECT: Monthly Work Plan Looking Forward Through January 2015

Reason for Report

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

Group	Area of Activity	Activity Status Update
External Relations		- Development of LTP Consultation document - Coordination of attendance at Wairoa A & P Show
CE’s office		- Continuation of LTP development - Development of LTP Consultation Document
Corporate Services		- Six month financial reporting to January 2015 Council meeting. - Continued preparation of LTP documents for presentation to Council workshop in February 2015 – this includes financial strategy, infrastructure asset strategy, and consultation document.
Civil Defence & Emergency Management	Emergency Readiness & Response Reduction	- Finalise Group Structure and Resourcing Review. - In conjunction with review develop detailed Group Work Programme to implement Group Plan - Commencing a review of the region’s control and coordination facilities including TLA emergency operations centres and Group emergency coordination centre - Planning commenced for East Coast LAB - multi-agency community resilience initiative, with paper go to the 10 December E&S Committee meeting - Commence planning for major Group exercise Nov 2105.
Asset Management & Biosecurity	Coastal Biosecurity	- Coastal strategy development to continue to be progressed, however no meetings of Technical advisory group or governance group planned during January. - Review of tendering and contracting procedures underway. This will be progressed during January.
Resource Management	Science	- The weekly Recreational Water Quality monitoring program continues and will run through to mid‑March - Analysis and report on the ecological health and life supporting capacity of the Karamu Stream to be finalised early in 2015 - Five yearly ‘State of the Environment’ reporting continues, with the summary report substantially complete and the document now being laid out. It is expected to be available in draft form in January 2015. - The Mohaka Catchment characterisation report is being completed in sections and reviewed
Resource Management	Consents	- NCC application for coastal protection structure at Whakareri Ave remains on hold - NCC Thames Tyne stormwater consent application process – 10 submissions received. - TAG application for an oil exploration bore at Boar Hill remains on hold. - Applications from HBRIC, Bostocks and Te Awahohonu Forest Trust (Gwavas Station) for Ruataniwha “tranche 2” water are in process. Additional information has been requested from HBRIC. Others on hold. - Review of Ruataniwha groundwater consents in process. 10 have requested review of annual volumes calculated. - Twyford Global consent application. Raupare in discussion over conditions. Ngaruroro – unconfined aquifer limited notified. - Panpac application to extend their outfall from 440m to 2,000 m off shore due to be limited notified - CHBDC, Waipukurau and Waipawa wastewater treatment consents currently in process.
Strategic Development	Resource Management Planning	- Environment Court hearing took place on 3 and 4 December 2014 on two outstanding appeal points by NKII. No indication was given as to when the decision might be issued. - A Strategy and Planning programme for the 2015-25 LTP has been endorsed by Council through its workshops for the draft LTP. - Work is continuing on PC6 Implementation Plan across Council groups. - The next TANK Group is scheduled for February/March 2015. - Setup phases continuing for project funded by MfE’s Community Environment Fund ($80K) to develop criteria and methodology for the identification of ‘outstanding freshwater bodies’ in the context of the NPSFM2014. - The public meetings on the Draft Regional Biodiversity Strategy were successful with feedback on Draft Strategy due later in the month. - Hastings DC’s district plan hearings will continue into the first quarter of 2015. - Napier CC District Plan Change 10 hearings still have not been scheduled
Strategic Development	Transport	- The draft Regional Public Transport Plan and the Regional Land Transport Plan was released for consultation on 8 December and submissions close on 23 January 2015. A hearing is scheduled on 13 February 2015. - The draft Regional Cycle Plan to be signed off by the governance group by late January, and then forwarded to member organisations for their consideration.
Strategic Development	Economic Development	· Business Hawke’s Bay (BHB) KPI framework to be considered by Council at the Corporate and Strategic meeting in February 2015. BHB will also be reporting back at that meeting. · BHB will be presenting a progress report on the Regional Economic Development Strategy (REDS) refresh to the Intersectoral Forum on Tuesday 16^th December 2014. · Staff are promoting and supporting an initiative to produce a HB Maori Economic Development Strategy – aligned with REDS · Scope use of Te Tumu Paeroa-managed Hereheretau Station for wise land use project in Wairoa. · Monitor progress of Ata Milk market validation study in Wairoa. · As required and where appropriate, support RWSS workstreams.

Decision Making Process

2. Council is required to make a decision in accordance with Part 6 Sub-Part 1, of the Local Government Act 2002 (the Act). Staff have assessed the requirements contained within this section of the Act in relation to this item and have concluded that as this report is for information only and no decision is required in terms of the Local Government Act’s provisions, the decision making procedures set out in the Act do not apply.

Recommendation

1. That Council receives the Monthly Work Plan Looking Forward Through January 2015 report.

Mike Adye

Group Manager
Asset Management

Helen Codlin

Group Manager
Strategic Development

Paul Drury

Group Manager
Corporate Services

Ian Macdonald

Group Manager/Controller Hawke's Bay Civil Defence Emergency Management

Iain Maxwell

Group Manager
Resource Management

Liz Lambert

Chief Executive

Attachment/s

There are no attachments for this report.

Item	Topic	Councillor / Staff
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.