Agenda of Regional Planning Committee - Wednesday, 17 May 2023

Meeting of the Regional Planning Committee

Date: 17 May 2023

Time: 1.00pm

Venue:

Council Chamber

Hawke's Bay Regional Council

159 Dalton Street

NAPIER

Agenda

Item Title Page

1. Welcome/ Karakia/ Apologies

2. Welcome Michelle McIlroy and farewell Api Tapine

Welcome Mana Hazel and farewell Karauna Browns

3. Conflict of Interest Declaration

Decision Items

4. Regional Planning Committee tangata whenua representation on Council’s committees 3

5. Freshwater Management Units 15

Information or Performance Monitoring

6. Cyclone Gabrielle – response, recovery and reviews 21

7. May 2023 Policy Projects update 23

8. Kotahi Plan verbal update

9. May 2023 Statutory Advocacy update 27

Parking

There will be named parking spaces for tangata whenua members in the HBRC car park – entry off Vautier Street.

Regional Planning Committee Members

Name	Represents
Tania Hopmans (Co-chair)	Maungaharuru-Tangitu Trust
Keri Ropiha (Deputy Co-chair)	Heretaunga Tamatea Settlement Trust
Tania Eden	Mana Ahuriri Trust
Mana Hazel	Te Kopere o te Iwi Hineuru
Laura-Margaret Kele	Heretaunga Tamatea Settlement Trust
Nicky Kirikiri	Te Toi Kura o Waikaremoana
Michelle McIlroy	Tātau Tātau o Te Wairoa
Mike Mohi	Ngati Tuwharetoa Hapu Forum
Theresa Thornton	Ngati Pahauwera Development & Tiaki Trusts
Hinewai Ormsby (Co-chair)	Hawke’s Bay Regional Council
Thompson Hokianga (Deputy Co-chair)	Hawke’s Bay Regional Council
Will Foley	Hawke’s Bay Regional Council
Xan Harding	Hawke’s Bay Regional Council
Charles Lambert	Hawke’s Bay Regional Council
Jock Mackintosh	Hawke’s Bay Regional Council
Di Roadley	Hawke’s Bay Regional Council
Martin Williams	Hawke’s Bay Regional Council
Jerf van Beek	Hawke’s Bay Regional Council

Total number of members = 18

Quorum and Voting Entitlements Under the Current Terms of Reference

Quorum (clause (i))

The Quorum for the Regional Planning Committee is 75% of the members of the Committee

At the present time, the quorum is 14 members (physically present in the room).

Voting Entitlement (clause (j))

Best endeavours will be made to achieve decisions on a consensus basis, or failing consensus, the agreement of 80% of the Committee members present and voting will be required. Where voting is required all members of the Committee have full speaking rights and voting entitlements.

Number of Committee members present Number required for 80% support

18 14

17 14

16 13

15 12

14 11

Hawke’s Bay Regional Council

Regional Planning Committee

17 May 2023

Subject: Regional Planning Committee tangata whenua representation on Council’s committees

Reason for Report

1. This item provides the means for the Regional Planning Committee (RPC) to nominate appointed Post Settlement Governance Entity (PSGE) members for appointment to Council’s standing and joint committees to represent tangata whenua views on the issues considered by those committees.

2. This item also provides the means for formalising the appointments of Tania Hopmans as Co-chair and Keri Ropiha as Deputy Co-chair of the Regional Planning Committee.

Executive Summary

3. The Regional Council has invited the RPC to nominate PSGE appointed members as members of:

3.1. the Cyclone Recovery Committee (up to 2)

3.2. the Corporate and Strategic Committee (Keri Ropiha)

3.3. the Climate Action Joint Committee (up to 2 and 1 alternate) established by the five Hawke’s Bay councils.

4. Statute does not allow for the provision of a voting appointment to the Regional Council; however a representative, usually the RPC’s PSGE appointed co-chair, with full speaking rights is normally appointed to attend Council meetings. This appointment could extend to include the Deputy Co-chair attendance when the Co-chair is unable to attend.

5. The Terms of Reference for the above committees are attached to aid members in considering whether they wish to express interest in representing the PSGE appointed members of Committee on a particular committee.

Financial and Resource Implications

6. The remuneration for tangata whenua representatives’ attendance at meetings other than the Regional Planning Committee is currently $452 per meeting plus associated travel costs, paid upon submission of a Travel Claim form.

7. This is considered to be fair and reasonable and is the same remuneration paid to Māori Committee representatives performing the same roles. This per meeting remuneration is in addition to the remuneration paid for the role of tangata whenua Regional Planning Committee member, currently $13,750 per annum.

8. This remuneration is within the budgets provided in the Māori Partnerships cost centre.

Decision Making Process

9. Council and its committees are 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 is not significant under the criteria contained in Council’s adopted Significance and Engagement Policy.

9.4. The decision is not inconsistent with an existing policy or plan, and is within Council’s purview in accordance with:

9.4.1. LGA s81(1) A local authority must (a) establish and maintain processes to provide opportunities for Māori to contribute to the decision-making processes of the local authority, and (b) consider ways in which it may foster the development of Māori capacity to contribute to the decision-making processes of the local authority.

9.5. 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 Hawke’s Bay Regional Council:

1. Receives and considers the Regional Planning Committee Tangata Whenua representation on Council’s committees 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.

3. Nominates the following representatives for appointment:

3.1. Keri Ropiha as a member of the Corporate and Strategic Committee

3.2. Tania Hopmans and Keri Ropiha as members of the Cyclone Recovery Committee

3.3. ______________ and ______________ as members of the Climate Action Joint Committee, and ____________ as alternate.

4. The Regional Planning Committee recommends that Hawke’s Bay Regional Council confirms:

4.1. The appointment of Tania Hopmans to the role of Regional Planning Committee Co-chair.

4.2. The appointment of Keri Ropiha to the role of Regional Planning Committee Deputy Co-chair

4.3. The appointments to the Corporate and Strategic and Cyclone Recovery committees and the Climate Action Joint Committee as detailed in 3. above.

4.4. The appointment of the Regional Planning Committee Co-chair, Tania Hopmans, to the Regional Council with full speaking rights.

Authored by: Approved by:

Leeanne Hooper

Team Leader Governance

Pieri Munro

Te Pou Whakarae

Attachment/s

1 ⇩	Corporate and Strategic Committee Terms of Reference
2 ⇩	Cyclone Recovery Committee Terms of Reference
3 ⇩	Climate Action Joint Committee Terms of Reference

Hawke’s Bay Regional Council

Regional Planning Committee

17 May 2023

Subject: Freshwater Management Units

Reason for Report

1. A decision is sought from the Regional Planning Committee (RPC) in the form of a recommendation to Hawke’s Bay Regional Council, for adoption of the Freshwater Management Units (FMUs) detailed in this agenda item.

Officers’ Recommendations

2. Staff recommend that the Committee considers the information provided and adopts the FMUs as included in this paper as endorsed by the Māori Committee in their February meeting.

Executive Summary

3. This paper reflects the korero around this kaupapa through the All Governors Forum and the related community engagement, and outlines Freshwater Management Units (FMUs) for the region. FMUs are the primary scale for reporting the associated freshwater accounting to central government and implementing the National Objectives Framework (NOF) as required by the National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management 2020 (NPS-FM2020).

4. Regional councils must develop long-term visions for freshwater in their regions and include these as objectives in the Regional Policy Statement. Visions must be set for each FMU, part FMU or catchment level.

5. Although the genesis of the FMU decision lies with the Kotahi project, this decision continues to need to be made under the NPSFM before any associated work can be undertaken. It is also sought in relation to the recovery work that needs to be undertaken.

6. This paper is largely replicated from the paper presented to the Māori Committee on 8 February this year, with updates due to Cyclone Gabrielle.

Background /Discussion

7. This paper follows on from previous discussions at the RPC workshop held on 14 April 2020, the RPC meeting held on 7 July 2021 and the RPC meeting held on 1 September 2021, all of which related to the creation of FMUs as required under the NPS-FM2020 and necessary for the Kotahi plan. The relevant papers and minutes are attached.

8. At the 1 September 2021 RPC meeting a resolution was passed to “defer making a decision on Freshwater Management Units (FMU) boundaries, as recommended by the tangata whenua representatives, to allow staff and tangata whenua time to identify values within the catchments”.

9. Since this time staff have been working with All Governors at a catchment level and have also been engaging the community throughout the region in their communities. What is clear from the engagement is that both tāngata whenua and the wider community favour, relate to and understand the ki uta ki tai approach. People are connected to their wai at place, we have heard they have a multitude of reasons why they value their wai, and they want to know that they can influence the wai now and in the future and be part of how it is cared for and improved. This can only be done through a ki uta ki tai approach to managing the water and the activities on lands which impact the water. This approach also acknowledges that everyone has responsibility for the water at all reaches - not just those in proximity to those waterbodies which are less than healthy. These sentiments have been expressed strongly through our engagement to date with All Governors, tāngata whenua and the wider community, through their values over the past 18 months.

10. Further to this, feedback received through the All-Governors workshops and operational meetings with tangata whenua is that there is substantial identification of values through existing processes such as Treaty Settlements, OWB hearings, Iwi/Hapū Management Plans, Takutai Moana evidence and affidavits, etc. Staff have progressed an inventory of documented cultural values for each catchment, recognising that this does not form a full and complete assessment.

11. This paper was taken to Māori Committee on 8 February 2023 where the committee endorsed the FMUs as outlined below and recommended that Regional Planning Committee adopt them.

12. As at the time of writing there has been no direction provided by central government regarding HBRC’s obligation to give effect to the NPSFM in the wake of Cyclone Gabrielle. Despite any hypothetical relaxing of deadlines FMUs will still need to be defined before any planning work can proceed.

13. It should be noted that other teams within council have recently been seeking clarification around FMUs for the design of recovery programs and associated engagement.

Discussion

14. The NPS-FM2020 requires Hawke’s Bay Regional Council (Council) to identify Freshwater Management Units for the region with every water body included in at least one FMU.

15. Freshwater Management Units is a term to describe a water body or water bodies, and their related catchments, that are used by the Regional Council as a unit for freshwater management and accounting purposes. FMUs are the primary scale for reporting the associated freshwater accounting to Central Government and implementing the National Objectives Framework (NOF).

16. While the FMUs are used to report freshwater accounting to central government as prescribed by the NPS-FM, the FMU delineation does not prevent adding more layers, such as sub FMUs or overlays being applied to manage at a smaller scale, e.g. for mātauranga monitoring.

17. Opportunities for mātauranga monitoring are not restricted by the setting of FMUs and can be developed with tangata whenua at place to respond to their aspirations for their particular wai.

18. Sub-FMUs and overlays can be applied to FMUs to address specific values, needs, or management regimes where needed. This acknowledges that FMUs are only one of the available options for management and monitoring of freshwater in the Hawke’s Bay region.

19. Rules can also be applied to specific waterways within an FMU to provide a targeted management approach and do not necessarily need to apply to the entirety of an FMU. An example of this could be specific rules for low land coastal streams within an FMU.

20. Engagement to date has provided the feedback that tangata whenua and communities are seeking a ki uta ki tai (mountain to sea) approach when dealing with issues in their catchments and that work should be undertaken in a manner that enables a whole of catchment approach.

21. The suggestion was made through TANK submissions to divide each biophysical catchment into three FMUs for the upper, middle, and lower spans of the catchment to reflect hapū boundaries. This approach would result in 33 FMUs. Not only would this require significant financial and staffing resources (as discussed in the Financial and resource implications section of this paper) but would not align with a ki uta ki tai approach mentioned previously. It is for these reasons that it is not recommended this approach is taken.

22. After undertaking community consultation, engaging with tangata whenua and working with the All Governors over the course of the last 18 months, a decision is sought on FMU boundaries for the region to progress work on Kotahi.

23. The following image outlines the recommended FMUs.

Options Assessment

24. A decision is now required to ensure the freshwater component of the Kotahi Plan is progressed and engagement can continue at place in the catchments to ensure 2024 statutory deadline is met.

Financial and Resource Implications

25. There are financial and resource implications in relation to the creation of FMUs. Approximate costs for the establishment of a FMU monitoring site is $150,000 per FMU with ongoing costs of $50,000 per site on the basis of a simple site with a small number of attributes (no more than two) to monitor monthly. The costs for sites will increase as more attributes are added and if higher sampling frequencies are required to assess compliance with targets/limits. Existing State of the Environment monitoring sites will be used to form part of the monitoring for each FMU, additional sites may be needed, again depending on the attribute and the policy requirements. Note that sites generally cannot be started and stopped randomly and that the value of our current data sets comes from the stable long-term nature of the data. If sites are moved then costs increase further as we have to monitor both sites (the old and the new) for a period of time so that we understand the relationships between them and can therefore use the older data sets.

26. Additional monitoring sites are not currently provided for in monitoring budgets and will need to be budgeted for in the 2024-2034 Long Term Plan.

27. There are also resourcing implications in regard to staffing should the number of FMUs increase significantly from the recommendation included in this proposal. The current network is matched to the available staff resource. As the network expands, we would need to recruit Resource Technicians to runs the sites and collect the data, Resource Analysts to review, quality code/quality assure the data and then store it, and Scientists to turn the data into information via reporting.

28. Should the number of FMUs increase beyond what is proposed, this would also require additional Policy, Communications and Engagement, and Māori Partnerships staff to undertake engagement to develop the FMU chapters for Kotahi, as required by the NPS-FM 2020.

Decision Making Process

29. Council and its committees are 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:

29.1. This decision does not significantly alter the service provision or affect a strategic asset, nor is it inconsistent with an existing policy or plan.

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

29.3. This decision is not significant under the criteria contained in Council’s adopted Significance and Engagement Policy however will be subject to public consultation as part of the Kotahi Plan process.

Recommendations

That the Regional Planning Committee:

1. Receives and considers the Freshwater Management Units 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 the Regional Planning Committee can exercise its discretion and make decisions on this issue without conferring directly with the community which will have the opportunity to engage with the Regional Council through the Kotahi Plan process.

3. Recommends that Hawke’s Bay Regional Council adopts the six FMUs for the region as detailed in this report.

Authored by:

Nichola Nicholson

Team Leader Policy & Planning

Approved by:

Ceri Edmonds

Manager Policy & Planning

Attachment/s

There are no attachments for this report.

Hawke’s Bay Regional Council

Regional Planning Committee

17 May 2023

Subject: Cyclone Gabrielle – response, recovery and reviews

Reason for Report

1. This paper provides a brief outline of the verbal update that will be given to the Māori Committee around the work currently being undertaken in the aftermath of Cyclone Gabrielle.

2. Executive Leadership Team - Scene-setting presentation on the event, its impacts on HBRC infrastructure, rural recovery and reviews.

3. Louise McPhail – HBRC Recovery Manager will present the Hawke’s Bay Recovery Framework.

4. Gavin Ide – Principal Advisor Strategic Planning will provide an update on the new Severe Weather Emergency Legislation Act (SWELA) and the Severe Weather Emergency Recovery Legislation Act (SWERLA) which came into force in March and April respectively.

5. Ceri Edmonds – Manager Policy and Planning will outline the work currently being undertaken on proposed mana whenua and community engagement for recovery purposes.

6. The intent of the update is to provide an understanding of the work currently being undertaken by the Regional Council and give an opportunity for any related questions to be raised.

Recommendation

That the Regional Planning Committee receives and notes the Cyclone Gabrielle – response, recovery and reviews staff report.

Authored by:

Ceri Edmonds

Manager Policy & Planning

Louise McPhail

HBRC Recovery Manager

Approved by:

Desiree Cull

Executive Officer to CE

Attachment/s

There are no attachments for this report.

Hawke’s Bay Regional Council

Regional Planning Committee

17 May 2023

Subject: May 2023 Policy Projects update

Reason for Report

1. This report provides an outline and update of the Council’s various resource management projects currently under way.

Resource management policy project update

2. The projects covered in this report are those involving reviews and/or changes under the Resource Management Act to one or more of the following planning documents:

2.1. the Hawke's Bay Regional Resource Management Plan (RRMP)

2.2. the Hawke's Bay Regional Policy Statement (RPS) which is incorporated into the RRMP

2.3. the Hawke's Bay Regional Coastal Environment Plan (RCEP).

3. From time to time, separate reports additional to this one may be presented to the Committee for fuller updates on specific plan change projects.

4. Similar periodical reporting is also presented to the Council as part of the quarterly reporting and end of year Annual Plan reporting requirements.

Decision Making Process

5. 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.

Recommendation

That the Regional Planning Committee receives and notes the May 2023 Policy Projects update staff report.

Authored by:

Mary-Anne Baker

Team Leader Policy & Planning

Approved by:

Ceri Edmonds

Manager Policy & Planning

Attachment/s

1 ⇩

May 2023 RMA projects update

Hawke’s Bay Regional Council

Regional Planning Committee

17 May 2023

Subject: May 2023 Statutory Advocacy update

Reason for Report

1. This item updates the status of reports on proposals forwarded to the Regional Council and assessed by staff acting under delegated authority as part of the Council’s Statutory Advocacy project.

2. The Statutory Advocacy project centres on local resource management-related proposals upon which the Regional Council has an opportunity to make comments or to lodge a submission. These include, but are not limited to:

2.1. resource consent applications publicly notified by a territorial authority

2.2. district plan reviews or district plan changes released by a territorial authority

2.3. private plan change requests publicly notified by a territorial authority

2.4. notices of requirements for designations in district plans

2.5. non-statutory strategies, structure plans, registrations, etc prepared by territorial authorities, government ministries or other agencies involved in resource management.

3. In all cases, the Regional Council is not the decision-maker, applicant nor proponent. In the Statutory Advocacy project, the Regional Council is purely an agency with an opportunity to make comments or lodge submissions on others’ proposals. The Council’s position in relation to such proposals is informed by the Council’s own plans, policies and strategies, plus its land ownership or asset management interests.

4. The summary outlines those proposals that the Council’s Statutory Advocacy project is currently actively engaged in.

Decision Making Process

Recommendation

That the Regional Planning Committee receives and notes the May 2023 Statutory Advocacy update staff report.

Authored by:

Gavin Ide

Principal Advisor Strategic Planning

Nichola Nicholson

Team Leader Policy & Planning

Approved by:

Ceri Edmonds

Manager Policy & Planning