Meeting of the Hawke's Bay Regional Council Maori Committee

Date: Tuesday 30 April 2013

Time: 10.15 am

Venue:

Council Chamber

Hawke's Bay Regional Council

159 Dalton Street

NAPIER

Agenda

Item Subject Page

1. Welcome/Notices/Apologies

2. Conflict of Interest Declarations

3. Short Term Replacements

4. Confirmation of Minutes of the Maori Committee held on 26 February 2013

5. Matters Arising from Minutes of the Maori Committee held on 26 February 2013

6. Call for General Business Items

7. Action Items from Previous Maori Committee Meetings

Decision Items

8. Receiving Hapu Management Plans

Information or Performance Monitoring

9. Update on Current Issues by the General Manager - Operations

10. Statutory Advocacy Update

11. General Business

Please Note - Pre Meeting for Māori Members of the Committee begins at 9 am

1. As building alterations are currently underway on site, access to parking spaces on site is unavailable.

2. Green Parking permits have been included with this agenda to allow you to park in the Napier City Carpark in Vautier Street for the meeting. There is no requirement for you to purchase a ticket from the machine.

3. Please note the instruction on the permit which state the green permit should be placed right side up inside your car windscreen.

HAWKE’S BAY REGIONAL COUNCIL

Maori Committee

Tuesday 30 April 2013

SUBJECT: Short Term Replacements

REASON FOR REPORT:

1. Council has made allowance in the terms of reference of the Committee for short term replacements to be appointed to the Committee where the usual member/s cannot stand.

RECOMMENDATION:

That the Maori Committee agree:

That ______________ be appointed as member/s of the Maori Committee of the Hawke’s Bay Regional Council for the meeting of Tuesday, 30 April 2013 as short term replacements(s) on the Committee for ________________

Viv Moule

Human Resources Manager

Liz Lambert

General Manager (Operations)

Attachment/s

There are no attachments for this report.

HAWKE’S BAY REGIONAL COUNCIL

Maori Committee

Tuesday 30 April 2013

SUBJECT: Action Items from Previous Maori Committee Meetings

Introduction

1. Attachment 1 lists items raised at previous meetings that require actions or follow-ups. All action items indicate who is responsible for each action, when it is expected to be completed and a brief status comment. Once the items have been completed and reported to Council they will be removed from the list.

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 the Maori Committee receives the report “Action Items from Previous Maori Committee Meetings”.

Viv Moule

Human Resources Manager

Liz Lambert

General Manager (Operations)

Attachment/s

1 View

Action items

Action items

Attachment 1

Actions from Maori Committee Meetings

26 February 2013 meeting

	Agenda Item	Action	Person Responsible	Due Date	Status Comment
1.	Action items	Short report outlining Council procedures for Hapū Plan	VM	30 April 2013	Agenda item at this meeting
2.	Naming of Clive River	Ongoing discussion Update	VM/MM	30 April 2013	Update at meeting
3.

HAWKE’S BAY REGIONAL COUNCIL

Maori Committee

Tuesday 30 April 2013

SUBJECT: Receiving Hapu Management Plans

Reason for Report

1. At the February 2013 meeting of the Maori Committee some concern was expressed at the way in which hapu management plans (‘HMPs’) were ‘presented’ to Council, both now and in the future and the way in which Council would deal with the content of the plans.

2. In anticipation that a number hapu groups might intend to prepare HMPs in the future, this paper outlines a proposed process for Council ‘receiving’ any such HMPs. This paper does not deal with how hapu groups themselves might set about preparing their HMPs.

Background

3. Committee members will recall meeting in December 2012 at Kohupatiki Marae where representatives of Ngati Hori presented their own HMP to the Maori Committee. Ngati Kahungunu Iwi Incorporated (‘NKII’) had received and officially endorsed Ngati Hori’s Plan.

4. NKII’s response is important because acceptance or endorsement of any management plan prepared by a hapu group then has clear legal implications for decision-making under the Resource Management Act (RMA). These management plans may also have a bearing on the Council’s broader projects and roles under the Local Government Act.

5. In general terms, HMPs are tools for outlining the aspirations of iwi/hapu that may relate to resource management and local authority planning. There is no prescribed format or content for HMPs, or any requirement for a hapu group to have discussions with local authorities during preparation of a HMP.

6. If the Council were to receive a HMP that had been approved by NKII, then the Council would clearly be expected to consider the HMP for purposes of decision-making under the RMA. The act of Council ‘receiving’ a HMP (with or without NKII’s prior endorsement) would not constitute forming a ‘partnership,’ or being an endorsement or absolute support for the HMP’s content. This is an important issue that needs to be clearly outlined to those submitting HMPs to Council to avoid any confusion of what action Council may or may not take.

7. The term ‘receiving’ a HMP is deliberate. The Council is not being asked to accept or reject the document, instead, simply receive it so the document can be taken into account as part of the Council’s future planning and decision-making.

Proposed Process

8. Firstly, it should be noted that the following discussion on ‘process’ is from the Regional Council’s perspective only. The proposed process outlined below is not intended to override or prevent other agencies (for example, a district council or government department) being presented with, and receiving a HMP in some other manner.

9. The key steps of a proposed process being recommended for a HMP to be ‘received’ by the Regional Council are:

9.1 Hapu group advises HBRC of its intention to lodge a HMP. (NB: this might occur with or without any prior involvement of the Council in preparation of the HMP) and may or may not be endorsed by NKII.

9.2 Staff make arrangements for next practicable meeting of Maori Committee to be on an appropriate marae (i.e. ‘marae X’)

9.3 Hapu representatives present their HMP to meeting of Maori Committee on marae ‘X’

9.4 At next regular meeting of Maori Committee following presentation of HMP, the HMP is further considered by Maori Committee (with any relevant staff comments). Maori Committee recommend that Council ‘receive’ HMP. Additional commentary may be provided regarding merits of HMP content.

9.5 At next regular Council meeting, Council resolve to ‘receive’ HMP.

9.6 After Council officially ‘receives’ HMP, then HMP published on website, circulated to relevant staff and other Council contacts as appropriate.

10 While it could be assumed that presentation of a HMP at a marae indicates a mandate to present on behalf of that hapu this might come into question. Council would look to the Maori Committee for advice on this sensitive issue as it is not considered appropriate for Council to challenge who is mandated. In this respect Council would ‘receive’ the HMP in ‘good faith’.

11 Irrespective of the general process outlined above relating to receiving’ HMPs, the Regional Council, and the Maori Committee too, will need to convey to the hapu that their requests and aspirations expressed in the HMP need to be considered in the wider context of Council’s work programme and commitments. When ‘receiving’ a HMP, Council cannot give an undertaking to guarantee that specific work or resources will be assigned to the requests within the HMP, or carried out within the time frame sought by the hapu. As noted above, those decisions are subject to priorities determined through Annual Plan and Long Term Plan processes.

12 Another issue with HMPs is that they are exactly that, hapu plans. They are not created to specifically meet the needs of the Regional Council (or any other agency for that matter). While HMPs are something that Council might consider when making decisions, it is not considered appropriate for Council to determine or question the content other than to clarify when appropriate. Council can provide assistance if asked but should not take action that could be viewed as damaging the mana of the hapu work.

13 There is a commitment to maintain dialogue to work through the issues to try to find a way to achieve results that meet both Council and hapu needs.

Recommendations

The Maori Committee recommends that Council:

1. In relation to ‘receiving’ hapu management plans (‘HMP’), follows a process with the following key steps:

1.1 Hapu group advises the Regional Council of its intention to lodge a HMP

1.2 Staff make arrangements for next practicable meeting of Maori Committee to be on an appropriate marae

1.3 Hapu representatives present their HMP to meeting of Maori Committee on marae

1.4 At the next regular meeting of Maori Committee following presentation of HMP, HMP is further considered by Maori Committee (with any relevant staff comments). Maori Committee recommend that Council ‘receive’ HMP. Additional commentary may be provided regarding merits of HMP content.

1.5 At the next regular Council meeting, Council consider ‘receiving’ HMP.

1.6 After Council officially ‘receives’ HMP, then HMP published on website, circulated to relevant staff and other Council contacts as appropriate.

Viv Moule

Human Resources Manager

Gavin Ide

Team Leader Policy

Liz Lambert

General Manager (Operations)

Attachment/s

There are no attachments for this report.

HAWKE’S BAY REGIONAL COUNCIL

Maori Committee

Tuesday 30 April 2013

SUBJECT: Statutory Advocacy Update

Reason for Report

1. This paper 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 between 1 February 2013 to 31 March 2013.

2. The Statutory Advocacy project (‘Project 192’) centres on 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 plus accompanying map outlines those proposals that the Council’s Statutory Advocacy project is currently actively engaged in.

Decision Making Process

5. 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 to be made, the decision making provisions of the Local Government Act 2002 do not apply.

Recommendation

1. That the Maori Committee receives the Statutory Advocacy Update report.

Esther-Amy Bate

Planner

Helen Codlin

Group Manager Strategic Development

Attachment/s

1 View	Statutory Advocacy Update
2 View	Statutory Advocacy Map

Statutory Advocacy Update

Attachment 1

Statutory Advocacy Update (as at 31 March 2013)

Received	TLA	Map Ref	Activity	Applicant/ Agency	Status	Current Situation
14 February 2013	NCC	4	Resource Consent – Subdivision The application seeks to subdivide and develop an existing site to create a mix of 17 residential lots and 2 lots to be vested as roads on Oak Road, Poraiti, Napier.	Silverhill Trustees Ltd Consultant – Consult Plus Ltd	Notified by NCC Restricted Discretionary	31 March 2013 · Submission period closed 15 March 2013. · Submission lodged by Council opposes the application due to concerns regarding the site coverage and stormwater solutions proposed by the applicant.
12 August 2011	NCC	3	Proposed Plan Change 7 – Jervoistown The purpose of the plan change is to create a new zone with new policies and rules for Jervoistown. The plan change seeks to counteract the effects of adhoc development within Jervoistown.	NCC	Notified by NCC	31 March 2013 · Napier City Council declared Change 7 to become operativ e from 25 March 2013.
24 May 2010	NCC	2	Resource Consent - Subdivision The application seeks to subdivide an area of land currently zoned as Main Rural on 66 Franklin Road, Bay View into 6 lots and undertake earthworks.	Brian Nicholls	Notified by NCC Restricted Discretionary (hearing pending)	31 March 2013 · No further update. Pending hearing by NCC. · Previously HBRC lodged a submission opposing proposal unless all 6 lots were fully serviced. HBRC staff have had discussions since lodging submission with NCC and applicant. Discussions focused on stormwater and wastewater design options for the proposed subdivision.
23 August 2010	NCC	1	Resource Consent – Subdivision The application seeks to subdivide 58 McElwee Street, Jervoistown Certificate of Tile HBM2/1351 into two separate lots.	Mr B. Joseph Consultant – Consult Plus Ltd	Notified by NCC Restricted Discretionary (subject to appeal)	31 March 2013 · No further update. Application on hold pending hearing by NCC re Plan Change 7. · Previously HBRC lodged submission opposing proposal. NCC declined consent and applicant appealed NCC’s decision. HBRC joined appeal proceedings as an interested party. HBRC’s interests primarily relate to stormwater management and disposal.

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