Agenda of Community Development Committee

PALMERSTON NORTH CITY COUNCIL

Community Development Committee MEETING

11 December 2017

Order of Business

NOTE: The Community Development meeting coincides with the ordinary meeting of the Economic Development Committee meeting. The format for the meeting will be as follows:

- Community Development Committee will open and adjourn immediately to Economic Development Committee

- Economic Development Committee will open, conduct its business and then close.

1. Apologies

2. Notification of Additional Items

Pursuant to Sections 46A(7) and 46A(7A) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987, to receive the Chairperson’s explanation that specified item(s), which do not appear on the Agenda of this meeting and/or the meeting to be held with the public excluded, will be discussed.

Any additions in accordance with Section 46A(7) must be approved by resolution with an explanation as to why they cannot be delayed until a future meeting.

Any additions in accordance with Section 46A(7A) may be received or referred to a subsequent meeting for further discussion. No resolution, decision or recommendation can be made in respect of a minor item.

3. Public Comment

To receive comments from members of the public on matters specified on this Agenda or, if time permits, on other Committee matters.

(NOTE: If the Committee wishes to consider or discuss any issue raised that is not specified on the Agenda, other than to receive the comment made or refer it to the Chief Executive, then a resolution will need to be made in accordance with clause 2 above.)

4. Deputation - Volunteer Resource Centre Page 7

5. Deputation - Heart Foundation Page 9

6. Deputation - Safety Advisory Board Page 11

7. Confirmation of Minutes Page 13

“That the minutes of the Community Development Committee meeting of 11 September 2017 Part I Public and the extraordinary Community Development Committee meeting of 16 October 2017 Part I Public be confirmed as a true and correct record.”

8. Local Alcohol Policy - preliminary advice on issues raised by submitters Page 27

Memorandum, dated 10 November 2017 from the Policy Analyst, Peter Ridge.

9. Council Events Review - future actions Page 33

Memorandum, dated 7 December 2017 from the Manager - Community Engagement, Ian Littleworth.

10. Report on community relations and representations related to portfolios Page 39

Memorandum, dated 15 November 2017 from the Strategy & Policy Manager, Julie Macdonald.

11. CBD Amenity Bylaw - S155 Determination Report Page 45

Report, dated 21 November 2017 from the Policy Analyst, Ann-Marie Mori and the Strategy & Policy Manager, Julie Macdonald.

12. Work Schedule Page 71

13. Exclusion of Public

To be moved:

“That the public be excluded from the following parts of the proceedings of this meeting listed in the table below.

The general subject of each matter to be considered while the public is excluded, the reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter, and the specific grounds under Section 48(1) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 for the passing of this resolution are as follows:

General subject of each matter to be considered		Reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter	Ground(s) under Section 48(1) for passing this resolution
14.	Minutes of the Community Development Committee meeting - Part II Confidential - 11 September 2017	For the reasons setout in the Community Development Committee minutes of 11 September 2017, held in public present.

This resolution is made in reliance on Section 48(1)(a) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 and the particular interest or interests protected by Section 6 or Section 7 of that Act which would be prejudiced by the holding of the whole or the relevant part of the proceedings of the meeting in public as stated in the above table.

Also that the persons listed below be permitted to remain after the public has been excluded for the reasons stated.

Chief Executive (Heather Shotter), Chief Financial Officer (Grant Elliott), General Manager, City Enterprises (Ray McIndoe), General Manager, City Future (Sheryl Bryant), General Manager, City Networks (Ray Swadel), General Manager, Customer Services (Peter Eathorne), General Manager, Libraries and Community Services (Debbie Duncan), Human Resources Manager (Wayne Wilson) and Communications and Marketing Manager (or their representative (name)) because of their knowledge and ability to provide the meeting with advice on matters both from an organisation-wide context (being members of the Council’s Management Team) and also from their specific role within the Council.

Legal Counsel (John Annabell), because of his knowledge and ability to provide the meeting with legal and procedural advice.

Governance and Support Team Leader (Kyle Whitfield) and Committee Administrators (Penny Odell, Carly Chang and Rachel Corser), because of their knowledge and ability to provide the meeting with procedural advice and record the proceedings of the meeting.

[Add Council Officers], because of their knowledge and ability to assist the meeting in speaking to their report and answering questions, noting that such officer will be present at the meeting only for the item that relate to their respective report.

[Add Third Parties], because of their knowledge and ability to assist the meeting in speaking to their report/s [or other matters as specified] and answering questions, noting that such person/s will be present at the meeting only for the items that relate to their respective report/s [or matters as specified].

PALMERSTON NORTH CITY COUNCIL

Palmerston North City Council

Minutes of the Community Development Committee Meeting Part I Public, held in the Council Chamber, First Floor, Civic Administration Building, 32 The Square, Palmerston North on 11 September 2017, commencing at 9.00am

Members

Present:

Councillor Aleisha Rutherford (in the Chair), The Mayor (Grant Smith) and Councillors Brent Barrett, Susan Baty, Rachel Bowen, Adrian Broad, Gabrielle Bundy-Cooke, Vaughan Dennison, Lew Findlay QSM, Leonie Hapeta, Jim Jefferies, Lorna Johnson, Duncan McCann, Karen Naylor, Bruno Petrenas and Tangi Utikere.

Councillor Leonie Hapeta left the meeting at 3.26pm during consideration of clause 25. She entered the meeting again at 3.53pm during consideration of clause 27. She was not present for clauses 25 and 26 inclusive.

Councillor Gabrielle Bundy-Cooke left the meeting at 3.38pm at the conclusion of clause 25. She entered the meeting again at 3.51pm during consideration of clause 27. She was not present for clause 26.

Councillor Rachel Bowen left the meeting at 4.22pm during consideration of clause 29. She was not present for clauses 29 and 30.

Councillor Jim Jefferies left the meeting at 4.23pm during consideration of clause 29. He was not present for clauses 29 and 30.

Councillor Duncan McCann left the meeting at 4.25pm at the conclusion of clause 29. He was not present for clause 30.

The meeting adjourned at 9.01am

The meeting resumed at 10.56am

20-17	Public Comment
	Public comment was received from: - Sally Babbage from the Housing Advice Centre regarding the Social Housing Strategy and highlighting the increasing number of elderly struggling with affordable accommodation. - Nigel Fitzpatrick from Public Health supporting the Healthy Beverage Policy.
	Moved Aleisha Rutherford, seconded Rachel Bowen. The COMMITTEE RESOLVED 1. That the Committee receive the Public Comment for information.
	Clause 20-17 above was carried 16 votes to 0, the voting being as follows: For: The Mayor (Grant Smith) and Councillors Brent Barrett, Susan Baty, Rachel Bowen, Adrian Broad, Gabrielle Bundy-Cooke, Vaughan Dennison, Lew Findlay QSM, Leonie Hapeta, Jim Jefferies, Lorna Johnson, Duncan McCann, Karen Naylor, Bruno Petrenas, Aleisha Rutherford and Tangi Utikere.

21-17

Deputation - Community Services Council

Representing Community Services Council Michelle Thompson and Fraser Greig spoke to the deputation providing an overview of the Social Well-Being Forum.

Three main issues were identified from the forum;

- Housing was becoming a more complex issue and Palmerston North was fortunate that Council was holding onto their social housing and implementing such things as building warrant of fitnesses. It was believed that social housing providers needed to work collaboratively.

- There was a growing need for funding for organisations, however the funding pool was reducing. Investigating other ways to raise funds required more time and resources and organisations do not have the ability to do this.

- Organisations needed to building capacity and capability and Community Manawatu was seen as a way to achieve this.

Moved Leonie Hapeta, seconded Rachel Bowen.

The COMMITTEE RESOLVED

1. That the Community Development Committee receive the deputation for information.

Clause 21-17 above was carried 16 votes to 0, the voting being as follows:

For:

The Mayor (Grant Smith) and Councillors Brent Barrett, Susan Baty, Rachel Bowen, Adrian Broad, Gabrielle Bundy-Cooke, Vaughan Dennison, Lew Findlay QSM, Leonie Hapeta, Jim Jefferies, Lorna Johnson, Duncan McCann, Karen Naylor, Bruno Petrenas, Aleisha Rutherford and Tangi Utikere.

22-17

Confirmation of Minutes

Moved Rachel Bowen, seconded Leonie Hapeta.

The COMMITTEE RESOLVED

1. That the minutes of the Community Development Committee meeting of 12 June 2017 Part I Public be confirmed as a true and correct record.

Clause 22-17 above was carried 14 votes to 0, with 2 abstentions, the voting being as follows:

For:

Councillors Brent Barrett, Susan Baty, Rachel Bowen, Adrian Broad, Gabrielle Bundy-Cooke, Vaughan Dennison, Lew Findlay QSM, Leonie Hapeta, Jim Jefferies, Lorna Johnson, Duncan McCann, Karen Naylor, Bruno Petrenas and Tangi Utikere.

Abstained:

The Mayor (Grant Smith) and Councillor Aleisha Rutherford.

23-17

Capacity & Capability Building in the Community Sector

Memorandum, dated 23 August 2017 from the Community Liaison Team Leader, Peter Grey.

In discussion elected members noted the concerns raised by the deputation from Community Services Council and sought advice on how Council could assist on the main issued raised.

Moved Aleisha Rutherford, seconded Rachel Bowen.

The COMMITTEE RECOMMENDS

1. That the Committee receives the memorandum dated 23 August 2017 and entitled “Capacity and Capability Building in the Community Sector” for information.

2 That the Chief Executive provide a response to the key concerns of the social Well Being Forum report including how the Council could support a more coordinated approach.

Clause 23-17 above was carried 15 votes to 0, with 1 abstention, the voting being as follows:

For:

The Mayor (Grant Smith) and Councillors Brent Barrett, Susan Baty, Rachel Bowen, Adrian Broad, Gabrielle Bundy-Cooke, Vaughan Dennison, Lew Findlay QSM, Jim Jefferies, Lorna Johnson, Duncan McCann, Karen Naylor, Bruno Petrenas, Aleisha Rutherford and Tangi Utikere.

Abstained:

Councillor Leonie Hapeta.

The meeting adjourned at 11.59am

The meeting resumed at 3.00pm

24-17

Recommendation to Exclude Public

Moved Aleisha Rutherford, seconded Tangi Utikere.

The COMMITTEE RESOLVED

“That the public be excluded from the following parts of the proceedings of this meeting listed in the table below.

General subject of each matter to be considered		Reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter	Ground(s) under Section 48(1) for passing this resolution
14.	Community Development Small Grants Council Report 2017	Negotiations	s7(2)(i)

Also that the persons listed below be permitted to remain after the public has been excluded for the reasons stated.

Acting Chief Executive (David Wright), Chief Financial Officer (Grant Elliott), General Manager, City Enterprises (Ray McIndoe), General Manager, City Future (Sheryl Bryant), General Manager, City Networks (Ray Swadel), General Manager, Customer Services (Peter Eathorne), General Manager, Libraries and Community Services (Debbie Duncan), Human Resources Manager (Wayne Wilson) and Senior Communications Advisor (Sandra Crosbie) because of their knowledge and ability to provide the meeting with advice on matters both from an organisation-wide context (being members of the Council’s Management Team) and also from their specific role within the Council.

Legal Counsel (John Annabell), because of his knowledge and ability to provide the meeting with legal and procedural advice.

Community Groups Advisor (Pascal Francois), Community Liaison Team Leader (Peter Grey) and Manager Community Engagement (Ian Littleworth) , because of their knowledge and ability to assist the meeting in speaking to their report and answering questions, noting that such officer will be present at the meeting only for the item that relate to their respective report.

Co-Chairs of the Community Development Small Grants Working Party, (Joyce Fowler and Krys Baker), because of their knowledge and ability to assist the meeting in speaking to their report and answering questions, noting that such persons will be present at the meeting only for the items that relate to their respective report.

Clause 24-17 above was carried 16 votes to 0, the voting being as follows:

For:

The meeting moved into Part II at 3.01pm

The meeting resumed in Part I at 3.20pm

25-17

Disability Reference Group update

Memorandum, dated 8 September 2017 from the Community Liaison Team Leader, Peter Grey.

Councillor Leonie Hapeta left the meeting at 3.26pm

Moved Aleisha Rutherford, seconded Rachel Bowen.

The COMMITTEE RECOMMENDS

1. That the Community Development Committee receives the memorandum dated 8 September 2017 and entitled “Disability Reference Group Update” for information.

2. That Officers report back to Council on the outcome of the investigation by Enable NZ into the development of a disability sector advisory group and identifies any potential opportunities for Council participation.

Clause 25-17 above was carried 15 votes to 0, the voting being as follows:

For:

Councillor Gabrielle Bundy Cooke left the meeting at 3.38pm

26-17

Conference Opportunity - Young Elected Members Retreat

Memorandum, dated 24 August 2017 from the Governance & Support Team Leader, Kyle Whitfield.

Moved Rachel Bowen, seconded Tangi Utikere.

The COMMITTEE RESOLVED

1. That the Committee approve the attendance of Councillor Aleisha Rutherford to attend, with expenses paid, the LGNZ Young Elected Member Retreat held on 9-11 November 2017.

Clause 26-17 above was carried 12 votes to 0, with 1 abstention, the voting being as follows:

For:

The Mayor (Grant Smith) and Councillors Brent Barrett, Susan Baty, Rachel Bowen, Adrian Broad, Vaughan Dennison, Lew Findlay QSM, Lorna Johnson, Duncan McCann, Karen Naylor, Bruno Petrenas and Tangi Utikere.

Abstained:

Councillor Aleisha Rutherford.

Did note vote:
Councillor Jim Jefferies.

27-17

Student City Update

Memorandum, dated 11 September 2017 from the Student City Co-ordinator, Remy Waldteufel-Irvine.

Councillor Gabrielle Bundy-Cooke entered the meeting again at 3.51pm

Councillor Leonie Hapeta entered the meeting again at 3.53pm

Moved Aleisha Rutherford, seconded Grant Smith.

The COMMITTEE RESOLVED

1. That the Community Development Committee notes for information the memorandum ‘Student City Update’ which accompanies the Officer’s verbal presentation.

Clause 27-17 above was carried 15 votes to 0, with 1 abstention, the voting being as follows:

For:

Abstained:

Councillor Leonie Hapeta.

28-17

Implications of proposed changes to the Social Housing Strategy

Memorandum, dated 22 June 2017 from the Strategy & Policy Manager, Julie Macdonald.

In discussion Elected Members agreed that options to be considered for Social Housing should be referred to the Long Term Plan.

Moved Susan Baty, seconded Lorna Johnson.

The COMMITTEE RECOMMENDS

1. That the report attached as Appendix One entitled ‘Implications of the proposed review of the Social Housing Strategy’ be received.

2. That the options C and D outlined in the report titled “Implications of proposed changes to the Social Housing Strategy” be referred to the Long Term Plan.

Clause 28-17 above was carried 15 votes to 0, with 1 abstention, the voting being as follows:

For:

The Mayor (Grant Smith) and Councillors Brent Barrett, Susan Baty, Rachel Bowen, Adrian Broad, Gabrielle Bundy-Cooke, Vaughan Dennison, Leonie Hapeta, Jim Jefferies, Lorna Johnson, Duncan McCann, Karen Naylor, Bruno Petrenas, Aleisha Rutherford and Tangi Utikere.

Abstained:

Councillor Lew Findlay QSM.

29-17

Healthy Beverage Policy

Memorandum, dated 24 August 2017 from the Policy Analyst, Lili Kato.

Councillor Rachel Bowen left the meeting at 4.22pm

Councillor Jim Jefferies left the meeting at 4.23pm

Moved Aleisha Rutherford, seconded Karen Naylor.

The COMMITTEE RECOMMENDS

1. That Council adopt the Healthy Beverage Policy.

2. That the Chairperson and Deputy Chairperson of the Community Development be given delegated authority to approve minor amendments to the attached Healthy Beverage Policy prior to publication.

Clause 29-17 above was carried 8 votes to 6, the voting being as follows:

For:

Councillors Brent Barrett, Susan Baty, Adrian Broad, Lorna Johnson, Duncan McCann, Karen Naylor, Aleisha Rutherford and Tangi Utikere.

Against:

The Mayor (Grant Smith) and Councillors Gabrielle Bundy-Cooke, Vaughan Dennison, Lew Findlay QSM, Leonie Hapeta and Bruno Petrenas.

Councillor Duncan McCann left the meeting at 4.35pm

30-17

Committee Work Schedule

Moved Aleisha Rutherford, seconded Vaughan Dennison.

The COMMITTEE RESOLVED

1. That the Community Development Committee receive its Work Schedule dated September 2017.

Clause 30-17 above was carried 13 votes to 0, the voting being as follows:

For:

The Mayor (Grant Smith) and Councillors Brent Barrett, Susan Baty, Adrian Broad, Gabrielle Bundy-Cooke, Vaughan Dennison, Lew Findlay QSM, Leonie Hapeta, Lorna Johnson, Karen Naylor, Bruno Petrenas, Aleisha Rutherford and Tangi Utikere.

The meeting finished at 4.40pm

Confirmed 11 December 2017

Chairperson

PALMERSTON NORTH CITY COUNCIL

Palmerston North City Council

Minutes of the Extraordinary Community Development Committee Meeting Part I Public, held in the Council Chamber, First Floor, Civic Administration Building, 32 The Square, Palmerston North on 16 October 2017, commencing at 1.11pm

Members

Present:

33-17

Submissions on the draft Local Alcohol Policy

Memorandum, dated 4 September 2017 from the Policy Analyst, Peter Ridge.

The following people appeared before the Committee and made oral statements in support of their submissions and replied to questions from Elected Members.

MidCentral Health (31)

Representing the MidCentral Health, Dr Rob Weir spoke to the submission and made the following additional comments:

- Of all the Local Alcohol Policies (LAP) that have been adopted nationwide only one has not been appealed.

- LAPs in Horowhenua and Wanganui have been appealed based on off licence trading times.

- MidCentral Health had been collecting data from Emergency Department over a number of years that provided useful evidence but probably did not meet the standard required for Hearings.

Creative Catering at the Awapuni Function Centre (20)

Representing Awapuni Function Centre, Mr Alasdair Robertson, provided a PowerPoint presentation and made the following additional comments:

- Were supportive of the initiative to encourage the minimisation of harm caused by alcohol but the draft proposal did not recognise the existence of a designated and purpose built facility.

- There should be a distinction between a blanket geographic ban and the approved existence of a planned, approved and well managed facility.

- The proposed LAP would affect the vast majority of events that are held at the Function Centre and cause significant commercial and social benefit damage to the Function Centre.

Big Barrel (21)

Representing Big Barrel, Ms Vicki Samuels and Ms Shelley Kennard spoke to the submission and made the following additional comments:

- Closing at 9.00pm would prevent the public from “pre-loading” prior to heading into town and reduce amount of drunk drivers on our roads.

- The current proposal of 10.00pm closing would not make enough of an impact and would encourage young drivers to be driving late at night to get last minute supplies. A lot of these drivers are on restricted driver licenses and this would encourage them to drive illegally outside their restricted hours.

The Albert Sports Bar (27)

Representing The Albert Sports Bar, Mr Jared Rawiri spoke to the submission and made the following additional comment:

- Currently the availability of alcohol was huge and changing the time that places open or close will not affect that. If individuals wanted to drink they will find a place.

Jonathan P Galuska (28)

Mr Galuska spoke to his submission and made the following additional comment:

- The Policy needed to be evidence and there is not enough evidence to make the changes that are being proposed.

Health Promotion Agency (30)

Representing the Health Promotion Agency, Ms Cathy Bruce and Ms Giselle Bareta spoke to the submission and made the following additional comments:

- Were supportive of Council’s decision to develop a LAP and encouraged the Council to be bold, and ensure that the policy reflects the views of the community

- Overall were supportive of the LAP and suggest strengthening the content to ensure that it meets the object of the Act. The areas that could be strengthened are around location and number of premises, special licences and discretionary conditions.

Corrine Smith (34)

Ms Corrine Smith spoke to her submission and made the following additional comments:

- Had concerns regarding the negative affect of alcohol on communities and as a nurse had seen many incidents of domestic violence fuelled by alcohol and carnage from car accidents

- Believed that the LAP should be strengthened as it was about finding ways of reducing harm and protecting communities.

Andy Towers (35)

Mr Andy Towers spoke to his submission and made the following additional comments:

- The policy was not a strong policy and there was no evidence to back it up. There was a real concern regarding the level of data available as the law states evidence has to be shown to support the policy.

- It was not clear once you buy alcohol from the supermarket where the harm comes in.

Warren McLaughlin (38)

Mr Warren McLaughlin spoke to his submission and made no additional comments.

Safety Advisory Board (40)

Representing the Safety Advisory Board, Cr Vaughan Dennison and Ms Zoe Kavanagh spoke to the submission and made no additional comments.

Willow Park Tavern ( 41)

Representing Willow Park Tavern, Mr Fraser Donaldson spoke to the submission and made the following additional comments:

- Did not see how changing the closing time would reduce harm. On premise operators were generally operating at a good level.

- Willow Park had two branches to its business (a tavern and function area) and if hours were changed wouldn’t be able to cater to those that use the function area.

Alcohol Healthwatch (42)

Representing Alcohol Healthwatch, Mr Nathan Cowie and Ms Nicki Jackson spoke to the submission and made no additional comments.

Foodstuffs North Island Limited (43)

Representing Foodstuffs North Island Limited, Mr Iain Thain spoke to the submission and made the following additional comments:

- It was positive that the policy was clear and simple as other LAPs had been appealed due to their ambiguity.

- The main business for supermarkets was not alcohol and therefore wanted to be able stay open longer to provide better service to their customers.

Hospitality New Zealand Palmerston North (44)

Representing Hospitality New Zealand Palmerston North, Mr Chris Hince and Ms Colleen Maxwell spoke to the submission and made the following additional comments:

- A policy had to be proportionate to the amount of harm.

- Individuals will drink alcohol regardless of what is in a Policy and reducing hours could increase the at home drinking.

Progressive Enterprises Limited (45)

Representing Progressive Enterprises Limited, Mr Paul Radich spoke to the submission and made the following additional comment:

- The proposed change of time would have significant impact on their stores but they understand what Council is trying to achieve.

Moved Aleisha Rutherford, seconded Gabrielle Bundy-Cooke.

The COMMITTEE RESOLVED

1. That the oral and written submissions on the draft Palmerston North Local Alcohol Policy 2017 be received.

2. That the Community Development Committee note the Procedure for Hearing of Submissions, as described in the Procedure Sheet.

The clause 33-17 above was carried 14 votes to 0, the voting being as follows:

For:

The Mayor (Grant Smith) and Councillors Brent Barrett, Susan Baty, Rachel Bowen, Adrian Broad, Gabrielle Bundy-Cooke, Lew Findlay QSM, Jim Jefferies, Lorna Johnson, Duncan McCann, Karen Naylor, Bruno Petrenas, Aleisha Rutherford and Tangi Utikere.

NOTE

Councillors Vaughan Dennison and Leonie Hapeta declared a conflict of interest and withdrew from discussion and voting on clause 33-17 above.

The meeting finished at 3.51pm

Confirmed 11 December 2017

Chairperson

PALMERSTON NORTH CITY COUNCIL

Memorandum

TO: Community Development Committee

MEETING DATE: 11 December 2017

TITLE: Local Alcohol Policy - preliminary advice on issues raised by submitters

DATE: 10 November 2017

AUTHOR/S: Peter Ridge, Policy Analyst, City Future

RECOMMENDATION(S) TO Council

1. That the Council agrees in principle to promote a District Plan change to remove references to hours of trade for activities involving the sale of alcohol, and instructs the Chief Executive to prepare a District Plan change proposal.

2. That the Council suspends the development of the Local Alcohol Policy, including further consideration of submissions, until the proposed District Plan change affecting hours of trade for activities involving the sale of alcohol has been completed.

1. ISSUE

As a result of analysing submissions to the draft Local Alcohol Policy officers have identified that eight premises are disproportionately affected by the trading hours restrictions proposed in the draft Policy. Some submitters expressed concerned about the impact of the draft Policy on their business. If the Local Alcohol Policy was adopted as proposed, then some of those businesses would be forced to close their premises by up to 4.5 hours earlier than currently required. This is not what the draft Local Alcohol Policy intended to achieve; the objective was to encourage people to drink in a supervised environment such as on-licence, by bringing trading hours back by one hour across the board.

2. BACKGROUND

The Council approved the draft Local Alcohol Policy for public consultation in June 2017. The key change proposed by the draft Local Alcohol Policy was to the maximum trading hours for licensed premises. The starting point for this change was the trading hours contained in the District Plan for activities involving the sale of alcohol.

The Council received 45 submissions on the draft Local Alcohol Policy. Oral submissions were heard in October 2017. A number of submitters raised concerns about the impact on their business of the change in trading hours.

3. Analysis

The issue arises because there are three factors affecting trading hours – the District Plan, the draft Local Alcohol Policy, and the liquor licence for each licensed premises.

Currently, the hours that can be granted by a liquor licence are guided by the District Plan, based on which zone the business is located in. The District Plan sets rules for premises in the Inner, Outer and Fringe Business Zones, the Local Business Zone, and the Industrial Zone. Trading hours are more restrictive for premises that are in the Local Business Zone, or front or adjoin a Residential Zone. However, in some cases a liquor licence may have been granted before the District Plan was first made operational, and therefore that licence may permit the premises to open for longer than would otherwise be permitted by the current District Plan. This is known as “existing use rights”, and is provided for by the Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA). This is relevant because currently the only restriction on trading hours for licensed premises is set by the District Plan, which is made under the RMA.

However, with the introduction of the draft Local Alcohol Policy, there is now a third factor affecting trading hours. Section 93 of the Sale and Supply of Alcohol Act states that while a Local Alcohol Policy may be more restrictive than the applicable District Plan, it can’t authorise something that the District Plan forbids. This means that the Local Alcohol Policy can set more restrictive hours than would be provided for in the District Plan, but it can’t extend them.

In practical terms, this limits what the Council can include in the draft Local Alcohol Policy. This becomes an issue for those licensed premises which are located in zones with more restrictive trading hours – those in the Local Business Zone, or adjoining a Residential Zone. The Local Alcohol Policy can’t extend the maximum trading hours in those areas beyond what is in the current District Plan, which means that when the eight premises identified renew their liquor licences the Local Alcohol Policy will significantly curtail the hours they can operate.

While the goal of the draft Local Alcohol Policy is to reduce alcohol-related harm by encouraging people to drink in supervised environments, by bringing back the maximum trading hours by 1 hour, the Local Alcohol Policy as drafted would have an inequitable application for those businesses affected. It is an unintended consequence brought about because of the conflict between the provisions of the District Plan and the draft Local Alcohol Policy, and the application of section 93 of the Sale and Supply of Alcohol Act 2012.

The proposal, therefore, is to remove the point of conflict by amending the District Plan and removing the rules that set maximum trading hours for activities involving the sale of alcohol. At the time the rules were included in the District Plan there was no alternative regulatory mechanism, and it was the most effective way of regulating noise related to activities involving the sale of alcohol. However, with the introduction of the Local Alcohol Policy provisions of the Sale and Supply of Alcohol Act 2012 there is a more effective regulatory tool. It makes sense to amend the District Plan and leave regulation of trading hours to the Local Alcohol Policy. Furthermore it will give the Council greater scope to consider how maximum trading hours may be set. Rather than focussing on planning zones, the Local Alcohol Policy could set maximum trading hours by suburb, or by reference to identified entertainment “precincts”, or by some other geographic association.

4. NEXT STEPS

If the Council agrees in principle to pursue a change to the District Plan, then officers will prepare the required documents, including a section 32 report. Consultation on that proposed Plan Change would be conducted under the Resource Management Act 1993, and is expected to take between 7-9 months.

This process will require the development of the Local Alcohol Policy to be suspended until the District Plan change process is complete. If the rules are removed from the District Plan, the draft Local Alcohol Policy will then be revised to reflect a different approach to setting maximum trading hours.

If the recommended approach is adopted then people who have already submitted on the draft Local Alcohol Policy will be notified that the development of the Local Alcohol Policy is suspended, and the reasons for suspending the project. Once the District Plan Change process is complete, and work recommenced on the Local Alcohol Policy, then submitters will be notified again and invited to participate in the process.

5. Compliance and administration

Does the Committee have delegated authority to decide? If Yes quote relevant clause(s) from Delegations Manual <Enter clause>	No
Are the decisions significant?	No
If they are significant do they affect land or a body of water?	No
Can this decision only be made through a 10 Year Plan?	No
Does this decision require consultation through the Special Consultative procedure?	No
Is there funding in the current Annual Plan for these actions?	Yes
Are the recommendations inconsistent with any of Council’s policies or plans?	No

Attachments

Current Trading Hours for Licensed Premises ⇩

Peter Ridge

Policy Analyst

PALMERSTON NORTH CITY COUNCIL

Memorandum

TO: Community Development Committee

MEETING DATE: 11 December 2017

TITLE: Council Events Review - future actions

DATE: 7 December 2017

AUTHOR/S: Ian Littleworth, Manager - Community Engagement, Libraries and Community Services

RECOMMENDATION(S) TO Council

1. That Council reviews and approves the action points highlighted in clause 3 within this Memorandum in relation to the Council Events workshop held 4 September 2017.

1. ISSUE

This memorandum is to summarise a review undertaken of Council events and to confirm the actions that were identified at the Councillor workshop held on Monday 4 September 2017.

2. BACKGROUND

The Events and Festivals Strategy was completed in 2016 and is a review of the 2011 Strategy.

An action point under the strategy’s Driver 3: To improve coordination of community and commercial events was to undertake a funding review of all events. The scope of that review was broadened to accommodate wider aspects of council events that have become relevant since the strategy was written.

The review was further shaped by Council’s proposed new goal to be a Creative and Exciting City to be delivered through the draft Creative and Liveable Strategy; and in particular the priority to develop a national and international reputation as an exciting city that has plenty of things to do at night and the on the weekends.

The review was focussed on larger/significant community events that occur in the city that have a connection with Council either directly, through contracts or grant funding to community groups.

Specific aspects included:

· Council community events

· Commemorative events

· PNCC grant funded community events

· Other event opportunities

· Council officer support provided to events.

A Councillor only workshop was held on 4 September 2017 for Officers to report back on the review; and to paint a picture of the city’s community events landscape in order to inform future Council discussions and 10 year planning.

Key points from the review:

The term core events as used in the 2016 Events and Festival Strategy has been replaced with the term community events.

Council is responsible for the direct delivery or contracting of a range of community and commemorative events.

CURRENT COUNCIL COMMUNITY / COMMEMORATIVE EVENTS	DELIVERY METHOD
Armistice Day	Council delivered
Christmas Tree Lighting/Carols in the Square	Contracted
Christmas Parade	Contracted
Christmas in the Square	Contracted
New Year’s Concert	Contracted
Summer Concert series	Contracted
Waitangi Day	Contracted
Esplanade Day	Contracted
Festival of Cultures	Council delivered
ANZAC Day	Council delivered
Jazz Festival	Funding agreement
Winter Festival	Contracted/Council delivered

In 2017/18 Council provided $648,000 of direct, contract or grant funding to support a range of council, commemorative and community events.

Grant funding for events is managed predominantly through the Celebrating Communities and Creative Communities grant process. $157,000 was allocated in 2017/18 to community events through grants.

A range of wider regional and economic events are also supported by Council either by funding and/or officer support around bookings and regulatory processes. The more significant of these events include Rural Games, Gold Cup Festival and NZ Grand Prix, which along with other regional/economic events are also supported by CEDA.

Council makes provision for the community booking and/or usage of street flagpoles, cross street banners, LED advertising screen, events equipment and furniture, and community stage.

Council is currently in the process of establishing an Events team to facilitate a coordinated approach to community and commemorative events, to provide a more customer centric focus to supporting the development and delivery of events.

The purpose of this team is to:

· Facilitate an events ‘One Stop Shop’ approach for the community and internally

· Manage contract relationships for Council’s contracted events

· Directly manage the delivery of specific events

· Provide event support to community organisations

· Manage event bookings on Council land

· Manage bookings for Council event equipment and collateral

· Assist event organisers navigate Council internal and regulatory processes

· Build relationships and synergies across the wider events sector

Whilst recruitment is not yet fully complete, Officers have already begun delivering many of these services.

Councillor Workshop feedback summary:

· Councillors continue to support the existing community and commemorative events; and current level of event funding.

· Councillors support the continuation of the provision of a community stage of the current size. There was very little Council support for the provision of a larger stage.

· Councillors support the ongoing funding for a winter event, the nature of which is to be flexible from year to year.

3. NEXT STEPS

Key actions from workshop:

· Fireworks over the River, the Reel Earth Festival and associated funding to be included as ongoing Council community events.

· Funding be included for consideration in the 10 Year Plan for a contestable fund for adhoc community event opportunities that arise.

· Funding be included for consideration in the 10 Year Plan for a regular maintenance programme for event equipment and collateral.

· Funding be included for consideration in the 10 Year Plan to renew the installation system for street flagpoles and to replace old street flags.

· Waitangi Day commemorations to return to the Square and include a greater civic acknowledgement of the day.

· Officers to undertake a review of the fee structure for usage of the community stage.

· Officers to consider that when the community events are next contracted out again, the Esplanade Day event be moved to a biannual cycle; and that open days for other Council reserves be considered.

· Further work is undertaken to re-establish the Manawatu Events Trust.

4. Compliance and administration

Does the Committee have delegated authority to decide? If Yes quote relevant clause(s) from Delegations Manual <Enter clause>	No
Are the decisions significant?	No
If they are significant do they affect land or a body of water?	No
Can this decision only be made through a 10 Year Plan?	No
Does this decision require consultation through the Special Consultative procedure?	No
Is there funding in the current Annual Plan for these actions?	Yes
Are the recommendations inconsistent with any of Council’s policies or plans?	No

Attachments

Nil

Ian Littleworth

Manager - Community Engagement

PALMERSTON NORTH CITY COUNCIL

Memorandum

TO: Community Development Committee

MEETING DATE: 11 December 2017

TITLE: Report on community relations and representations related to portfolios

DATE: 15 November 2017

AUTHOR/S: Julie Macdonald, Strategy & Policy Manager, City Future

RECOMMENDATION(S) TO Council

1. That information about the community relationships and representations relating to Councillor portfolios is received.

1. ISSUE

At the Community Development Committee meeting on 12 June 2017, a Notice of Motion presented by Cr Naylor recommended that Council support the formation of a Disability Reference Group to advise Council on disability issues. Following discussion and resolution on that particular issue, it was resolved:

That the Chief Executive reports on community relationships and representations as it relates to portfolios.

2. BACKGROUND

This report is in response to that resolution, and provides a summary of the formalised relationships and representations that correspond to each portfolio held by Councillors. The table below outlines the relationships by portfolio, and also notes the relationships with the CCOs. It should be noted that this report does not describe the many informal liaison opportunities taken up by Councillors in the course of their portfolio work.

Portfolio	Community relationships and representations	Comment
CBD and retail	City Centre Reference Group (Councillor representation)
Children and families
Community services	Palmerston North Community Services Council (Councillor representation)
Cultural	Palmerston North Community Arts Council (Councillor representation) Palmerston North Performing Arts Trust (Councillor representation)	CCO relationships (Te Manawa, Globe Theatre, Regent Theatre, Caccia Birch)
Digital/ technology	Digital Leaders Forum (Councillor representation)	This Forum does not meet at present
Disability	Disabled Person Assembly Partnership Advisory group (Councillor representation)	There is a proposed disability sector advisory group (Community Development Committee September 2017). Officers will report back on this matter
Education		Annual Council meeting with IPU, Massey University and UCOL
Employment		Chamber of Commerce (Council membership)
Environmental and sustainability	Environment Network Manawatū (informal Councillor attendance)
Health and wellbeing		Annual Council meeting with the MidCentral DHB
Housing	Housing Needs Monitoring Group (informal Councillor attendance)
Multicultural	Manawatū Multicultural Centre (Councillor representation) Papaioea Pasifika Centre (informal Councillor attendance)
Neighbourhood engagement	Linton Community (informal Councillor attendance) Awesome Awapuni (informal Councillor attendance) Roslyn REACH (informal Councillor attendance) Kelvin Grove community (informal Councillor attendance)
Science and innovation		CCO relationship (Te Manawa) BCC (funding relationship and annual meeting with Council)
Safe city and civil defence	Manawatū-Whanganui Civil Defence Emergency (Councillor representation) Management Group (Councillor representation) Manawatū-Whanganui Regional Disaster Relief Fund (Councillor representation) Palmerston North Neighbourhood Support Group (Councillor representation) Safety Advisory Board (Councillor representation)
Seniors and aged care	Age Friendly City (informal Councillor attendance)
Transport – public and active	Horizons Regional Council Land Transport Committee (Councillor representation) Councillor representation on Horizons Regional Council Passenger Transport Committee (Councillor representation) People on Bikes Forum (informal Councillor attendance)
Rural and villages	Bunnythorpe Community Committee (informal Councillor attendance) RECAP Society for the Resilience and Engagement of the Community of Ashhurst and Pohangina (RECAP) (informal Councillor attendance) Longburn Community Committee (informal Councillor attendance)
Youth and Students	Palmy Youth Network (informal Councillor attendance)

Councillor representatives are also appointed to some specific organisations (Manawatū Community Athletics Track Advisory Committee, Wildbase Recovery Community Trust and Hoffman Kiln Trust, and Palmerston North Jaycees Travelling Fellowship Scheme) and are members of project committees (such as He Aro Kotahi Bridge and Pathway Project Group, Arena Masterplan Steering Group, and the Waste Water Project Steering Group). The activities of specific groups and project teams are outside the scope of the information requested by the Council.

3. conclusion

There is not a formal reference or liaison group for each portfolio area, however Councillors do have a wide range of informal and formal relationships with networks and reference groups. The majority of the groups identified above are both initiated and led by the wider community.

4. Compliance and administration

Does the Committee have delegated authority to decide?	Yes
Are the decisions significant?	No
If they are significant do they affect land or a body of water?	No
Can this decision only be made through a 10 Year Plan?	No
Does this decision require consultation through the Special Consultative procedure?	No
Is there funding in the current Annual Plan for these actions?	No
Are the recommendations inconsistent with any of Council’s policies or plans?	No

Attachments

Nil

Julie Macdonald

Strategy & Policy Manager

PALMERSTON NORTH CITY COUNCIL

Report

TO: Community Development Committee

MEETING DATE: 11 December 2017

TITLE: CBD Amenity Bylaw - S155 Determination Report

DATE: 21 November 2017

AUTHOR/S: Ann-Marie Mori, Policy Analyst, City Future

Julie Macdonald, Strategy & Policy Manager, City Future

RECOMMENDATION(S) TO Council

1. That a CBD Amenity Bylaw is the most appropriate option to address the adverse effects on amenity values of the CBD resulting from nuisance behaviour that may be associated with begging and other anti-social activities (as described in the S155 Local Government Act 2002 Determination Report attached in Appendix 1).

Summary of options analysis for CBD AMENITY BYLAW

Problem or Opportunity	Adverse effects that begging and other anti-social activities can have on public safety and convenience, and the effects of certain nuisance behaviours on the amenity value of public places in the Central Business District (CBD).
OPTION 1:	Council determines that a CBD Amenity bylaw is the most appropriate way of addressing the perceived problems associated with begging and other anti-social activities (as described in Option 7 in the S155 report attached as Appendix 1).
Community Views	Community views on this form of bylaw have not yet been sought.
Benefits	Provides a comprehensive framework to deal with the identified problem. This legislative tool will enable Council to take action when required and improve the City’s amenity values where they are impacted on by begging and other anti-social behaviours.
Risks	The proposed approach may not sufficiently address the concerns raised by Councillors in the past. The bylaw may give rise to implications under the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 (NZBORA) however any restrictions on rights and freedoms guaranteed by NZBORA are likely to be justified.
Financial	The Customer Services General Manager has advised that implementation costs could be met through existing resources.
OPTION 2:	Council does not determine that the form of bylaw recommended is the most appropriate way of addressing the perceived problems associated with begging and other anti-social activities. Analyses of other available options that may address the problem have been presented in the S155 report (attached).
Community Views	Community views have not yet been sought.
Benefits	Other options could be explored further with the aim of reducing the identified problem.
Risks	The problem continues with associated impacts on the amenity values of the City’s CBD.
Financial	There may be financial implications arising from a decision to pursue any of the other options explored in the S155 report. These have not been explored in detail.
Contribution of Recommended Option to Council’s Strategic Direction	The recommended option is Option 1: this option supports the priorities in the draft Creative and Liveable, and Connected Community. In particular, the proposed bylaw supports the objectives to improve the vibrancy and welcoming nature of the central city, and to promote the safety of the community in general.

Rationale for the recommendations

1. Overview of the problem or opportunity

1.1 The issue of anti-social and intimidatory behaviour principally related to begging has repeatedly been raised by the Council and members of the community over recent years.

1.2 The Council has bylaw-making powers under Section 145 of the Local Government Act 2002 (LGA 2002) for one or more of the following purposes:

- protecting the public from nuisance:

- protecting, promoting, and maintaining public health and safety:

- minimising the potential for offensive behaviour in public places.

1.3 Before making a bylaw the Council must consider whether a bylaw is the most appropriate way of addressing the perceived problem.

1.4 In this determination decision the Council must carefully identify and define the ‘perceived problem’ as well as identify and assess options for addressing the problem. In this context the perceived problem has been carefully scrutinised and defined on the basis of the Council’s resolution in March 2017:

“That council address issues of intimidatory behaviour related to begging through an existing or new Bylaw."

1.5 Officers have been assisted in the preparation of the attached S155 determination report by Cooper Rapley Lawyers (refer Appendix 1). Two key paragraphs from the S155 report are included below to reinforce the criticality of problem definition in the context of bylaw making:

“The essence of the perceived problem is “raised levels of concern reported from residents, retailers and visitors to the city, primarily centred around the behaviour of the beggars which has been seen as intimidating, aggressive and generally disruptive to businesses and members of the public in the CBD”. This has been identified despite the fact that begging is not new to Palmerston North and there is no empirical evidence to suggest that the number of beggars in the city is increasing.

It is considered that the perceived problem is most appropriately defined as “the adverse effects on public safety and convenience and the amenity values of public places resulting from nuisance behaviour”. This will be referred to as “the Problem” in this report. Defining the Problem in this way:

(a) focusses the analysis of options on the essential nature of the community’s concerns, being adverse effects on public safety and convenience and the amenity of public places;

(b) facilitates an approach that protects the community’s expectation of positive experiences of public places while respecting an individual’s reasonable right of access to public places; and

(c) recognises the reasonable expectations of businesses that public frontages will be attractive, convenient, and safe places.”

1.6 The problem has been broadly defined in this way to ensure that the constitutional rights and freedoms of individuals are respected, and in particular the freedom of expression and freedom from discrimination. Appendix 1 contains an extensive analysis of the implications of bylaw-making under the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act.

2. Background and previous council decisions

2.1 The issue of begging in the City has been discussed by the Council a number of times and the table below provides a brief summary of the key decisions and initiatives over the last six years:

Year	Reporting and relevant recommendations
2011	In response to complaints from members of the public, officers prepared a report discussing the problem and assessing options. A bylaw was not recommended as an effective response to the problem.
2012	Give Wisely campaign launched in December. Emphasis of campaign is to encourage people to give money to charities rather than directly to beggars.
2013 (December)	“Passionate About Broadway” registers petition in complaint about begging, with 1560 signatures. Memo to Community Development Committee discussed limitations of a bylaw, and noted that Give Wisely had been running for 12 months. Councillor motion to develop a bylaw was lost.
2016 (May)	Councillors requested research into whether begging could be addressed as part of the review of the Nuisance Bylaw. Report concluded a bylaw was not the most appropriate way of addressing the problem, and recommended exploring alternative identified solutions. Resolution made to “expand the Give Wisely campaign, creating a day patrol or other approaches … and report back …”
2016 (June – September)	Report discussed alternatives and recommended trial of the “Day Hosts” programme, supported by the Safety Advisory Board. Council initially agreed to this recommendation, but changed its decision following further discussion. Council resolution supported a 3-month trial by MASH Trust to deliver targeted services to beggars to discourage begging.
2017 (March)	Report back from MASH on results of trial conclude that it had been effective in reducing begging, but a persistent core remained and would not likely be affected by an ongoing programme. Council decided not to continue MASH trial, and instructed officers to develop a begging bylaw to address the issue. The following resolutions were made: · “That Council does not extend the MASH Trust contract to provide targeted services supporting the social needs of beggars in the CBD" · “That the Chief Executive be instructed to trial… Place Activation options…within existing budgets and report back by June 2017" · “That council address issues of intimidatory behaviour related to begging through an existing or new Bylaw".
2017 (June)	Report back on the options for place activations as a response to begging in the CBD. Resolution was to trial an extension of the dining areas outside The Lab restaurant out onto the footpath.
2017 (October)	Report in response to an increase in antisocial behaviour from a small but determined group of youth. Resolution for the City Ambassadors trial to go ahead. This report did not address begging issues.
2017 (December)	Current report to Community Services Committee in response to the March 2017 resolution.

3. Description of options

3.1 Option 1: Council determines that a CBD Amenity bylaw is the most appropriate way of addressing the perceived problems associated with begging and other anti-social activities (as described in Option 7 in the S155 report attached as Appendix 1).

3.2 Option 2: Council does not determine that the form of bylaw recommended is the most appropriate way of addressing the perceived problems associated with begging and other anti-social activities. Analyses of other available options that may address the problem have been presented in the S155 report (attached).

4. Analysis of options

4.1 Option 1: Council determines that a CBD Amenity bylaw is the most appropriate way of addressing the perceived problems associated with begging and other anti-social activities (as described in Option 7 in the S155 report attached as Appendix 1).

4.2 The key features of a bylaw developed under Option 1 are:

Scope of nuisance behaviour:

The suggested scope of nuisance behaviour in the bylaw would incorporate three categories of behaviour that can have an adverse effect on public safety and convenience and the amenity of public places.

(a) Begging in a public place in a manner that is likely to cause harassment, alarm, or distress to any reasonable person;

(b) Behaving in a way that causes an unreasonable interference with the peace, comfort or convenience of any person;

(c) Occupying a public place for an unreasonable period of time that affects the reasonable operation of private businesses adjoining that public place or otherwise unreasonably reduces the area available for pedestrian use.

Principles to respect an individual’s rights and freedoms:

(d) spatial limitation i.e. the bylaw will only apply to an area where the Problem is being experienced;

(e) a complaints and investigation process involving consideration of complaints based on objective criteria by experienced Authorised Officers;

(f) high level decision-making as to formal steps by Authorised Delegates and based on written reports;

(g) the issue of formal notices to remedy nuisance behaviour that have specified conditions and a limited duration;

(h) an opportunity to object to formal notices.

4.3 Option 2: Council does not determine that the form of bylaw recommended is the most appropriate way of addressing the perceived problems associated with begging and other anti-social activities. Alternatives to address the problem have been explored in the S155 report. These are described fully in Appendix 1.

· Do nothing (no formal option taken to address the problem)

· Targeted Social Services Contract

· Education Campaign (to consider alternative methods of giving to beggars)

· Placemaking options (to move beggars away from high traffic, visible or risk areas)

· Amend an Existing Bylaw (e.g. Signs and Use of Public Places Bylaw 2015)

· Develop a standalone Bylaw focussed on intimidating behaviour

5. Conclusion

The Council has requested advice on the development of a bylaw to “address issues of intimidatory behaviour related to begging through an existing or new Bylaw." This report outlines the complexities involved in responding appropriately to that resolution. It is considered that a CBD Amenity Bylaw is the most appropriate option to address the adverse effects on the amenity values of public places in the CBD resulting from nuisance behaviour that may be associated with begging and other anti-social activities.

6. Next actions

6.1 If Councillors decide to the adopt the recommended approach, a draft CBD Amenity Bylaw, including an Administration Manual, will be prepared and reported back to the Community Development Committee for approval to consult in March 2018.

6.2 Discussion with Rangitāne o Manawatū, and stakeholders such as MASH Trust, MidCentral Public Health, NZ Police, Council staff and the Safety Advisory Board, are proposed. This feedback will be used to further inform the drafting of a CBD Amenity bylaw.

7. Outline of community engagement process

7.1 Given the long history of discussion of this issue, while officers will seek feedback on the proposed approach, the main opportunity for input will be on the draft Bylaw itself once Council has approved it for consultation.

Compliance and administration

Does the Committee have delegated authority to decide? If Yes quote relevant clause(s) from Delegations Manual 168.3	Yes
Are the decisions significant?	No
If they are significant do they affect land or a body of water?	No
Can this decision only be made through a 10 Year Plan?	No
Does this decision require consultation through the Special Consultative procedure?	No
Is there funding in the current Annual Plan for these actions?	Yes
Are the recommendations inconsistent with any of Council’s policies or plans?	No

Attachments

Proposed Bylaw on CBD Amenity Section 155 Determination Report ⇩

Ann-Marie Mori

Policy Analyst

Julie Macdonald

Strategy & Policy Manager

Aleisha Rutherford (Chairperson)
Rachel Bowen (Deputy Chairperson)
Grant Smith (The Mayor)
Brent Barrett	Jim Jefferies
Susan Baty	Lorna Johnson
Adrian Broad	Duncan McCann
Gabrielle Bundy-Cooke	Karen Naylor
Vaughan Dennison	Bruno Petrenas
Lew Findlay QSM	Tangi Utikere
Leonie Hapeta