Agenda of Regional Council Meeting

	Agenda Item	Action	Person Responsible	Due Date	Status Comment
1.	Ruataniwha Plains Water Storage Project	Regular updates on milestones achieved	AN/ GH	ongoing
2.	RMA Delegations	Central ‘delegations register’ to be developed	IM/AN		Under development
3.	Recommendations from the Corporate & Strategic Committee	Investigate inclusion of Oil & Gas Exploration on the list of risks to Council	MA
4.	General Business	Staff to provide Councillors with policy and/or rules relating to discharge of chemicals into waterways.	HC/IM

HAWKE’S BAY REGIONAL COUNCIL

Wednesday 27 June 2012

SUBJECT: Affixing of Common Seal

Comment

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 458

DP 2451

CT P4/587

- Agreement for Sale and Purchase

(discount 17.5% resides at property)

- Transfer

1.1.2 Lot 29

DP 13693

CT F2/1291

- Transfer

1.1.3 Lot 40

DP 6391

CT E2/1454

- Transfer

1.1.4 Lot 158

DP 6598

CT C2/359

- Agreement for Sale and Purchase

(discount 17.5% resides at property)

- Transfer

1.1.5 Lot 132

DP 11103

CT B2/1278

- Agreement for Sale and Purchase

(discount 10% landlord)

- Transfer

1.1.6 Lot 277

DP 107765

CT 211860

- Transfer

1.1.7 Lot 78

DP 13096

CT E3/518

- Agreement for Sale and Purchase

(discount 17.5% resides at property)

- Transfer

1.1.8 Lot 4

DP 11626

CT C2/598

- Transfer

1.1.9 Lot 3

DP 14665

CT G3/320

- Transfer

1.1.10 Lot 1

DP 11826

CT L2/1118

- Agreement for Sale and Purchase

(discount 17.5% resides at property)

- Transfer

1.1.11 Lot 42

DP 7201

CT B4/943

- Agreement for Sale and Purchase

(cross-lease 1 x 10% discount landlord and 1 x 17.5% discount resides at property)

- Transfer

1.1.12 Lot 40

DP 14224

CT F4/1487

- Agreement for Sale and Purchase

(discount 17.5% resides at property)

- Transfer

1.1.13 Lot 180

DP 6598

CT C2/366

- Agreement for Sale and Purchase

(cross-lease 1 x 10% discount landlord and 1 x 17.5% discount resides at property)

- Transfer

1.1.14 Lot 107

DP 13039

CT E2/1250

- Agreement for Sale and Purchase

(discount 10% landlord)

1.1.15 Lot 62

DP 10477

CT E2/397

- Agreement for Sale and Purchase

(discount 17.5% resides at property)

- Transfer

1.1.16 Lot 7

DP 14447

CT G2/653

- Agreement for Sale and Purchase

(discount 17.5% resides at property)

- Transfer

1.1.17 Lot 1

DP 14614

CT G2/1407

- Agreement for Sale and Purchase

(discount 17.5% resides at property)

- Transfer

1.1.18 Lot 2

DP 11321

CT B4/336

- Agreement for Sale and Purchase

(discount 17.5% resides at property)

- Transfer

1.1.19 Lot 84

DP 12780

CT E1/746

- Agreement for Sale and Purchase

(discount 17.5% resides at property)

- Transfer

1.1.20 Lot 178

DP 10912

CT D4/929

- Agreement for Sale and Purchase

(discount 17.5% resides at property)

1.1.21 Lot 196

DP 8434

CT C2/631

- Agreement for Sale and Purchase

(cross-lease 1 x 10% discount landlord and 2 x 17.5% discount resides at property)

1.1.22 Lot 144

DP 2172

CT 55/192

- Transfer

1.1.23 Lot 1

DP 18973

CT L2/234

- Agreement for Sale and Purchase

(discount 17.5% resides at property)

1.1.24 Lot 161

DP 13096

CT E3/533

- Agreement for Sale and Purchase

(discount 17.5% resides at property)

1.1.25 Lot 133

DP 13096

CT E3/529

- Agreement for Sale and Purchase

(discount 17.5% resides at property)

1.1.26 Lot 33

DP 10513

CT D2/1140

- Transfer

1.1.27 Lot 71

DP 2172

CT 56/251

- Transfer

1.1.28 Lot 10

DP 9950

CT 178/33

- Agreement for Sale and Purchase

(discount 17.5% resides at property)

1.1.29 Lot 10

DP 4221

CT C2/403

- Transfer

1.1.30 Lot 44

DP 14448

CT G2/680

- Agreement for Sale and Purchase

(discount 17.5% resides at property)

1.1.31 Lot 16

DP 1311

CT E3/556

- Agreement for Sale and Purchase

(cross-lease 1 x 10% discount landlord and 2 x 17.5% discount resides at property)

1.1.32 Lot 2

DP 15804

CT H3/322

- Agreement for Sale and Purchase

(discount 17.5% resides at property)

- Transfer

1.1.33 Lot 140

DP 6598

CT C2/322

- Transfer

1.1.34 Lot 110

DP 13039

CT E2/1251

- Transfer

1.1.35 Lot 17

DP 12780

CT E1/739

- Transfer

1.1.36 Lot 127

DP 14452

CT G2/763

- Agreement for Sale and Purchase

(discount 17.5% resides at property)

3370

3396

3371

3372

3373

3403

3374

3415

3375

3376

3418

3377

3378

3379

3380

3381

3382

3383

3384

3385

3409

3386

3388

3406

3389

3417

3390

3402

3391

3419

3392

3413

3393

3394

3395

3397

3398

3399

3400

3401

3404

3405

3407

3408

3410

3411

3412

3414

3416

3420

25 May 2012

7 June 2012

25 May 2012

28 May 2012

12 June 2012

28 May 2012

21 June 2012

30 May 2012

21 June 2012

30 May 2012

14 June 2012

30 May 2012

31 May 2012

13 June 2012

31 May 2012

21 June 2012

31 May 2012

12 June 2012

5 June 2012

21 June 2012

5 June 2012

14 June 2012

5 June 2012

7 June 2012

8 June 2012

11 June 2012

12 June 2012

13 June 2012

12 June 2012

13 June 2012

14 June 2012

18 June 2012

21 June 2012

1.2

Proposal Submission

for PS103 County Pumping Station

Renewal of Pumphouse Building

Contract No: 12-10-4326

3387

30 May 2012

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

Andrew Newman

Chief Executive

Attachment/s

There are no attachments for this report.

HAWKE’S BAY REGIONAL COUNCIL

Wednesday 27 June 2012

SUBJECT: Adoption of the Regional Land Transport Strategy, incorporating the Regional Land Transport Programme

Reason for Report

1. This report seeks the adoption of the Regional Land Transport Strategy (RLTS) 2012-2042, incorporating the Regional Land Transport Programme (RLTP) 2012-15 by the Hawke’s Bay Regional Council.

Background

2. Section 74 of the Land Transport Management Act (LTMA) requires that, at least once in every six financial years, the Regional Council must ensure that the relevant Regional Transport Committee (RTC) prepares, on the Regional Council’s behalf, a Regional Land Transport Strategy (RLTS) that covers a period of at least 30 financial years; and the Regional Council must approve that strategy. Further, section 13 of the LTMA specifies that, every three financial years, the Regional Council must ensure that the relevant RTC prepares, on the Regional Council’s behalf, a Regional Land Transport Programme (RLTP).

3. The LTMA has very specific requirements about what is to be included in the RLTS, one key requirement being a statement provided by an independent auditor of how the process followed by the RTC complied with the requirements of the LTMA. The RLTP is not subject to this provision.

RLTS/RLTP Development Process

4. The current Regional Land Transport Strategy was adopted in 2008 and was required to be reviewed in 2011, but an extension of time was requested and granted by the New Zealand Transport Agency (NZTA). It was decided that the Regional Land Transport Strategy would be reviewed and consulted on with the draft 2012-15 Regional Land Transport Programme and produced as one document, Part One being the RLTS and Part Two the RLTP.

5. The RLTS identifies what is needed in our region to achieve an affordable, integrated, safe, responsive and environmentally sustainable land transport system, now and in the future and sets out a framework for our transport network. It focuses on the strategic transportation needs of the Region, looking out over a period of the next 30 years.

6. The purpose of the RLTP is to seek funding from the National Land Transport Programme (NLTP) and forms the basis of a programme of works through which Approved Organisations (AOs) in Hawke’s Bay are able to request funding subsidy from NZTA.

7. Over the past year the RTC have considered and agreed the content of the RLTS and RLTP. Regular workshops and meetings were held and the Transport Advisory Group (TAG – which consists of members of Territorial Authorities, HBRC and NZTA) gave advice to the RTC on the document, in particular the 2012-15 programme.

8. The two major transportation studies undertaken in the last three years (Wider Region Transportation Study and the Heretaunga Plains Transportation Study) have been key documents that have informed both the RLTS and RLTP. Executive summaries from these studies are attached Councillor’s information, see Attachment 2. It is intended that at a later meeting, and when time permits, that a presentation will be made to the Council on the Heretaunga Plains Transportation Study.

9. The draft RLTS/RLTP and summary of information were available from 1 May 2012 and submissions closed on 31 May 2012. Public notices were placed in Hawke’s Bay Today and community papers around the region; one week prior to submissions closing a reminder advertisement was placed in the same newspapers.

Submissions

10. A total of 30 submissions were received; of which 15 indicated they wished to present their submission verbally. Verbal submissions were heard by the RTC on Friday, 8 June. Once all submitters had been heard the RTC deliberated on all submissions received.

11. The majority of submissions lodged supported the content and endorsed the direction of the RLTS and RLTP as notified. Key themes from the submissions which sought changes were:

11.1. making provision for the development of additional High Productivity Motor Vehicle (HPMV) routes in the medium term programme

11.2. making stronger reference to the uncertainty surrounding the ongoing future of the Napier to Gisborne section of the Palmerston North – Gisborne Line (PNGL) and identifying an advocacy role for the Regional Transport Committee in support of retaining the line in response to this issue

11.3. extending the discussion contained in the RLTS surrounding the uncertainties relating to the supply and cost of oil based fuels for transport

11.4. inclusion of a reference to “equity” and the impacts this has in terms of peoples mobility and ability to access work, personal services and recreational opportunities

11.5. identifying more clearly the current and future role of tourism within our region.

12. To reflect the submissions, a number of changes were made to the RLTS.

13. A copy of the printer’s proof of the final RLTS/RLTP is provided to Councillors, see Attachment 1.

14. The final RLTS is now being reviewed by Council’s Auditor and his advice will be tabled at the meeting.

15. The final Regional Land Transport Programme, which is the request for funding from the Government’s National Land Transport Programme, must be submitted by 30 June 2012.

16. The next steps and key milestones are outlined below for Council’s information.

22 June 2012	RTC approves final RLTS/RLTP for adoption by Hawke’s Bay Regional Council
27 June 2012	Hawke’s Bay Regional Council adopts the RLTS/RLTP
30 June 2012	Final RLTP is submitted to NZTA (via their online programme)
30 August 2012	New Zealand Transport Agency releases the National Land Transport Programme

17. The Regional Transport Committee will be considering the endorsement of the RLTS/RLTP at their meeting on Friday, 22 June. Any changes from that meeting will be advised to the Council at the meeting.

18. The final RLTS/RLTP is now presented to the Hawke’s Bay Regional Council for adoption.

19. Once the document has been adopted it will be printed and distributed to key stakeholders and interested parties, including submitters, within one month.

Decision Making Process

20. The Committee 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 within this section of the Act in relation to this item and concluded that the Regional Land Transport Strategy, incorporating the Regional Land Transport Programme must use a special consultative procedure as set out in section 83 of the Act when adopting this RLTS.

Recommendations

That Council:

2. Adopts, on the recommendation of the Regional Transport Committee, the Regional Land Transport Strategy 2012-2042, incorporating the Regional Land Transport Programme 2012-15, and notes that the RLTP will be submitted to NZTA by 30 June 2012.

Carol Gilbertson

Transport Manager

Attachment/s

1	Attachment 1 - RLTS/RLTP		Under Separate Cover
2 View	Attachment 2 - Executive Summaries - WRTS and HPTS

HAWKE’S BAY REGIONAL COUNCIL

Wednesday 27 June 2012

SUBJECT: Additional Funding for Prosperity Study

Reason for Report

1. At its meeting on 29 February 2012 Council resolved the following.

A Study on Improving the Social and Economic Performance of Hawke's Bay

That Council:

2. Adopts the terms of reference as amended, for a study on improving the social and economic performance of Hawke’s Bay.

3. Delegates to the chair and mayors, appointment of the lead consultant.

4. Obtains a budget estimate for the study from the lead consultant once appointed.

5. Agrees that funding for the balance of the 2011-12 financial year be drawn for the project provision for Local Government efficiency studies and that if required additional provision be made for the 2012-13 financial year.

Kirton/Scott

CARRIED

2. The purpose of this report is to present the study brief and requirement for additional funding provision for the 2012/13 year for adoption by Council.

Financial and Resource Implications

3. Through the Long-Term Plan process Council has provisionally approved new expenditure in project 840-013 of $60,000 for 2012/13 to provide funding for the completion of the Hawke’s Bay Social and Economic Study subject to approval of the study at the 27 June 2012 Council meeting.

4. These funds would be sourced from general funding.

Discussion

5. The ‘Study on Improving the Social and Economic Performance of Hawke’s Bay’ is being undertaken on behalf of the region’s five councils, and is being funded by the Hawke’s Bay Regional Council. The Terms of Reference for the Study were adopted by the Joint Group overseeing the development of the study (HBRC Chair and CEO, TA Mayors and CEOs) in April 2012. The Terms of Reference are appended to this paper as Attachment 1.

6. At the same meeting of the Joint Group it was agreed that Hawke’s Bay Regional Council would fund the Study in its entirety, and would assume responsibility for the management of a contract to deliver the Study.

7. McGredy Winder & Co has been appointed to undertake the Study and has brought together a multi-disciplinary team for this purpose. They have submitted a refined proposal setting out the proposed scope of the work and an indicative costing for the work.

8. The full proposal is annexed as Attachment 2.

9. The key elements of the Study are in two phases: a situation analysis and identification phase, and a ‘solutions’ phase. The identification of possible solutions in the Situation Analysis phase will enable the consultants to work with the Joint Group to agree the solutions that should be carried forward for full consideration.

10. McGredy Winder and Co has commenced Stage 2 of the Study and is in Hawke’s Bay this week carrying out interviews with stakeholders. It is anticipated that Stage 2 will be completed by the end of July and the full study completed by 28 September 2012.

11. A summary of the total costs, as identified in the final Proposal, is as follows.

11.1. Stage 1 no charge

11.2. Stage 2 $60,000 fixed price

11.3. Stage 3 no charge

11.4. Stage 4 $40,000 indicative (but will be finalised as part of Stage 3)

12. This represents a total cost of $100,000 for the Study. Of this amount $40,000 was previously made available by Council and a further $60,000 is required. Council has made preliminary provision in the Long-Term Plan budget for 2012/13 for this amount and this is now required to be confirmed.

Decision Making Process

13. 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:

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

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

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

13.4. The persons affected by this decision are all ratepayers in the region

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

13.6. 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:

2. Confirms the provision of $60,000 in the 2012/13 to fund the completion of the Study on Improving the Social and Economic Performance of Hawke’s Bay.

3. Approves the Study Proposal, as detailed in the letter from the consultants dated 1 June 2012.

Liz Lambert

Group Manager

External Relations

Andrew Newman

Chief Executive

Attachment/s

1 View	Terms of Reference approved by Joint Group
2 View	Finalised Study Proposal 1 June 2012

HAWKE’S BAY REGIONAL COUNCIL

Wednesday 27 June 2012

SUBJECT: Adoption of the 2012-22 Long Term Plan

Reason for Report

1. The purpose of this paper is to set out for Council the final amendments to be made to the 2012-22 Long Term Plan (LTP) and to set out the resolutions required by Council to formally adopt this Plan which, as required by the Local Government Act 2002, is to be adopted no later than 30 June 2012.

Comment

Consultation

2. During the Council meetings on 11, 12, 13 & 14 June 2012 Council considered 583 written submissions and considered presentations from 166 submitters who verbally submitted their submissions.

3. Subsequent to the adoption of this Plan, it is the intention to write to submitters setting out Council’s resolutions in response to the items each submitter raised.

Plan Changes in Response to Internal/External Submissions

4. Amendments have been made to the draft LTP to reflect the resolutions made at the abovementioned Council meetings to reflect issues raised in both the internal and external submissions.

5. A number of resolutions adopted by Council at those meetings covered the issues raised in the Right Debate Section of the draft LTP as the majority of issues to be consulted on were included under the topics raised in the Right Debate section of the LTP. The final LTP now includes under each Right Debate topic, the outcomes from consultation.

Final 10 Year Plan Financials

6. The financial impacts of the changes made by Council through the external and internal submission process to the draft LTP have now been included in the Plan financials to provide figures for the final LTP. The attachments to this paper show the effect of these changes:

Attachment 1: Reconciling the underlying deficit/surplus from the draft LTP adopted on 21 March 2012 to the final deficit/surplus in the final LTP.

Attachment 2: Analysis to show that the adjustments made to the budgets by Council are consistent with the objective of ensuring that cash operating balances remain at $4m for the term of the LTP.

Final LTP – Printer’s Proof and Audit Process

7. Under Section 94 of the Local Government Act 2002 both the draft LTP and the final LTP are subject to audit. Prior to Council adopting the draft 2012-22 LTP on 21 March 2012, a letter was tabled at that meeting which provided to Council an audit clearance of the Plan.

8. The requirements of Audit New Zealand for their audit of the final LTP stated the following matters were to be addressed:

8.1. To confirm whether Council’s consultation process complies with its legislative obligations.

8.2. To identify any significant matters arising that may impact on the final LTP.

8.3. To review changes and consider their linkage to the consultation process, assess the reasonableness of how these changes have been incorporated into the final LTP document, and to assess the consistency of the underlying policies and assumptions contained in the final LTP.

8.4. To review the clerical accuracy of the final LTP and to ensure internal consistency of the final document.

8.5. To ensure that all relevant legislative requirements have been complied with.

8.6. To assess the potential impact of any changes made to the draft LTP on the wording of their audit opinion on the final LTP.

9. Information has already been sent to Audit New Zealand on the policies and procedures adopted by Council for the consultation process for the draft LTP. Further, they have worked through the adjustments made to the Draft Plan with Council staff, both from a financial and wording perspective. They have also been provided with a copy of the final printers’ proof of the LTP.

10. The audit clearance from Audit New Zealand for the final LTP will be available for tabling at this Council meeting.

11. A copy of the final printers’ proof of the LTP is circulated with this paper for Councillors. This Plan is still being proofread and grammar/spelling and other adjustments may be made.

12. The production and printing of the final LTP will commence immediately after approval at this Council Meeting. Under the Local Government Act 2002, the final LTP must be sent out no later than one month after Council’s formal approval. It is envisaged that this Plan will be completed over the next few weeks and sent out by mid July 2012.

Decision Making Process

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

13.1. Special consultative procedure is required by sections 83 & 84 of the Act and this process has been completed.

13.2. The Council has a statutory obligation to adopt a Long Term Plan under Section 93 of the Act.

13.3. The persons affected by the Long Term Plan have been consulted and a final decision is to be made at this Council meeting covering those issues raised by those members of the community that have submitted to the Council on the draft Long Term Plan.

Recommendations

That Council:

1. Agrees the decision is to be made under Section 93 of the Act which specifies the adoption of the Long Term Plan, and also under sections 83 & 84 requiring a special consultative process which includes consideration of submissions on the Plan from members of the community, and that this process has been undertaken.

2. Agrees to fund the underlying deficits in the years where the deficits are shown in the Plan, from cash operating balances which are estimated to be at a level which is sufficient to provide such funding.

3. Adopts the following resolutions pursuant to Section 12 of the Local Government Act 2002:

3.1. Council raises a loan or loans or facilitate loan funding through banks to fund the borrowing set out in the 2012-22 LTP for the purposes of funding clean heat/ insulation/solar hot water advances to householders, flood and drainage schemes, public good capital assets, systems integration programme, building extensions and investment assets. These loans to be drawn down when required to fund the approved capital programmes.

3.2. Council delegates to the Chief Executive, authority to negotiate and agree on the terms of the loan including:

3.2.1. Any future financing needs within the overall terms of borrowing, the interest rate payable by Council.

3.2.2. The frequency of interest payments.

3.2.3. The timing of drawdown.

3.2.4. The institution(s) who will provide the loans.

3.2.5. The number of loans which will make up the borrowing.

3.2.6. All other terms and conditions of such loans and facilities as may be necessary in obtaining such loans and facilities in accordance with the Council’s Liability Management policy to execute any agreements, documents, and certificates in respect of such loans and facilities on behalf of Council.

3.3. Adopts the audited 2012-22 LTP, in accordance with Section 93 of the Local Government Act 2002, being the audited draft LTP issued for public consultation and amended:

3.3.1. By Council at the meetings held on 11, 12, 13 & 14 June 2012.

3.3.2. By Council at its meeting on 27 June 2012.

3.4. Approves, in accordance with sections 83 and 150 of the Local Government Act 2002, the resource consent and user charges as adopted in Part 4 on pages 51 - 60 of the draft LTP issued for public consultation and amended by Council at its meetings on 11, 12, 13 & 14 June 2012, and today, 27 June 2012.

3.5. Instructs staff to make any necessary final amendments to the LTP 2012-22 to reflect the changes agreed at the meetings on 11, 12, 13 & 14 June 2012, and today, 27 June 2012, and then to issue the published Plan in its final form.

3.6. Amends the Policy Handbook, Section 1.1.2 – Long Term Planning to read:

“That the Council adopt the 2012-22 Long Term Plan being the draft Long Term Plan issued for public consultation and as amended:

- By Council at the meetings held on 11, 12, 13 & 14 June 2012.

- By Council at its meeting on 27 June 2012.”

Paul Drury

Group Manager

Corporate Services

Andrew Newman

Chief Executive

Attachment/s

1 View	Underlying Surplus - Deficit
2 View	Cash Operating Balances

HAWKE’S BAY REGIONAL COUNCIL

Wednesday 27 June 2012

SUBJECT: Makara Dam

Reason for Report

1. This report is to update Councillors on work being undertaken following the identification of a failure in the No 1 dam, to seek endorsement of the decisions made to date and the ongoing work programme.

Background

2. A failure has been identified in the Makara No 1 dam as a result of corrosion in the discharge pipe under the dam. The dam is the largest of 5 flood detention dams that form part of the Upper Makara Flood Control Scheme. The dams were constructed in the early 1980’s to protect the Makara Valley including Elsthorpe Village from frequent flooding. The Makara No 1 dam has a galvanized steel discharge pipe. All other dams have concrete discharge pipes.

3. The dam is classed as a high potential impact dam under the New Zealand Society on Large Dams (NZSOLD) Dam Safety Guidelines as there are between 1 and 10 people residing below the dam, and therefore are at risk should the dam fail.

4. Over the past several months staff have met with ratepayers to the Makara Scheme on a number of occasions. Two key issues were the focus of those discussions:

4.1. Repair of the pipe under the No 1 dam. A small slump occurred in the access track across the downstream end of the pipe following the April 2011 storm. This was repaired, but it was acknowledged that the discharge pipe was at the end of its useful life and would need to be repaired or replaced in the near future. Options were being developed and costed to enable the options and funding to be discussed with the community.

4.2. Siltation of the dam ponding area. Since the dam was constructed approximately 160,000m3 of silt has built up in the ponding area taking up approximately 20% of the volume of the ponding area and reducing the effectiveness of the dam. Options for improving the effectiveness of the dam were being considered and costed for discussion with the community.

5. The approach taken to repair the failure will need to take both of these issues into account.

6. The failure has most probably resulted from when the discharge was flowing full as it did in April 2011 and again in January 2012. It appears that turbulence caused fill material from around the pipe to be sucked out, which made a void around the outside of the pipe. The top face of the dam has subsequently given way and dropped down into the cavity, creating a sinkhole at the dam face.

7. Immediately following the failure being identified, the following action has been undertaken.

31 May	· Failure identified during routine inspection visit. (note this was not visible during a previous inspection on 2 April 2012
1 June	· Dam specialist firm Damwatch Services contacted and arrangements made for them to undertake detailed dam inspection the following week. · Inspection of inside of discharge pipe undertaken by HBRC engineers. · Key land owner (Andrew Thomas) and Civil defence advised of issue. · As long term weather forecast is for fine weather decision made that no further action be undertaken until Damwatch site visit
7 June	· Damwatch site visit and detailed inspection undertaken. · Damwatch and HBRC engineers met on site by two members of the Makara liaison committee (Andrew Thomas and James Thompsen). · Discussions held between Damwatch and HBRC engineers. Significant risk of failure confirmed if dam was to fill under heavy rain. Concern at risk to property if dam lowered. · Damwatch agree to provide report by13 June. · Residents in properties known to be low lying advised of issue by phone. · Long range weather forecast for continued fine weather interspersed with a few showers.
8 June	· Letter sent to all Makara ratepayers advising of issue. CHBDC also included on mail list. · LiDAR survey of Makara valley authorised by GM-AM after quote received from NZ Aerial Mapping. (cost approx $19,500 + GST). LiDAR survey will be needed to prepare necessary modelling to more accurately determine risk and to input to building consent application for rebuilding of dam.
13 June	· Damwatch draft report received and reviewed by HBRC engineers. Report recommends that a low level spillway be constructed · Press release on issue dispatched
14 June	· Telephone conference held between HBRC and Damwatch engineers to discuss report, exact level of spillway and options for location of spillway. Agreement reached and Damwatch agree to finalise report by 15 June. · Update on situation provided to Andrew Thomas during site visit to dam with CHBDC CD personnel. · Arrangements made with contractor to commence work on temporary spillway 15 June. · Meeting arranged with Landcorp (owner of Paeroa Station on which dam situated) for 15 or 16 June, this being the most convenient time for them.
15 June	· Work commences on temporary spillway. Estimated to take approx 1 week. Rough order cost $20,000.
17 June	· LiDAR survey flying completed
Week ending 22 June	· Update letter sent to all Makara ratepayers · Meeting held with representatives of Landcorp (owners of Paeroa Station on which the No 1 dam is constructed)
Future	· Further letter to all ratepayers to update them the situation as and when new information comes to hand. · Investigate installation of temporary water level recorder possibly in dam ponding area to enable early warning to most at risk properties downstream. Also system to communicate with community should a further issue arise. · Public meeting to explain and update community on situation during last week of June. · Continue to pursue delivery of LiDAR survey information – (likely to take 2 – 3 weeks after flying) · Design work commenced on options for long term protection of community. Damwatch Services likely to be commissioned to assist with this process. · Report to Council on situation and options for repair/replacement and funding for that work.

8. The Scheme is in a healthy financial position. As at 1 July 2011 Scheme accounts were as follows.

· Operating account $18,900

· Disaster damage reserve $38,850

· Depreciation reserve $155,568

9. The Group Manager Asset Management has authorised expenditure in response to the issue. (Specifically the work to provide a temporary spillway at a level agreed between HBRC and Damwatch engineers and LiDAR surveying). Provision for this expenditure is in excess of that provided for in the 2011/12 annual plan but is within the ability of the Scheme to fund.

10. The cost of repair/reinstatement will almost certainly exceed the ability of the Scheme to fund. Options are currently being worked through. Staff expect to bring a report to the E&S Committee on 15 August.

Decision Making Process

11. 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:

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

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

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

11.4. The persons affected by this decision are the ratepayers to the Upper Makara Flood Control Scheme.

11.5. Repair options are being developed and will be considered once a report on these has been completed.

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

11.7. 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. Endorses the expenditure committed to date and the development of options for a long term solution for the ratepayers to the Upper Makara Scheme.

Mike Adye

Group Manager Asset Management

Attachment/s

There are no attachments for this report.

HAWKE’S BAY REGIONAL COUNCIL

Wednesday 27 June 2012

SUBJECT: Submission to the regulations proposed under the Exclusive Economic Zone and Continental Shelf (Environmental Effects) Bill

Reason for Report

1. The Ministry for the Environment has prepared a consultation document for the development of regulations to manage environmental effects of activities in the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ).

2. The Environmental Protection agency is responsible for the implementation of the regulations.

3. The majority of the issues in the document impact stakeholders in the EEZ (beyond the 12 nautical mile limit), with little to no impact on Hawke’s Bay Regional Council functions.

4. This item recommends a submission that focuses on two key areas that are of interest to the Council and one advice only area. These are regulatory alignment, regional councils being notified of activities that may have effects that cross into the territorial sea and increasing tools to improve compliance with standards.

Financial and Resource Implications

5. There are no financial or resource implications of this paper.

6. There has been very limited time within which to prepare a draft submission. The submission will need to be lodged by the extended 29 June 2012 deadline.

Background

7. Regulatory Alignment - Based on a resolution of Council on 21 March 2012 staff consider that the Council should encourage alignment of all regulatory processes that are dealing with the oil and gas industry.

7.1. Council resolutions from 21 March 2012;

7.2. Contributes to a gap analysis of all regulations managing all of the aspects of the oil/gas industry to avoid a disjointed approach to this industry.

7.3. Agrees that New Zealand regulatory agencies should consider adopting overseas standards, where applicable, to ensure consistent regulations rather than develop our own standards

7.4. Notes that the British Columbia Oil and Gas Commission (BCOGC), Energy Resources Conservation Board (ERCB) and National Energy Board (NEB) have all offered ongoing support to assist the East Coast Councils and New Zealand as a whole, for development of policy, regulations and technical support.

8. For instance, within the oil and gas industry there is the regulatory role of the Department of Labour, the regulations being developed under this Bill and regional council functions in the territorial sea. The regulatory processes are all seeking to manage oil and gas well development safety standards to protect humans and protection the environment.

9. At present there is no mechanism to align oil and gas well drilling and development standards between the 16 Regional Councils, Department of Labour and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

10. Staff believe Council should encourage these regulations to require the EPA to develop oil and gas well drilling and development standards, that align with Department of Labour and the 16 Regional Councils.

11. This could be achieved via a national standard, informed by standards from countries with a mature industry, that details things such as oil and gas well construction and integrity testing.

12. Failure to co-ordinate regulations could lead to a situation where it is impossible an operator to comply with conflicting standards, or worse, potential could exist where an operator attempts to meet the requirements of multiple standards and creates a situation where the compromise poses an undue risk to people and the environment.

13. Regional Councils as Affected Parties – There is potential for activities outside the territorial sea to have impacts inside the territorial sea and therefore impact resources that are the responsibility of HBRC.

14. Staff recommend that Council should encourage these regulations to include Regional Councils as affected parties in regulatory processes where there could be an effect within the territorial sea.

15. Enforcement Advice – Whilst not directly affecting the Council, staff believe our regulatory experience could provide value to the regulations.

16. The discussion document appears to only be providing the EPA with enforcement orders as a means to improve compliance when a formal compliance process is required to improve environmental effects.

17. Enforcement Orders are not an effective tool to increase compliance in a timely manner and can be too heavy to address low level issues that needs some type of enforcement action to encourage corrective actions.

18. Staff recommend that Council should encourage these regulations to provide the Environmental Protection Agency with Infringement Notices and Abatement Notices as tools as provided in the Resource Management Act. This will enable better implementation of the regulations.

Decision Making Process

19. 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:

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

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

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

19.4. The persons affected by this decision are users of resources within the territorial sea and persons who have an interest impacts on the resources in the territorial sea.

19.5. Options that have been considered include:

19.5.1. lodge a submission on the proposed regulations discussion document, or

19.5.2. not lodge a submission.

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

19.7. 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 the submission as attached.

Bryce Lawrence

Manager – Compliance

and Harbours

Iain Maxwell

Group Manager

Resource Management

Attachment/s

1 View

EEZ Regulations Submissions

HAWKE’S BAY REGIONAL COUNCIL

Wednesday 27 June 2012

SUBJECT: Financial Report for the 11 Months Ended 31 May 2012

Reason for Report

1. This Annual Plan Progress Report is an abridged report and covers the first eleven months of the 2011/12 financial year ending 30 June 2012. The report consists of commentary on financial results to 31 May 2012 and various financial reports

Summary of Financial Position to 31 May 2012

2. The actual result covering the Council’s general funded operations for the first seven months of 2011/12 is a surplus of $1,810,481. This compares with the Annual Plan budget deficit of $309,314 and reforecast deficit of $274,599 for the full year.

3. The reforecast deficit has not been adjusted for the carry forward of expenditure approved by Council on 11 June 2012 as part of the internal submission to the LTP. The approved carry forward of expenditure to 2012/13 was $287,000. If this adjustment was made, 2011/12 would be reforecast to a $12,000 surplus.

Comment on Financial Results for Eleven Months to 31 May 2012

Groups of Activities

4. This report establishes that the net expenditure on groups of activities for the first seven months is 83% of the reforecast net funding requirement, as against an equal monthly pro-rata comparative of 92%. The comparative figure for the 11 months to 31 May 2011, which was adjusted for $172,000 of carry forward of expenditure, was 88%.

5. Strategic Planning shows a net expenditure of 83% of reforecast. While expenditure is tracking at 97% of reforecast, income is well ahead at 116% of reforecast after receipt of $210,000 from the Ministry for the Environment to assist in the funding of the National Environmental Monitoring Standards project. At year end any excess income will be carried forward to the next financial year.

6. Land Drainage and River Control shows a net expenditure of 84% of reforecast. $70,000 of work planned for river protection work in conjunction with Central Hawke’s Bay District Council (CHBDC) will not now proceed this year. As this expenditure was not carried forward, this will result in $20,000 general funded underspending in this group of activities for the financial year.

7. Regional Resources shows both gross and net expenditure to be 79% of reforecast. While internal time costs are tracking appropriately at 86% of reforecast, expenditure on grants for the regional land scheme was only 58% of reforecast and expenditure on consultants and contractors was only 76% of reforecast.

7.1. Science project leaders advise that most projects are progressing well and expect that all projects will be completed near reforecast budgets by year end. However, $100,000 of consultancy costs will be carried forward in respect of the Heretaunga groundwater investigation.

7.2. The land management project leader advises that regional land scheme grants are paid out towards the end of the financial year because most work is carried out by farmers in the summer and autumn and billed later in the year and that payments are expected to be within 5% of reforecast amounts by year end.

8. Regulation shows a net expenditure of 122% of reforecast. Expenditure on regulation activities is broadly in line with reforecast at 87%, however, billing for compliance is not as this is traditionally completed at the end of the financial year while consent projects is almost complete. Once the billing of compliance work has been completed, the net expenditure for the Regulation group of activities should be close to reforecast by year end.

9. Biosecurity shows a net expenditure of 83% of reforecast. The lower than pro-rata percentage in this group of activities reflects the seasonal nature of many of the projects, which are carried out in the late autumn and early winter. Biosecurity staff advise that net expenditure is expected to be within 2% – 3% of reforecast amounts by year end.

10. Emergency Management shows a net expenditure of 63% of reforecast. The reforecast includes costs to set up a Group Emergency Coordination Centre based in Hastings and also cost associated with the appointment of a Recovery Manager and Lifelines Coordinator, which have not yet come to charge. In addition, a number of projects within this group of activities have progressed more slowly than planned resulting in the carry forward of $75,000 of expenditure from 2011/12 into 2012/13.

11. Transport shows a net expenditure of 58% of reforecast. The Transport group of activities has a very small ($130,000) reforecast amount for the year and therefore a small relative variance in relation to additional external income in Regional Roadsafe has had disproportionate effect on the actual/forecast percentage.

Operations Group

12. Operations Group reports a surplus of $634,376 for the eleven months to 31 May 2012. $454,735 of the surplus relates to Council activities that will be credited to the river control and flood protection schemes at the end of the financial year.

13. The remaining $180,000 of Operations Group surplus relates to the work carried out under contract for external parties. It is pleasing to note that this surplus is currently $50,000 favourable as compared to the reforecast budget.

Regional Income

14. Total regional income represents 93% of the reforecast net funding contribution for the first eleven months of the financial year, as against a pro-rata of 92%.

15. General funding interest income represents 93% of the reforecast interest receipts. The sums placed on deposit by Council are increasing due to the successful freeholding of Napier leasehold properties. This will result in increasing interest towards the end of the financial year. It is forecast that the year end position will be limited to approximately $30,000 unfavourable variance against budget.

General Funding for Capital Projects

16. The general funding requirement for capital projects is 68% of reforecast.

16.1. Land Drainage and River Control is at 62% of reforecast. While some projects have been delayed due to river conditions throughout the year and engineering time has been prioritised to projects such as Ruataniwha and cycleways, after fourth quarter loan repayments have been made, the net funding percentage of reforecast should be much close to reforecast at year end.

16.2. Regional Resources is heavily overspent against reforecast due to the Council Owned Wetlands project. Work on the PekaPeka Wetlands has now been completed and staff intend to invoice the New Zealand Lottery Commission for this work before year end. This will rectify the situation.

Healthy Homes – Summary Activity Report

17. The number of loans for insulation and clean heat are ahead of targets; however, clean heat grant uptake is slightly lower than planned. It is expected that all year end targets will be achieved or exceeded as end of May figures do not include approximately 300 applications for grants and loans which have been approved and are currently being processed.

18. While 225 applications were received in May, processing time has halved from an average 12 weeks in January 2012, to an average of 6 weeks by June 2012.

Volumes

Loan Type	2011/12 Targets		11 Months to 31 May 2012
Loan Type	Annual Plan Nos	Revised Nos.	Pro-rata Target Nos	Actual Nos	*Committed Nos**	Total / Actual Committed Nos	Actual / Committed Over Revised Target (%)
Insulation Loans	492	400	367	382	0	382	96%
Clean Heat Loans	310	200	183	222	0	222	111%
Clean Heat Grants	228	300	275	250	0	250	83%
Totals	1,030	900	825	854	0	854	95%

* Committed are applications that are approved but for which invoices have not yet been paid

Expenditure (excluding GST)

Loan Type	2011/12 Targets		11 Months to 31 May 2012
Loan Type	Annual Plan $’000	Revised $’000	Pro-rata Target $’000	Actual $’000	Committed* $’000	Total / Actual Committed $’000	Actual / Committed Over Revised Target (%)
Insulation Loans	971	634	581	655	0	655	103%
Clean Heat Loans	818	488	447	534	0	534	109%
Clean Heat Grants	159	183	168	152	0	152	83%
Totals	1,948	1,305	1,196	1,341	0	1,341	103%

* Committed are applications that are approved but for which invoices have not yet been paid

Non Recoverable Costs of Consent Appeals and Direct Referrals to the Environment Court

19. For the year to date costs for appeals and referrals to the Environment Court have amounted to $165,730. This includes staff time and external costs.

20. The appeal against the Napier City Council waste water outfall, which the Environment Court determined not to be proceeded with, has been appealed to the High Court by Mr Church. The High Court process is likely to have significant cost ($15,000 to $50,000). If Mr Church is successful in his High Court appeal it is likely that the matter will be referred back to the Environment Court.

21. The Twyford appeals have not been advanced much. The appellants have met with council staff to discuss investigations on management options that if acceptable may resolve their concerns. They have sought an extension of time to beyond 11 June 2012 to allow for these investigations, before advising the Environment Court whether they wish to proceed with the appeal.

22. The Opoutama appeal has been resolved in favour of the applicant and consistent with the HBRC decision. No further costs will be incurred on this.

23. The AFFCO appeal is close to being resolved. AFFCO and HBRC and s274 parties have agreed on all matters. It is now up to the Environment Court to sign off.

24. The Mexted et al appeal will proceed to a hearing. Evidence exchange has commenced. An issue arising in this process is the location of the seawall. A caucus of the coastal experts is proposed for July/August and the Environment Court hearing should proceed after this.

25. The Mahia direct referral costs have been repaid in part by Wairoa District Council. This is now closed.

26. The following table summarises costs for appeals and referrals for the 2011/2012 year to date:

Appeal Summary as at 31 May 2012
Appeal Name	Date of Council approval to defend	Estimated Cost of the Appeal as Advised to Council	Actual Costs of Appeal for 2011/2012	Comments
Twyford / Raupare (402109)	Wed 25 May 2011	Noted $150,000 on similar appeal	$23,688 int $25,050 ext	Appeal ongoing – mediation held on Nov 2 2011. Agreed to allow consents to commence. Appellants have sought extension on reporting back to the Environment Court to no earlier than 11 June.
			$48,738 total
Opoutama (402102)	Wed 16 Feb 2011	Noted $5,000 - $10,000	$2,489 int $13,160 ext	Appeal resolved 11 Aug 2011- upholding HBRC’s decision. A Court hearing was required. Closed
			$15,649 total
AFFCO (402046)	Wed 23 Sept 2009	Not estimated	$6,415 int $38,170 ext	Appeal mediation concluded. Awaiting final approval by the Environment Court.
			$44,585 total
Mexted, Williams and Malherbe (402051)	Thurs 10 June 2010	Not estimated	$7504 int $28,318 ext	Appeal ongoing. Evidence being prepared for hearing. Coastal experts caucus to be held (probably in August). Court hearing to follow.
			$35,822 total
Mahia Waste water Disposal (402060)	17 Mar 2010	WDC were expected to pay all costs	$238 int $3763 ext	Direct referral to the Environment Court. Invoiced $121,908.66. $78,214.44 paid by WDC. The legal costs were not covered. Unrecovered cost is $43,667.22. Closed
			$4001 total
NCC BTF Waste water outfall (402113)		High Court costs $15,000 - $50,000	$3456 int $13120 ext	This was appealed by Mr Wayne Church but was lodged after time and the Environment Court has determined that the appeal is not to be proceeded with. High Court to determine question of law.
			$16,575 total
Internal costs (year to date)			$43,790	Internal staff time charged to 402 project
External costs (year to date)			$121,585	The sum to date for 2011/2012 for external legal and consulting advice
Total costs (year to date)			$165,375	Total includes internal staff time plus external costs.

Balance Sheet

27. Public Equity, which reflects the net value of all the Council’s assets and liabilities, has increased by $58.2 million or 14.22% since the beginning of the year. The majority of this increase is a result of revaluing equity in the Port of Napier Ltd upwards by $56.86 million in April 2012.

28. Non-current property, plant and equipment, intangible and infrastructure assets have increased by $9,038,000 or 5.8% since the beginning of the year reflecting the purchase of fixed assets and construction of infrastructure assets in the period, offset by depreciation and amortisation charges. Included in this increase is $3,263,000 of development expenditure on Ruataniwha Plains Water Augmentation project, $2,506,000 on cycleway projects and $819,000 on Council forestry projects.

29. Investment property has decreased by $13,227,000 or 14.43% since the beginning of the year reflecting the disposal of 191 endowment leasehold land properties. This year staff estimate that Council will dispose of around 290 properties generating around $21,000,000.

30. Trade receivables have decreased since the beginning of the year by $1,526,000 and are $269,000 higher than at the same time last year.

31. Trade and Other Payables have decreased since the beginning of the year by $4,298,000 as year end invoices have been paid and accruals reversed.

32. Income in advance is $75,000 less than the balance at the beginning of the year reflecting the reversal of income in advance accrued at the end of last year and the accrual of one month’s rates income in advance in this financial year.

33. Total Cash, Cash Equivalents and Financial Assets show an increase of $58,212,000 or 33.50% since the beginning of the year reflecting the revaluation of equity in the Port of Napier Ltd in April 2012.

Cash Reserve Investments

34. The average rate of interest being earned on liquid investments is currently 4.10%. This rate is lower than the average rate of 4.63% at 30 June 2011 and lower than the rate assumed in the 2011/12 Annual Plan of 5.0% for both short and long term bank investments.

35. The pie chart entitled “Allocation by Institution” shows the percentage of Council investments placed with various institutions. Council policy requires that no more than 25% of investments be placed with any non government–guaranteed institution of groups of associated institutions.

Decision Making Process

36. 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 Council receives the Annual Plan Progress Report for the first 11 months of the 2011/12 Financial Year.

John Peacock

Corporate Accountant

Paul Drury

Group Manager Corporate Services

Attachment/s

1 View

Period 11 - 2011/12 Financials

HAWKE’S BAY REGIONAL COUNCIL

Wednesday 27 June 2012

SUBJECT: June 2012 Work Plan - Looking Forward

Reason for Report

1. This report is provided in order to update Councillors about significant work activities under way over the next month in each area of Council.

Group	Area of Activity	Activity Status Update
Asset Management	· Asset Management Plan reviews	Reviews of Asset Management Plans substantially complete for HPFCS and UTTS. Peer reviews and audit completed. Some modification required to align AMP’s with LTP financials and levels of service. These will be finalised following adoption of the LTP.
	· Biosecurity	Regional Pest Management Strategy and Regional Phytosanitary Pest Management Strategy Hearing held 15 February 2012. Council adopted Hearings Panel recommendations 29 Feb. One reference made to Environment Court. Both parties have agreed to mediation. Mediation set for 12 September 2012.
	· Land Management	A proposal for how the Land management team will influence the uptake of best farming practices in intensive land use areas is being developed and will be brought to Council for their consideration in due course. The proposal will include the alignment of a proportion of the RLS subsidy scheme to support the initiative.
	· CHB District Council Wastewater project	CHBDC have decided to proceed with a floating wetland option for improving the quality of effluent from Waipukurau and Waipawa into the Tukituki river. There will be no further involvement in this project from the Asset Management group.
	· Mahia Beach wastewater project	Staff working with WDC, their consultants and other stakeholders on detailed design issues and catchment planning associated with the Whangawehi catchment as required by the resource consent conditions. Legal documents relating to access to the land and use of the land for treatment of waste water are with Wairoa District Council for signature.
	· Infrastructure disaster insurance	A review of infrastructure disaster insurance arrangements is underway. LAPP trustees held a meeting of Members during May to seek feedback on future of LAPP. A further meeting has been arranged with Regional and Unitary Councils on 31 July to work through issues specific to that flood control and drainage assets. Subject to the outcome of that meeting staff expect to report to the September C&S Committee meeting on the issue.
	· Tutira Properties	Staff are progressing discussions with a number of parties on various options. MTI have advised that they wish to have a proposal for consideration by 31 August 2012. Staff will endeavour to have a deal sufficiently advanced to meet this deadline.
Asset Management	· Regional Forestry project	As part of their LTP deliberations Council agreed to proceed with this project subject to their approval of an operational plan, and a carbon trading strategy and policy for the project by September 2012. Staff are now working to meet this deadline.
	· Regional open spaces review	A project to identify and record HBRC open space sites and their values, articulate the management principles and levels of service for those spaces, and identify opportunities for the development of those spaces for public enjoyment is underway.
	· Upper Makara Scheme	A temporary spillway has been excavated following the discovery of a sinkhole in the face of the dam. Staff are assessing options for flood protection of the Makara valley and how they could be funded. It is expected that agreed works will be constructed over the 2012/13 summer.
Resource Management	· Appeal mediation processes underway for · Large Consent processes/ applications	Twyford Court appointed mediation held on 2 November, attended by the appellants (Watering Society) HBRC, Fish and Game, DOC, and Te Taiwhenua of Heretaunga. Appellants advised that a report is being prepared for them by Aqualinc, but will not be ready until next year. Appellants will advise the Court before June 2012 if they intend to progress the appeals. AFFCO Paper to Council this month to accept mediated solution. Appeal settled. Mexted & Williams All parties are now working towards a court hearing, the date of which is yet to be advised. The coastal hazard evidence of the appellant has raised some concerns about the current design of the seawall. Caucusing between the coastal hazard experts is to be organised so that these issues can be discussed. NCC BTF plant High court deciding whether to accept Submitter W. Church appeal or not, decision expected August. CHBDC waste water Application on hold expecting withdrawal after publicised decision on different approach. Poukawa Discussions ongoing with applicants and stakeholders pre notification decision, Limited notification likely June 2012
Resource Management	· Science Activities	Groundwater Staff continue to work closely with the planning team on policy development for water allocation and water quality for the Tukituki plan change. Also work has been completed on groundwater model scenarios for the water storage project. Staff have installed rainfall recharge lysimeter equipment at Maraekakaho for the Heretaunga Plains groundwater Lysimeter equipment is currently being installed at a second site on the Heretaunga Plains. Surface Water Allocation modelling work continuing for Tukituki Plan Change. Scenario modelling work completed for Ruataniwha Storage Project. Mohaka concurrent gauging underway with 3 runs completed to date. NIWA contracted to back edit Glenfalls, Raupunga, Kuripapaingo and Chesterhope flow records. Recently completed reports: ‘Tutaekuri River Instream Flow Assessment Report’, ‘Tukituki Catchment Instream Flow Assessments Addendum Report’, ‘Quantifying Permitted Water Use in Hawke’s Bay’, and ‘Assessment of potential effects of the proposed Ruataniwha Water Storage scheme on groundwater and surface water resources in the Tukituki River Catchment’. Thomas Wilding has started as Senior SW Quantity Scientist currently progressing joint Science Heretaunga Resource Summary Report for consents. Installation of Ruakituri Climate Site planned by end of June. Ecology Staff continue to focus on supporting the Planning team on the Tukituki Plan Change and Mohaka Plan Change. A large component of work on the Karamu is close to completion to support the Consents team with the Karamu consent renewals. Fiona Cameron recently completed field assessments of the ecological condition of Council owned wetlands. The team is busy planning for an increase from quarterly to monthly sampling for the State of Environment Rivers monitoring program – this being dependent on finalisation of the LTP. Work on the Coastal monitoring buoy is progressing well with splashdown planned within the coming months
Strategic Development	· Land and Water Management Strategy	Strategy implementation to be ongoing, including via 2012-22 LTP.
	· Plan Change for freshwater management in Tukituki River catchment	Ongoing. Technical reports being used to develop the water allocation framework. Stakeholder engagement revision as per May 2012 Council decision.
Strategic Development	· Rivermouth Hazard Areas in proposed Regional Coastal Environment Plan (Variation 1)	Schedule 1 RMA process. Decisions issued 6 June 2012. Appeal period closes on or about 20 July 2012.
	· Onsite Wastewater change (Change 3 + Variation 3)	Schedule 1 RMA process. Decisions issued 6 June 2012. Appeal period closes on or about 20 July 2012.
	· RPS Change to incorporate HPUDS and wider infrastructure matters (Change 4)	Schedule 1 RMA process. 45 submissions and 6 further submissions received. Hearing by end of 2012.
	Ÿ Taharua Strategy and Mohaka plan change.	Ongoing. Broadened scope to cover whole Mohaka River catchment. Preliminary stakeholder engagement commenced with wider Mohaka River interests. Further liaison with Taharua Stakeholder Group, particularly farmers, on options.
	Ÿ Proposed Regional Coastal Environment Plan plus Change 1 to RRMP	Ongoing. Environment Court soon to ratify settlement of all appeals. RCEP to be directly reported to Council for approval following Environment Court’s ratification of appeal settlements. Council-approved RCEP then referred to Minister of Conservation for approval of provisions relating to coastal marine area.
	Ÿ Heretaunga Plains Urban Development Strategy (HPUDS)	Ongoing implementation as it relates to other actions where HBRC is a lead agency or a partner agency via HPUDS Working Group.
	Ÿ Regional Land Transport Programme and Regional Land Transport Strategy.	Verbal submissions were held on Friday, 8 June at RTC Meeting. Endorsement of RLTP and RLTS will be completed by RTC Committee on 22 June at its meeting. Final RLTP/RLTS will be presented to Council on 27 June for final adoption.
	Ÿ Tech NZ R&D funding as part of the Regional Business Partner partnership with HB Chamber of Commerce	Over $2.3m in funding year to date.
	Ÿ Strategic Farming Initiative	Meetings with individual parties continues as individual projects are scoped
	Ÿ Massey Strategic Relationship	Job description drafted for the planned Massey person to be based in Hawke’s Bay to coordinate activities in the region.
Corporate Services	· Setting of rates	August 2012
	· Assessment of selling cash flows from Napier leasehold land.	To be undertaken in August 2012.
	· Constituency Review	Corporate & Strategic meeting – 18 July 2012.
External Relations	· Statutory advocacy and liaison	Liaison with consultant on Prosperity Study Preparation of submission on Local Government Amendment Bill
	· Training of Treaty claimant representatives on Regional Planning Committee	Series of workshops covering : HB Land and Water Management Strategy Regional policy statement process Nutrient management
	· Community engagement / environmental education	Publication of July edition of “Our Place” in preparation Ongoing communications around feasibility study and the Ruataniwha Storage Project Finalising of technical requirements for webcasting of Council and Committee meetings
	· HeatSmart	Processing of significant number of applications for both insulation and clean heat, above specified target
Operations/ Water Group	· Ruataniwha Water storage	Work over the next month involves: · Commenting and providing feedback on Cawthron aquatic ecology report for project. · Review and complete final drafts for non-physical science reports, including archaeology, road & traffic, noise, recreation and landscape impacts. · Ongoing work on Land use intensification studies, modelling and mitigations works. · On-Farm Economic Studies to be updated by Macfarlane Rural Business. · National & Regional Economic Impact Assessments about to commence. · Stakeholder, leadership and landowner meetings to host.
	· Cycleways	· Finalise detail with HDC for remaining Craggy Range section of trail of the Landscapes trail. · Input into final detail for Taipo section of the Water trail. Commence construction of minor remaining sections of Water trail through Taradale. · Continue with construction of Ngatarawa and Roys hill section of trail of Winery trail. · Continue with support for HDC Iway sections of trail in Hastings and Clive.
	· Ngaruroro Water storage project	Lodge MAF IAF application for on-farm economic study.
CE’s Office	Ÿ Represent Regional Sector on Land and Water Forum “Small Group”	Draft recommendations on limit setting and collaborative governance delivered to Ministers and publicly released. Focus continues on rights of appeal, water allocation methods, etc. Presented HB Water Strategy limits setting and infrastructure scenario to LAWF Small Group which was extremely well received.
	Ÿ Treaty Settlements –Claimant Groups	Regional Planning Committee focus on Land and Water management strategy insertion into Regional Policy Statement
CE’s Office	Ÿ Regional Prosperity study	Study leader appointed. Paper on this Agenda Liz Lambert will coordinate from HBRC
	Ÿ Ruataniwha Water Storage	Ongoing oversight. Procurement of financial advisory services completed. Detailed work on what may happen post feasibility under way. Meetings with Federation of Maori Authorities.
	Ÿ HB Regional Investment Company establishment	Meeting likely to be scheduled late July/early August
	Ÿ Hill Country Afforestation Proposal	Further oversight of business plan under way.
	Ÿ Continue work with Regional Sector CEs at Horizons and Greater Wellington plus Government Department CEs as appropriate on southern North Island partnership	Ongoing Meeting CEs on 11 July to review options
	Ÿ Continue involvement with Ministry for Primary Industries Peak Group for Implementation of the ETS	Ongoing
	Ÿ Advisory Committee on Official Statistics	Ongoing

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

Recommendation

1. That Council receives the May 2012 Work Plan Looking Forward report.

Andrew Newman

Chief Executive

Attachment/s

There are no attachments for this report.