AGENDA

Finance & Audit Committee

 


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Susan Baty (Chairperson)

Karen Naylor (Deputy Chairperson)

Grant Smith (The Mayor)

Vaughan Dennison

Leonie Hapeta

Renee Dingwall

Lorna Johnson

Lew Findlay QSM

Bruno Petrenas

Patrick Handcock ONZM

Tangi Utikere

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


 

 

 


PALMERSTON NORTH CITY COUNCIL

 

 

 

 

Finance & Audit Committee MEETING

 

19 February 2020

 

 

 

Order of Business

 

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.         Declarations of Interest (if any)

Members are reminded of their duty to give a general notice of any interest of items to be considered on this agenda and the need to declare these interests.

 

 

 

 

4.         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.)

5.         Confirmation of Minutes                                                                                     Page 7

“That the minutes of the Finance & Audit Committee meeting of 4 December 2019 Part I Public be confirmed as a true and correct record.”  

6.         Conference Opportunity - Rangitāne Appointed Members                             Page 13

Memorandum, presented by Hannah White, Democracy & Governance Manager.

7.         Quarterly Performance and Financial Report - Quarter Ending 31 December 2019 Page 17

Memorandum, presented by Stuart McKinnon, Chief Financial Officer and Andrew Boyle, Head of Community Planning.

8.         Treasury Report - 6 months ending 31 December 2019                                   Page 83

Memorandum, presented by Steve Paterson, Strategy Manager - Finance.

9.         New Deed of Lease for Manawatu Pony Club, Manawatu Canine Club and Ruahine Kindergarten Milverton                                                                                     Page 93

Memorandum, presented by Bryce Hosking, Manager - Property.

10.       Powerco Easement at Vautier Park                                                                   Page 99

Memorandum, presented by Bryce Hosking, Manager - Property.

 

 

11.       Wastewater BPO Quarterly Report & Financial Status                                  Page 103

Report, presented by Robert van Bentum - Transport and Infrastructure Manager, Sacha Haskell, GM - Communications and Marketing.

12.       PNCC Animal Shelter Options                                                                          Page 117

Report, presented by Bryce Hosking, Manager - Property.

13.       Committee Work Schedule                                                                              Page 187

 14.      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

 

 

 

 

 

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.

[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

 

Minutes of the Finance & Audit Committee Meeting Part I Public, held in the Council Chamber, First Floor, Civic Administration Building, 32 The Square, Palmerston North on 04 December 2019, commencing at 9.00am

Members

Present:

Councillor Susan Baty (in the Chair), The Mayor (Grant Smith) and Councillors Vaughan Dennison, Renee Dingwall, Lew Findlay QSM, Patrick Handcock ONZM, Leonie Hapeta, Lorna Johnson, Karen Naylor and Tangi Utikere.

Non Members:

Councillors Brent Barrett, Rachel Bowen, Zulfiqar Butt, Billy Meehan and Aleisha Rutherford.

Apologies:

Councillor Bruno Petrenas.

 

Councillor Bruno Petrenas entered the meeting at 11.15am during consideration of clause 78. He was not present for clauses 72 to 77 inclusive. 

1-19

Apologies

 

Moved Susan Baty, seconded Rachel Bowen.

The COMMITTEE RESOLVED

1.   That the Committee receive the apologies.

 

Clause 1-19 above was carried 15 votes to 0, the voting being as follows:

For:

The Mayor (Grant Smith) and Councillors Brent Barrett, Susan Baty, Rachel Bowen, Zulfiqar Butt, Vaughan Dennison, Renee Dingwall, Lew Findlay QSM, Patrick Handcock ONZM, Leonie Hapeta, Lorna Johnson, Billy Meehan, Karen Naylor, Aleisha Rutherford and Tangi Utikere.

   

2-19

Public Participation at Meetings

Memorandum, presented by Natalya Kushnirenko, Democracy & Governance Administrator.

 

Moved Vaughan Dennison, seconded Karen Naylor.

The COMMITTEE RESOLVED

1.   That the Finance & Audit Committee set aside a public comment section of not more than 30 minutes at the commencement of each ordinary meeting of the Committee to provide members of the community the opportunity to comment.

 

Clause 2-19 above was carried 15 votes to 0, the voting being as follows:

For:

The Mayor (Grant Smith) and Councillors Brent Barrett, Susan Baty, Rachel Bowen, Zulfiqar Butt, Vaughan Dennison, Renee Dingwall, Lew Findlay QSM, Patrick Handcock ONZM, Leonie Hapeta, Lorna Johnson, Billy Meehan, Karen Naylor, Aleisha Rutherford and Tangi Utikere.

 

3-19

Public Comment

 

Mr John Hornblow and Mr Robert Gibb made public comment regarding a proposal to establish a climate change group.

 

Moved Susan Baty, seconded Lorna Johnson.

The COMMITTEE RESOLVED

1.  That the Public Comment be received for information.

 

Clause 3-19 above was carried 15 votes to 0, the voting being as follows:

For:

The Mayor (Grant Smith) and Councillors Brent Barrett, Susan Baty, Rachel Bowen, Zulfiqar Butt, Vaughan Dennison, Renee Dingwall, Lew Findlay QSM, Patrick Handcock ONZM, Leonie Hapeta, Lorna Johnson, Billy Meehan, Karen Naylor, Aleisha Rutherford and Tangi Utikere.

 

4-19

4 Month Performance and Financial Report - Period Ending 31 October 2019

Memorandum, presented by Stuart McKinnon, Finance Manager.

 

Moved Susan Baty, seconded Karen Naylor.

The COMMITTEE RESOLVED

1.       That the Committee receives the October 2019 Performance and Financial Report and note:

a.    The October 2019 financial performance.

b.    The September 2019 quarterly operating performance.

c.     The October 2019 capital expenditure programme progress.

 

Clause 4-19 above was carried 15 votes to 0, the voting being as follows:

For:

The Mayor (Grant Smith) and Councillors Brent Barrett, Susan Baty, Rachel Bowen, Zulfiqar Butt, Vaughan Dennison, Renee Dingwall, Lew Findlay QSM, Patrick Handcock ONZM, Leonie Hapeta, Lorna Johnson, Billy Meehan, Karen Naylor, Aleisha Rutherford and Tangi Utikere.

 

5-19

Treasury Report - 3 months ending 30 September 2019

Memorandum, presented by Steve Paterson, Strategy Manager - Finance.

 

Moved Susan Baty, seconded Leonie Hapeta.

The COMMITTEE RESOLVED

1.   That the performance of the treasury activity for the 3 months ended 30 September 2019 be noted.

 

Clause 5-19 above was carried 15 votes to 0, the voting being as follows:

For:

The Mayor (Grant Smith) and Councillors Brent Barrett, Susan Baty, Rachel Bowen, Zulfiqar Butt, Vaughan Dennison, Renee Dingwall, Lew Findlay QSM, Patrick Handcock ONZM, Leonie Hapeta, Lorna Johnson, Billy Meehan, Karen Naylor, Aleisha Rutherford and Tangi Utikere.

 

6-19

Review of Structure of Dog Control Fees

Memorandum, presented by Steve Paterson, Strategy Manager - Finance.

 

Moved Lorna Johnson, seconded Billy Meehan.

The COMMITTEE RECOMMENDS

1.   That the report be received and that it be noted that officers will be placing more emphasis than before on monitoring compliance with the criteria for classification as a preferred owner.

2.   That no specific change be made to the charging structure for animal control fees but the rationale for the components of the fees be consciously considered each year as part of the process of recommending an updated schedule of fees and charges.

 

Clause 6-19 above was carried 15 votes to 0, the voting being as follows:

For:

The Mayor (Grant Smith) and Councillors Brent Barrett, Susan Baty, Rachel Bowen, Zulfiqar Butt, Vaughan Dennison, Renee Dingwall, Lew Findlay QSM, Patrick Handcock ONZM, Leonie Hapeta, Lorna Johnson, Billy Meehan, Karen Naylor, Aleisha Rutherford and Tangi Utikere.

Meeting adjourned at 10.42am.

Meeting resumed at 11.05am.

 

7-19

Contract Approval - CET Arena - Arena 2 Ceiling, Lighting and Fire System Upgrade

Memorandum, presented by Bryce Hosking, Manager - Property.

Councillor Bruno Petrenas entered the meeting at 11.15am.

 

Moved Susan Baty, seconded Rachel Bowen.

The COMMITTEE RECOMMENDS

1.   That the Council approves the contract between Palmerston North City Council and Colspec Construction Limited for the Arena 2 Ceiling, Lighting and Fire System Upgrade for the sum of $2,082,757 + GST. This is for the major construction works including contingency, beginning on 9 December 2019.

2.   That the Council notes that:

a)   Enabling and minor works for this project, including the procurement of materials and sub-contractors, have already been completed. These works will be reflected in the contract between Palmerston North City Council and Project Work 2008 Limited for the Arena 2 Ceiling, Lighting and Fire System Upgrade for the sum of $277,244 + GST; and

b)   The major construction works covered in the contract to be approved in Recommendation 7-19.1 of the report titled “Contract Approval – CET Arena – Arena 2 Ceiling, Lighting and Fire System Upgrade” and dated 4 December 2019, are set to begin on 9 December 2019. This means works will commence prior to Recommendation 1 being approved by Council.

 

Clause 7-19 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, Zulfiqar Butt, Vaughan Dennison, Renee Dingwall, Lew Findlay QSM, Patrick Handcock ONZM, Leonie Hapeta, Lorna Johnson, Billy Meehan, Karen Naylor, Bruno Petrenas, Aleisha Rutherford and Tangi Utikere.

 

8-19

New Deed of Lease for 21 Havelock Avenue

Memorandum, presented by Bryce Hosking, Manager - Property.

 

Moved Aleisha Rutherford, seconded Lorna Johnson.

The COMMITTEE RECOMMENDS

1.   That the Council as the administering body under the Reserves Act 1977, on behalf of the Minister of Conservation, approves the lease of land and building at 21 Havelock Avenue, Palmerston North, to Papaioea Pasifika Centre Trust.

2.   That the Council agree to execute a new five-year and nine-months lease between Palmerston North City Council and Papaioea Pasifika Centre Trust for 21 Havelock Avenue, Palmerston North.

 

Clause 8-19 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, Zulfiqar Butt, Vaughan Dennison, Renee Dingwall, Lew Findlay QSM, Patrick Handcock ONZM, Leonie Hapeta, Lorna Johnson, Billy Meehan, Karen Naylor, Bruno Petrenas, Aleisha Rutherford and Tangi Utikere.

 

9-19

Committee Work Schedule

 

Moved Susan Baty, seconded Karen Naylor.

The COMMITTEE RESOLVED

1.   That the Finance & Audit Committee receive its Work Schedule dated December 2019.

 

Clause 9-19 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, Zulfiqar Butt, Vaughan Dennison, Renee Dingwall, Lew Findlay QSM, Patrick Handcock ONZM, Leonie Hapeta, Lorna Johnson, Billy Meehan, Karen Naylor, Bruno Petrenas, Aleisha Rutherford and Tangi Utikere.

 

10-19

Request for City Wide Capital New Programme to Fund New Parking Infrastructure

Memorandum, presented by Robert van Bentum, Manager Transport and Infrastructure.

 

Moved Lorna Johnson, seconded Susan Baty.

The COMMITTEE RECOMMENDS

1.   That the Council approve a Capital New Programme entitled City Wide - On-Street Parking Infrastructure for the 2019-20 financial year with a budget of $75,000.

 

Clause 10-19 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, Zulfiqar Butt, Vaughan Dennison, Renee Dingwall, Lew Findlay QSM, Patrick Handcock ONZM, Leonie Hapeta, Lorna Johnson, Billy Meehan, Karen Naylor, Bruno Petrenas, Aleisha Rutherford and Tangi Utikere.

 

11-19

Te Motu o Poutoa Land Purchase Opportunity

Report, presented by Kathy Dever-Tod, Parks and Reserves Manager.

 

Moved Brent Barrett, seconded Leonie Hapeta.

The COMMITTEE RECOMMENDS

1.   That the Council purchases the land at the entranceway to Te Motu o Poutoa for $300,000 from Higgins Family Holdings.

2.   That the Council funds the $300,000 land purchase by: 1. transferring $170,000 of the unspent budget from Programme 708 (Urban Growth - Aokautere - Reserves Land Purchase) to this purchase; and 2. utilising $130,000 of unallocated budget from Programme 94 (Walkways and Shared Path – Purchase of Land to Extend Walkways) for this purchase to make up the total.

3.   That the top up of Programme 708 (Urban Growth - Aokautere - Reserves Land Purchase) of $170,000 to cover the amount used at Te Motu o Poutoa to purchase the entranceway land be referred to the next 10 Year Plan 2021 process.

 

Clause 11-19 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, Zulfiqar Butt, Vaughan Dennison, Renee Dingwall, Lew Findlay QSM, Patrick Handcock ONZM, Leonie Hapeta, Lorna Johnson, Billy Meehan, Karen Naylor, Bruno Petrenas, Aleisha Rutherford and Tangi Utikere.

 

12-19

CET Arena Redevelopment Update

Memorandum, presented by Bryce Hosking, Manager - Property.

 

Moved Susan Baty, seconded Leonie Hapeta.

The COMMITTEE RECOMMENDS

1.   That Council approve the plan to deliver Programmes 1534 (Embankment), 1082 (Speedway Pits Relocation) and 1083 (Entrance Plaza) concurrently as one project through a single main contractor during the 2019/20 and 2020/21 years.

2.   That Council approve the budgets for these Programmes totalling $6.833m for the current 2019/20 financial year and $8.862m for the 2020/21 financial year as follows:

 

2019/20

2020/21

Programme 1534

$1,694,000

$2,481,000

Programme 1082

$2,876,000

$4,040,000

Programme 1083

$2,263,000

$2,341,000

TOTAL

$6,833,000

$8,862,000

3.   That Council note that as a consequence of the changes above the remaining LTP budgets for the following Programmes have been reduced to the following:

Programme 990

$6,757,000

Programme 1083 (Land Purchase)

$1,008,000

 

 

Clause 12-19 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, Zulfiqar Butt, Vaughan Dennison, Renee Dingwall, Lew Findlay QSM, Patrick Handcock ONZM, Leonie Hapeta, Lorna Johnson, Billy Meehan, Karen Naylor, Bruno Petrenas, Aleisha Rutherford and Tangi Utikere.

     

The meeting finished at 12.46pm

Confirmed 19 February 2019

 

 

Chairperson


 

 

 


PALMERSTON NORTH CITY COUNCIL

 

 

  Memorandum

TO:                                Finance & Audit Committee

MEETING DATE:           19 February 2020

TITLE:                            Conference Opportunity - Rangitāne Appointed Members

Presented By:            Hannah White, Democracy & Governance Manager

APPROVED BY:             Sheryl Bryant, General Manager - Strategy & Planning

 

 

RECOMMENDATION(S) TO Finance & Audit Committee

1.   That the attendance of Rangitāne Appointed Member Mr Chris Whaiapu, with expenses paid, at the Te Maruata Hui of LGNZ being held in South Taranaki on 11 and 12 March 2020, be approved.

2.   That a review of the Expenses Policy be undertaken to consider whether the Policy be extended to cover all Appointed Members.

 

 

 

1.         ISSUE

Rangitāne Appointed Members are not covered by the Elected Members’ Expenses Policy, last revised 13 November 2019, which sets out expenses for travel and attendance at conferences/seminars/training/programmes; nor Delegation 190, which specifies authority only regarding elected member conferences or training opportunities.  Thus, a resolution is required to seek approval.

Anticipated expenses for attending this Hui are:

Hui                               Free

Accommodation          Free

Travel                          $300.00

2.         BACKGROUND

The hui will provide an opportunity for Māori elected and appointed members to connect, learn more about Local Government New Zealand’s work, participate in the election of a new Te Maruata Roopu Whakahaere, and engage with key stakeholders.

The hui programme is attached.

3.         NEXT STEPS

If the Committee decides to approve the expenses associated with attendance at this conference, registration will be made.

If Recommendation 2 is passed, consideration of the Expenses Policy will be undertaken.

4.         Compliance and administration

Does the Committee have delegated authority to decide?

If Yes quote relevant clause(s) from Delegations Manual 174

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

The recommendations contribute to Goal 5: A Driven and Enabling Council

The recommendations contribute to the outcomes of the Driven and Enabling Council Strategy

The recommendations contribute to the achievement of action/actions in a plan under the Driven and Enabling Council Strategy

The action is: N/A

Contribution to strategic direction and to social, economic, environmental and cultural well-being

Opportunity for individual professional development leads to increased capacity for Council to carry out its duties, in particular the priority of excelling at good governance. Networking with other Māori elected and appointed members from across the country provides an opportunity to consider good practice and reflect on PNCC’s growing relationship with Rangitāne.

 

Attachments

1.

Te Maruata Hui Programme

 

    


PDF Creator



 

 

 


PALMERSTON NORTH CITY COUNCIL

 

Memorandum

TO:                                Finance & Audit Committee

MEETING DATE:           19 February 2020

TITLE:                            Quarterly Performance and Financial Report - Quarter Ending 31 December 2019

Presented By:            Stuart McKinnon, Chief Financial Officer and Andrew Boyle, Head of Community Planning

APPROVED BY:             Stuart McKinnon, Finance Manager

Sheryl Bryant, General Manager - Strategy & Planning

 

 

RECOMMENDATION(S) TO FINANCE & AUDIT COMMITTEE

1.   That the Committee receive the December 2019 Quarterly Performance and Financial Report.

 

 

 

1.         ISSUE

To provide an update on the performance and financial achievements of the Council for the period ending 31 December 2019. This is the second update provided for the year.

2.         BACKGROUND

Details of operating and financial performance are included in the following sections. Reports are against the goals as detailed in the 10 Year Plan 2018-28.

3.         NEXT STEPS

A further performance and financial report will be provided after the end of the March 2020 quarter.

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

The recommendations contribute to Goal 5: A Driven and Enabling Council

The recommendations contribute to the outcomes of the Driven and Enabling Council Strategy

The recommendations contribute to the achievement of action/actions in a plan under the Driven and Enabling Council Strategy

The action is: to enable Council to exercise governance by reviewing financial performance and operating performance and provide accountability for these to the public.

Contribution to strategic direction and to social, economic, environmental and cultural well-being

As above.

 

 

 

Attachments

1.

December 2019 Performance and Financial Report - CE overview and financial summary

 

2.

December 2019 Performance and Financial Report - Performance measures

 

3.

December 2019 Performance and Financial Report - Supplementary materials

 

    


PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator



 

 

 


PALMERSTON NORTH CITY COUNCIL

 

Memorandum

TO:                                Finance & Audit Committee

MEETING DATE:           19 February 2020

TITLE:                            Treasury Report - 6 months ending 31 December 2019

Presented By:            Steve Paterson, Strategy Manager - Finance

APPROVED BY:             Stuart McKinnon, Finance Manager

 

 

RECOMMENDATION(S) TO COMMITTEE

1.   That the performance of Council’s treasury activity for the six months ended 31 December 2019 be noted.

 

 

 

1.         ISSUE

To provide an update on the Council’s treasury activity for the 6 months ended 31 December 2019.

2.         BACKGROUND

The Council’s Annual Budget for 2019/20 forecast additional debt of $44.792m would need to be raised during the year to fund the $53.516m of new capital expenditure programmes (including assumed carry forwards from 2018/19).  In June 2019 the Council resolved to specifically authorise the raising of up to $45m of additional debt.  In August 2019 the Council approved increasing the new capital expenditure programme for the year to $57.022m due to a revised assessment of the level of carry forwards from 2018/19.  At this stage however there has been no change to the additional debt that has been authorised.  If additional debt is required a request will made later in the year.

Council’s Financial Strategy (updated version adopted 25 June 2018) contains the following ratios which the Council has determined to be prudent maxima:

•          Net debt as a percentage of total assets not exceeding 20%

•          Net debt as a percentage of total revenue not exceeding 200% 

•          Net interest as a percentage of total revenue not exceeding 15%

•          Net interest as a percentage of annual rates income not exceeding 20%

The Treasury Policy (embracing the Liability Management and Investment Policy), adopted in December 2017 and updated on 25 June 2018, also contains a number of other criteria regarding debt management.

3.         Performance

Following the latest annual review published on 30 September 2019 Council’s S&P Global Rating’s credit rating remained unchanged at AA / A-1+ with a positive outlook. 

Schedule 1 attached shows the details of Council’s debt as at 31 December 2019.   Debt levels were within the policy parameters outlined in section 2 of this report.

The summarised gross term debt movements are shown in the following table:

 

Annual Budget for year (2019/20)

$000

Actual – 3 months (2019/20)

$000

Actual – 6 months (2019/20)

$000

Debt Balance at 1 July 2019

New Debt #

Debt repayments #

122,041

44,792

121,200

2,950

121,200

8,850

Closing Balance

Comprising:

Bank advance (on call)

LGFA short term advance

LGFA & Council stock

166,833

124,150

 

5,150

10,000

109,000

130,050

 

6,050

10,000

114,000

 

#   A portion of the Council’s debt is drawn on a daily basis – daily drawdowns & repayments are not included in these figures but the net draw or repayment for the year to date is shown as part of new debt or debt repayment as appropriate.

Gross debt at 31 December 2019 was $130.5 m compared with $121.2m at 1 July 2019.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Movements in recent years are shown in the following graph:

Actual finance costs incurred during the 6 months (including interest, line fees & the effects of payments relating to swaps) amounted to $2.8m compared with the budget for the year of $7.616m. 

The Council has entered financial instruments related to its debt portfolio utilising swap trading lines established with Westpac and ANZ.  The details of these are shown in Schedule 2 attached.

The value of these instruments is measured in terms of its “mark-to-market” i.e. the difference between the value at which the interest rate was fixed and the current market value of the transaction.  Each of these transactions was valued at the date they were fixed and again at the reporting date.  Financial reporting standards require the movement in values to be recorded through the Council’s Statement of Comprehensive Income (Profit & Loss Account).  They have been revalued as at 31 December 2019 and show an increase in book value of $3.16m for the quarter and $1.12m for the year to date.

The Council’s Treasury Policy contains guidelines regarding the measurement of treasury risk as follows:

·    Interest rate risk is managed by the Council maintaining the ratio of debt that is subject to floating versus fixed interest rates within pre-set limits.

·    Funding and liquidity risk is managed by the Council maintaining a pre-set portion of its debt in a range of maturity periods eg < 1 year, 1 – 3 years, 5 years +. 

The position compared to the policy is illustrated in the graphs in Schedule 3.  The overall ratio of fixed v floating interest rate debt is based on the assessed level of total debt in 12 months’ time.

For the purpose of this calculation the forecast debt has been assumed as $142m although the Annual Budget forecast is that the total debt by 30 June 2020 will be $167m.  We have used this lower forecast to protect against the risk of becoming over hedged i.e. too much fixed debt in the event the actual borrowing required is lower than budgeted.  56% of the forecast total debt is fixed (using the forecast total of $142m) and this reduces to 47% (if the total is $167m).  Current market sentiment is that interest rates will be lower for longer.

As at 31 December 2019 all policy targets had been met. 

Council’s credit lines with the banks include a $18m four-year credit facility with Westpac Bank (maturing 31 July 2022) and a revolving $25m three-year facility with ANZ Bank (maturing 31 March 2022).

4.         conclusion & next steps

Finance costs for the 6-month period (including interest, line fees & the effect of swaps) was $2.8m compared with budget for the year of $7.616m.

In conjunction with Council’s treasury advisors hedging instruments are regularly reviewed in an effort to ensure the instruments are being utilised to best advantage as market conditions change. The level of hedging cover is also reviewed as the forecasts of future debt levels are revised.

Council’s borrowing strategy is continually reviewed, in conjunction with Council’s treasury advisors, to ensure best advantage is taken of Council’s quality credit rating.

A further performance report will be provided after the end of the March 2020 quarter.

5.         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?

Yes

Are the recommendations inconsistent with any of Council’s policies or plans?

No

The recommendations contribute to Goal 5: A Driven and Enabling Council

The recommendations contribute to the outcomes of the Driven and Enabling Council Strategy

The recommendations contribute to the achievement of action/actions in Not Applicable

This report outlines the outcomes of a fundamental administrative activity of the Council.

Contribution to strategic direction

Managing the Council’s treasury activity is a fundamental component of day to day administration of the Council.

 

 

Attachments

1.

Schedules 1-3

 

    


PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator



 

 

 


PALMERSTON NORTH CITY COUNCIL

 

Memorandum

TO:                                Finance & Audit Committee

MEETING DATE:           19 February 2020

TITLE:                            New Deed of Lease for Manawatu Pony Club, Manawatu Canine Club and Ruahine Kindergarten Milverton

Presented By:            Bryce Hosking, Manager - Property

APPROVED BY:             Tom Williams, Chief Infrastructure Officer

 

 

RECOMMENDATION(S) TO Council

1.   That the Council as the administering body under the Reserves Act 1977, on behalf of the Minister of Conservation, approve the following leases:

a.    Land lease at Ashhurst Domain, Palmerston North, to Manawatu Pony Club Incorporated.

b.    Land lease at Ashhurst Domain, Palmerston North, to The Manawatu Canine Centre Incorporated.

c.     Land lease at Milverton Park, Palmerston North, to Ruahine Kindergarten Association Incorporated.

2.   That the Council agree to execute the following leases:

a.    A new five-year lease with renewal option between Palmerston North City Council and Manawatu Pony Club Incorporated for the land at Ashhurst Domain, Palmerston North.

b.    A new five-year lease with renewal option between Palmerston North City Council and The Manawatu Canine Centre Incorporated at Ashhurst Domain, Palmerston North.

c.     A new five-year lease with renewal option between Palmerston North City Council and Ruahine Kindergarten Association Incorporated for the land at Milverton Park, Palmerston North.

 

 

1.         ISSUE

1.1       The following leases have expired and are now on a month-to-month tenancy:

a.   The land lease at Ashhurst Domain, Palmerston North, to Manawatu Pony Club Incorporated expired on 31 May 2016.

b.   The land lease at Ashhurst Domain, Palmerston North, to The Manawatu Canine Centre Incorporated expired on 30 June 2016.

c.   The land lease at Milverton Park, Palmerston North, to Ruahine Kindergarten Association Incorporated expired on 31 October 2019.

1.2       Manawatu Pony Club Incorporated, The Manawatu Canine Centre Incorporated and Ruahine Kindergarten Association Incorporated have intentions to continue using their respective land areas.  Thus, new land leases are required respectively.

1.3       As all three land areas are classified as reserves under the Reserves Act 1977, the new leases require approval from the Local Authority on behalf of the Minister of Conservation prior to a new lease being entered.

1.4       If new leases are entered, the lease terms will be as follows:

Manawatu Pony Club Incorporated

·    Commencement Date: 1 June 2020

·    Lease Term: Five (5) Years

·    Renewal Term: One term of Five (5) Years

·    Annual Rental: $1,000.00 + GST and outgoings

·    Use of the Site: Remain same as the existing use

The Manawatu Canine Centre Incorporated

·    Commencement Date: 1 July 2020

·    Initial Lease Term: Five (5) Years

·    Renewal Term: One term of Five (5) Years

·    Annual Rental: $500.00 + GST and outgoings

·    Use of the Site: Remain same as the existing use

Ruahine Kindergarten Association Incorporated

·    Commencement Date: backdated to start on 1 November 2019

·    Initial Lease Term: Five (5) Years

·    Renewal Term: One term of Five (5) Years

·    Annual Rental: $50.00 + GST and outgoings

·    Use of the Site: Remain same as the existing use

 

2.         BACKGROUND

2.1       Manawatu Pony Club Incorporated

·    Manawatu Pony Club Incorporated has had a land lease at Ashhurst Domain since June 2009.

·    Council Officers contacted the Pony Club for entering a new lease before the lease expiry in 2016. The execution of the lease had been delayed due to the Pony Club requesting more area for the new lease.

·    Council Officers were working with the Pony Club to confirm specific land size requirements. However, after negotiation the land size has stayed the same in the new lease as before.

·    For clarity, while these negotiations were taking place the lease rolled to month-to-month tenancy.

·    The Pony Club pay an annual rental each year in one payment. As the current year’s payment has been made, the new lease will commence in June 2020.

2.2       The Manawatu Canine Centre Incorporated

·    The Manawatu Canine Centre Incorporated has had a land lease at Ashhurst Domain since July 2006.

·    Council Officers contacted the Canine Centre for entering a new lease before the lease expiry in 2016. The execution of the lease had been delayed due to negotiations over the operational terms of a new lease.

·    For clarity, while these negotiations were taking place the lease rolled to month-to-month tenancy.

·    The Canine Centre pay an annual rental each year in one payment. As the current year’s payment has been made, the new lease will commence in July 2020.

2.3       Ruahine Kindergarten Association Incorporated

·    Ruahine Kindergarten Association Incorporated has had a land lease at Milverton Park since November 2009.

·    The land leased to Ruahine Kindergarten Association Incorporated is a 650 square metres narrow strip used as part of the path way accessing the facilities owned by Ruahine Kindergarten Association Incorporated right next to Milverton Park.

2.4       The public notification process required under the Reserve Act 1997 has been undertaken with notification being advertised of Council’s intention to enter a new lease for the above three new leases.

2.5       Council Officers confirm that no submissions were received from this process.

2.6       The draft new leases were provided to Manawatu Pony Club Incorporated, The Manawatu Canine Centre Incorporated and Ruahine Kindergarten Association Incorporated for review and they are satisfied with the terms.

3.         NEXT STEPS

3.1       A new lease will be executed between Palmerston North City Council and Manawatu Pony Club Incorporated.

3.2       A new lease will be executed between Palmerston North City Council and The Manawatu Canine Centre Incorporated.

3.3       A new lease will be executed between Palmerston North City Council and Ruahine Kindergarten Association Incorporated.

4.         Compliance and administration

Does the Committee have delegated authority to decide?

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

The recommendations contribute to Goal 2: A Creative and Exciting City

The recommendations contribute to the outcomes of the Creative and Liveable Strategy

The recommendations contribute to the achievement of action/actions in the Active Community Plan

The action is to: Carry out recreation and reserves planning functions under the Reserves Act 1977 and LGA including the preparation of Reserve Management and Development Plans and Master Plans.

Contribution to strategic direction and to social, economic, environmental and cultural well-being

·  

 

 

Attachments

Nil   



 

 

 


PALMERSTON NORTH CITY COUNCIL

 

Memorandum

TO:                                Finance & Audit Committee

MEETING DATE:           19 February 2020

TITLE:                            Powerco Easement at Vautier Park

Presented By:            Bryce Hosking, Manager - Property

APPROVED BY:             Tom Williams, Chief Infrastructure Officer

 

 

RECOMMENDATION(S) TO Council

1.   That Council, as the administering body of Vautier Park (legally described as Part Section 249 Town of Palmerston North), authorise the granting of an easement to convey electricity, to Powerco.

2.   That Council, in exercise of the powers conferred on it by delegation under the Reserves Act 1977, authorise the granting of an easement to convey electricity, to Powerco.

3.   That Council note that the requirements of Section 4 of the Conservation Act 1987 have been satisfied in relation to consultation with Iwi over granting an easement to convey electricity at Vautier Park.

4.   That Council note that the requirements of Sections 119 and 120 of the Reserves Act 1977 have been satisfied in relation to public notification prior to the resolution to grant an easement to convey electricity over Vautier Park.

 

 

 

1.         ISSUE

1.1       Powerco currently have facilities for the supply of electricity to Freyberg Pool and School located along the drive way from Tremaine Avenue into Vautier Park (legally described as Part Section 249 Town of Palmerston North), edged in red as below aerial picture.

1.2       Council has asked Powerco to carry out electrical works by taking a feed of the existing line to supply Vautier Park Netball Courts, Puriri Terrace, Palmerston North.

1.3       This work was undertaken to resolve the problem of the insufficient power to the courts to run the training lights.

1.4       Any form of utility for services on reserve land requires an easement (or some comparable form of approval to use the land for purposes that are not recreation-based activities), as described in the Reserves Act 1977.

1.5       In addition, there is no easement registered for the facilities supplying electricity owned by Powerco at Vautier Park.

2.         BACKGROUND

2.1       In 1968 the Electricity Act provided the legal basis for utilising land for the purposes of conveying electricity. In 1977 this method of utilising land in reserves for the purposes of conveying electricity was superseded by the Reserves Act 1977.

2.2       In recent years Powerco have been bringing the legal status of their electricity conveyance utilities into alignment with that Act – which requires the establishment of an easement. Powerco are achieving this, for efficiency, as they carry out additional work and the upgrade of their utilities.

2.3       Public notification is required under the Reserve Act for granting an easement.

2.4       Council Officers prepared a Memorandum for the corrective action of granting an easement to Powerco at Vautier Park, Palmerston North to the Executive Leadership Team in September 2019 before the public consultation.

2.5       The public submission process was undertaken for the easement as per Section 120 of the Reserves Act 1977.

2.6       There were no submissions in support or opposition received.

2.7       Iwi must also be consulted on any permanent easement proposal under Section 4 of the Conservation Act, prior to adoption of the easement. This consultation was undertaken, and Iwi did not oppose the easement.

3.         NEXT STEPS

3.1       The easement instrument will be drawn up and altered, then added to the relevant property title.

4.         Compliance and administration

Does the Committee have delegated authority to decide?

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

The recommendations contribute to Goal 3: A Connected and Safe Community

The recommendations contribute to the outcomes of the Economic Development Strategy

The recommendations contribute to the achievement of action/actions in the Economic Development Plan

The action is: Carry out recreation and reserves planning functions under the Reserves Act 1977 and LGA including the preparation of Reserve Management and Development Plans and Master Plans.

Contribution to strategic direction and to social, economic, environmental and cultural well-being

This action ensures Council meets its legal obligations under the Reserves Act 1977 with regards to reserves planning and legislative requirements for utilities sited in reserves.

 

 

 

Attachments

Nil   



 

 

 


PALMERSTON NORTH CITY COUNCIL

 

Report

TO:                                Finance & Audit Committee

MEETING DATE:           19 February 2020

TITLE:                            Wastewater BPO Quarterly Report & Financial Status

PRESENTED BY:            Robert van Bentum - Transport and Infrastructure Manager, Sacha Haskell, GM - Communications and Marketing

APPROVED BY:             Tom Williams, Chief Infrastructure Officer

Sacha Haskell, General Manager - Marketing and Communications

 

 

RECOMMENDATION(S) TO Council

1.   That the Committee receive the update for the Wastewater BPO Project as detailed in the report titled `Wastewater BPO Quarterly Report & Financial Status’ dated 19 February 2020.

2.   That the Committee approves additional budget of $470,700 in order to complete the technical work and marketing and communications input scoped for the BPO Project for the 2019/2020 FY.

 

 

1.         Report Purpose

1.1       The purpose of the report is to provide an update to the Finance and Audit Committee of Council on the achievements of the Wastewater BPO Project for the period ending 1 February 2019. This is the second third update for the 2019-20 FY. A final report will be provided in June 2020.

1.2       The quarterly reports are in addition to periodic project workshops with Council undertaken at key milestones and decision points within the Project.

1.3       This report also updates the project expenditure against budget and total project financial commitments for the financial year. The update confirms that in order to complete the full scope of technical investigations and communication and marketing work (programmed for this financial year), additional funding is required. The rationale for and breakdown of the additional funds required is outlined in the report.

 

 

2.         Background and previous council decisions

2.1       Introduction

2.1.1    Council is required to lodge an application for new resource consents for the Best Practicable Option (BPO) for on-going treatment and discharge of treated wastewater from the Totara Road Wastewater Treatment Plant, by 30 June 2022.

 

2.1.2    The BPO Project was initiated in 2017 and has progressed to date, in line with the Project Programme adopted by the Council (refer Attachment 1). To date, all programmed tasks have been achieved within the Projects timeframe and budget.

 

2.1.3    As part of the 2018/28 Long Term Plan, Council confirmed an operational programme budget of $1,120,800 for the 2019/2020 Financial Year.

 

2.2       Identification of BPO Options

 

2.2.1    The Project Team and Project Steering Group (PSG) are delivering the Project within the adopted methodology to determine the Best Practicable Option (BPO).  A copy of the methodology adopted to deliver the BPO is attached (Attachment 2).

 

2.2.2    Since December 2018, the Projects Team has worked with stakeholders to develop the preliminary list of options (longlist) for the Wastewater BPO. A total of 34 options were developed across 6 categories. These categories included: Land, River, Groundwater, Ocean, Direct to Water Supply, Land and River combined. Sub-regional schemes and alternative treatment plant locations were options considered for all categories.

 

2.2.3    After completing the various assessments, the shortlist was confirmed in a Council workshop on 17 June 2019. Council endorsed the shortlist on 24th June 2010 and the Project has proceeded into options development.

 

2.2.4    The shortlist options represent the full range of receiving environments and include the following:


 

Table 1                 Shortlist Options

Option

Description

R2(b)

All wastewater discharged to the Manawatū River, with increased TP and TN removal

Dual R + L

Manawatū River discharge at Totara Road and below Opiki Bridge, with some land application

L + R(a) and (b)

Approximately 97% of the treated wastewater applied to land

L + R(d) and (e)

Treated wastewater applied to land below intermediate/high flows in the Manawatū River

GW -2

Base flow to land application, with remainder to high rate infiltration

O + L

Most of the treated wastewater discharge to the ocean and some wastewater applied to land. 

 

2.2.5    Technical investigations that cover environmental, archaeological, cultural, social and economic constraints are needed to confirm optimal locations for each of the shortlist options.  To adequately complete an Alternatives Assessment under the Resource Management Act (RMA), these investigations need to be robust as they have the potential to be challenged in an Environment Court process.

 

2.2.6    Consultation with the stakeholders and the community is necessary to meet statutory obligations under the RMA and the Local Government Act (LGA).  The main consultation phase for the project is scheduled for March 2020 because this will inform the development of technical assessments and evaluation of options in late 2020.  It is also necessary to complete consultation prior to the Long Term Plan consultation phase. 

 

3.         Project progress during Current Quarter

3.1       Technical Work Streams

3.1.1    Since June 2019, the Project Team have refined the scope of work necessary to complete technical assessments and consultation.  This information is required to inform a Multi-Criteria Analysis (MCA) scheduled for July 2020 (refer Attachment 2).  This technical work has commenced and is focused on the following:

·    Determine treatment solutions for all shortlisted options, including updated costings and capital and operational costs;

·    Identify of potential sites for shortlisted options, including land, ocean, groundwater and river discharge locations;

·    Determine the size of land necessary for land and groundwater discharges;

·    Map constraints and report for sensitive receivers for the following criteria:  natural environment, social and recreation, archaeological, property, cultural, planning and land use;

·    Determine trade waste pre-treatment standards and solutions and model potential trade waste changes;

·    Continue to complete river studies (fieldwork) and complete further river modelling to refine option triggers for any river discharge option;

·    Complete workshops with technical experts to determine potentially preferred site options for each shortlist option;

·    Develop wetland objectives and principles that can be used to inform design of preferred wetland and land passages, site identification and associated costs; and

·    Identify funding and procurement options for the shortlist options.

 

3.1.2    Council were provided with a project update in January 2020, at which the Project Team will present the outcomes of the technical analysis completed to date, describe the upcoming consultation process starting in March 2020 and seek endorsement of future briefings and workshops to Council.

 

3.1.3    During February 2020, the project team will develop further summary information including infographics for each of the short-list options, to inform the preparation of consultation and engagement material.  A consolidated report will be prepared with summaries of each of the shortlist options (key components, treatment levels and indicative costs).

 

3.1.4    In March 2020 a 4-week stakeholder engagement process will be undertaken.  The information gathered from this process will be used to inform the Council of stakeholder aspirations for the BPO.  It will also provide the Project Team with additional information and any insights to inform further technical assessments leading up to the multi-criteria assessment process.

 

3.2       Statutory Planning Changes

3.2.1    On 22 July 2019, Horizons Regional Council publicly notified Proposed Plan Change 2 to One Plan.  Council made a submission to PPC2 on the basis the plan change has the potential to impact on the ability to discharge treated wastewater to land (as proposed in five of the shortlisted options).  This submission was considered necessary to safeguard Council’s position with respect to the future consenting of the BPO and was prepared using the technical expertise within the Project Team. 

 

3.2.2    Council also took the lead on preparing and lodging a combined submission, together with Horowhenua, Manawatu, Rangitikei, Ruapehu and Tararua District Councils.  Further submissions have been received by Horizons Regional Council with some being in support and others opposed to PNCC’s submission.  Council is still waiting to hear from Horizons Regional Council on the next step.

 

 

3.2.3    During July 2019, the Draft National Policy Statements for Freshwater, Productive Soils and Urban Development were released.  Council has lodged submissions on all three of these policy statements, following their release for consultation.  Council is still waiting to hear back on the next step in the consultation process.

 

3.3       Stakeholder Engagement

3.3.1    Between June 2019 and December 2019, additional information has been developed through the technical assessments however the information has not yet been shared with stakeholders and the community. Several meetings have been held with key stakeholders to provide updates on project progress and seek input into the options development, without providing any further technical detail on the options.

 

3.3.2    Communication with the public and stakeholders has been focussed on raising awareness of the Project.  This has included updates to websites and via social media channels, with supplementary information via print and radio. An open day was also held at the wastewater treatment plant in 2018. Following completion of each stage and key milestone in the project, the web and communication content has been refreshed and amended.

 

3.3.3    One to one engagement with wider Iwi groups will commence in February 2020, prior to the public engagement process in March.  The purpose will be to share with them information about the short-listed options, particularly for options located within their Rohi. Engagement will be on-going to ensure the project team is aware of their concerns regarding the impact of each option and to enable the team to identify any opportunities to avoid or mitigate their concerns. An Iwi advisor has been appointed to support the Project and is assisting the Principal Iwi Advisor in Council in fronting this engagement process.

 

3.3.4    Engagement with Horowhenua District Council and Manawatu District Council elected members is planned in February 2020, prior to the public engagement process in March.  This will make them aware that some of the short-listed options are located within their District. Engagement at Officer level has been ongoing since 2018, however it is necessary to engage with the Chief Executive and Elected Members at this stage of the Project.

 

3.3.5    One-to-one engagement with Massey University, Environment Network Manawatu and the Chamber of Commerce which has been on-going will continue as more detailed information on the short-listed options is available. The project team will look to identify some additional stakeholder groups to ensure information about the project is as widely understood as possible.

 

3.3.6    Focused engagement initiated with the trade waste sector will continue with workshops to consider results from more detailed monitoring and assessments of pre-treatment options and modelling of potential future trade waste charges.  A survey of trade waste customers completed in September 2019 has provided some baseline information around customer growth intentions and current on-site treatment priorities.

 

3.3.7    A Stakeholder Engagement Plan was presented to the PSG in October and a revised version again in December 2019.  The plan outlined activities and tasks to be undertaken to deliver a comprehensive programme of community and stakeholder engagement to commence in March 2020. The total budget for the proposed engagement is estimated at $140,000, with $40,000 of this amount associated with production of collateral to support the consultation.

 

4.         Outline of MARKETING & COMMUNICATIONS

4.1       Marketing & Communications Plan

4.1.1    A Communications and Marketing Plan was presented to the PSG in October and a revised version in December 2019.  The plan outlined a range of marketing initiatives to raise awareness of the project in the lead up to the intensive period of engagement and on-going promotional work to ensure a high level of response from the engagement.

 

4.1.2    The overall marketing objectives are to raise public awareness, understanding and interest in Nature Calls project and BPO decision-making process and to support the Project Team’s engagement plan.  This will assist in maintaining public confidence in the process by clearly communicating progress and provide assurance that public feedback is being captured and considered.

 

4.1.3    The Marketing and Communications Plan includes four phases:

·    Phase 1.  Build awareness, educate and inform (Jan to Feb 2020)

·    Phase 2.  Consultation support (March 2020)

·    Phase 3.  Inform public on the BPO selection (late 2020)

·    Phase 4.  Inform public of resource consent lodgement (early - mid 2020)

           

4.1.4    The purpose of Phase 1 is to raise awareness that the city will be making a major investment into wastewater.  It will also include an education component that includes how people can save money and reduce the wastewater inputs.  This will involve website updates and CAB displays.  The cost of delivering Phase 1 is estimated at $39,000.

 

4.1.5    The purpose of Phase 2 is to raise awareness of the shortlisted options and encourage residents to participate in the Nature Calls public consultation process.  This will involve website, CAB displays and project team involvement at engagement events. The cost of delivering Phase 2 is estimated at $76,500.

 

4.1.6    The total cost of marketing and communications input required for the project during the current financial year is estimated at $115,500. 

 

4.2       Technical & Legal Reviews

4.2.1    Mott MacDonald will undertake a review of all technical work produced to determine the shortlist options prior to the MCA process commencing.  This is scheduled to be complete in June 2020.  It is essential the Project Team and Council have a complete set of information prior to completing the MCA and these reviews will assist Council in ensuring the information is complete.

 

5.         Project Financial Update

5.1       Budget Allocation

5.1.1    The current 2019-20 budget was set during the development of the 2018-21 LTP, in early 2018 based on best assessments of the scope and extent of work to be undertaken. Budgets were developed in collaboration with the lead technical consultants Stantec, and included a contingency provision to provide for unforeseen additional work.

 

5.1.2    As the Project has evolved the resourcing and work scope requirements to meet the objectives of the project have become clearer. This has resulted in identification of additional work scopes required to robustly inform and assess the various options. A key driver for the additional work scope is the wide range of receiving environments to be assessed during the shortlist development phase.

 

5.1.3    Although every attempt has been made to utilise Council staff to undertake work where appropriate, the majority of assessment work is of a specialised nature so has required the use of external consultants. While savings have been made in some areas, the allocation of funds for technical assessment is significantly under-allocated. This has become evident through the current phase of Shortlist Options Development. There have also been several new work packages identified for which funds had not been provided in the original 2018 budget.

 

5.1.4    Table 2 below summarises the specific areas where funding and cost where changes in costs allocated and shortfall in costs for the 2019-20 Financial Year.

 

 

 


Table 2.           Budget and Funding Summary        

Project & Technical Deliverables

Current Budget

Revised Budget

Change

Project Management

$310,000

$300,000

-$10,000

Project Governance activities

$70,000

$116,000

+$46,000

Environmental Investigations and field work

$140,000

$190,000

+$50,000

Statutory Planning, Submissions & legal review/support

$130,000

$160,000

+$30,000

Shortlist Development

·    technical studies

·    Wetlands

·    Financial Options

 

$240,800

$30,000

$30,000

 

$410,000

$60,000

$30,000

 

+$169,200

+$30,000

$0

Peer Review

$70,000

$70,000

$0

Stakeholder Engagement

$100,000

$140,000

+$40,000

Sub-Total

$1,120,800

$1,476,000

+$355,200

 

 

 

 

Marketing and Communications

 

 

 

Phase 1

$0

$39,000

+$39,000

Phase 2

$0

$76,500

+$76,000

Sub-Total

$0

$115,500

+115,500

 

 

 

 

TOTAL for 2019/20 FY

$1,120,800

$1,591,486

+$470,700

 

5.1.5    The table attached (Attachment 3) further details the original funding estimates, current funding allocation within the 2019/2020 FY budget and the shortfalls.  A total additional budget of $355,200 is required to complete committed technical work this Financial Year, while an $115,500 is being requested to cover the costs associated with delivering Phase 1 and 2 of the Marketing and Communications Plan (refer Section 4 above).

 

5.1.6    In summary an additional $470,700 is required to complete both the technical assessments, consultation and marketing and communications tasks this financial year.

 

5.1.7    Every attempt has been made in collaboration with our lead consultants Stantec to reduce costs as much as reasonably possible.  This has been undertaken without compromising the delivery and credibility of technical assessments.  The scope and range of technical assessments have already been optimised and prioritised by utilising desk top assessments using publicly available data sets, involving Council staff and deferring a number of more detailed assessments e.g. soils field work, until after BPO option confirmation, later in the project. The optimisation process has been a collaborative one involving the Transport and Infrastructure Manager, BPO Project Manager and Stantec advisers. Specific areas where cost savings have been achieved include:

 

·    Revision of all work package scopes prepared by consultants by Project Manager and Transport and Infrastructure Manager, to ensure scopes are both reasonable and necessary;

·    Utilising internal staff to undertake a significant proportion of the Tradewaste investigations including surveys, workshops, modelling and testing;

·    Utilising the Project Manager with internal staff support to complete the social and recreational effects assessments;

·    Stakeholder meetings led by BPO Project Manager and supported when necessary by technical team.

 

5.1.8    The bulk of the additional costs are associated with the technical assessment required as part of the shortlist options development.  This work includes technical assessments in archaeology, soils and groundwater, property, social impacts, land use planning, environmental science and ocean sciences.  The additional work includes more detailed work on wastewater treatment solutions, and trade waste management options for each of the shortlisted options.  All the assessments are required to inform the MCA process to be undertaken early in the 2020/2021 Financial Year.

 

5.1.9    The Project is now at a critical stage, where adequate investigations are needed to inform the ‘Alternatives Assessment’ under the RMA.  This phase will be a contestable part of the resource consent and hearings process.  It is considered essential that adequate technical analysis is undertaken across all shortlist options prior to confirming the BPO in 2020.

 

6.         Conclusion

6.1.1    Significant assessment work has been completed on the short list options, such that there is adequate information available to inform the intensive consultation and engagement planned for February and March 2020. The Project is progressing in line with the programme schedule and timeline. The project is working towards confirmation and endorsement of the BPO by Council in December 2020. In order to achieve this adequate investigation and assessment of each of the short list options needs to be completed by the end of the 2019/20 financial year.

6.2       The original operational budget approved for the 2019/2020 financial year, is inadequate to complete the full scope of work due to several factors including:

·    the need to assess a wider range receiving environments as part of the shortlist development phase;

·    the need for more comprehensive and diverse assessments to adequately satisfy the ‘Alternatives Assessment’ test under the RMA across all options, if a challenge during the resource consent process is to be avoided e.g. Environment Court; and

·    the scope of marketing and communications tasks, tools and collateral required to effectively engage with the community and key stakeholders was inadequately provided for in the original budget.

6.3       Approval is requested from Council to increase the budget to cover unbudgeted expenditure of $355,200 to complete the technical work necessary to deliver the BPO this financial year.

6.4       Approval is requested from Council to increase the budget to cover unbudgeted expenditure of $115,500 to complete marketing and communications this financial year.

6.5       It is considered essential that the full scope of work now confirmed by the project team as required in this financial year be undertaken, to avoid compromising the robustness of the assessment and decision-making phase to be completed early in the 2020/21 financial year.

7.         Next actions

7.1       Council workshops are proposed in January, May and June to, confirm the consultation process, provide feedback on the engagement process and seek endorsement for the identified shortlist options.

7.2       Technical assessments will continue to be advanced to refine and further detail the shortlist options by June 2020.

7.3       The multi-criteria assessment (MCA) process will be undertaken in August - September 2020 with the aim of recommending a BPO to Council in December 2020.

8.         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?

 

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

The recommendations contribute to Goal 4: An Eco City

The recommendations contribute to the outcomes of the Eco City Strategy

The recommendations contribute to the achievement of action/actions in the Three Waters Plan

The action is:

A best practicable option (BPO) for the treatment and disposal of the city’s wastewater is identified for the renewal of the Wastewater Treatment Plant resource consent by June 2021.

Contribution to strategic direction and to social, economic, environmental and cultural well-being

The BPO project is informing the Council’s decision about the future treatment and discharge of wastewater for the city for the next 35 to 50 years. It is the most significant investment decision the Council will make in the current LTP and is critical to ensuring the future sustainability of the city and its ability to provide for wastewater from future residential and industrial growth.

 

 

Attachments

1.

BPO Project Programme

 

2.

BPO Project Methodology

 

3.

BPO Project Budget Detail

 

    


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


 

 

 


PALMERSTON NORTH CITY COUNCIL

 

Report

TO:                                Finance & Audit Committee

MEETING DATE:           19 February 2020

TITLE:                            PNCC Animal Shelter Options

PRESENTED BY:            Bryce Hosking, Manager - Property

APPROVED BY:             Tom Williams, Chief Infrastructure Officer

 

 

RECOMMENDATION(S) TO Council

1.   That Council agrees to proceed with Option 2 and builds a new Animal Shelter next to the existing facility in Totara Road, Palmerston North for $2,925,919 + GST. This will be a multi-year Programme split over the 2020/21 and 2021/22 financial years.

The proposed programme budget (not currently budgeted for) will be split:
2020/21    $300,000 – Design and Consent Phase
2021/22    $2,625,919 – Construction Phase

 


 

Summary of options analysis for

Problem or Opportunity

In its current state the existing animal shelter does not meet all requirements of the Code of Welfare for the Temporary Housing of Companion Animals. Council has several options to address this.

OPTION 1:

Refurbishment of Existing Facility

Community Views

·    Good location of current facility and easy to access.

·    Improved animal welfare is generally well supported.

Benefits

·    Location retained.

·    Will meet new minimum standards of code of welfare requirements.

Risks

·    Unable to accommodate education space and re-homing area within the space.

·    Significant works to be completed.

·    Would cause disruption as operations would have to relocate to another site during works.

·    Unbudgeted expense.

Financial

$2,608,898 + GST and temporary relocation costs.

OPTION 2:

Build a New Facility

Community Views

·    Good location of current facility and easy to access.

·    Improved animal welfare is generally well supported.

Benefits

·    Location retained as building next to current facility.

·    No disruption to existing operations.

·    Able to fully comply with new code of welfare requirements.

·    Able to accommodate education space and re-homing area within the space.

Risks

·    Unbudgeted expense.

Financial

$2,925,919 + GST.

OPTION 3:

Share Facility with Another Council

Community Views

·    Opportunity to save money generally viewed favourably.

·    Improved animal welfare is generally well supported.

Benefits

·    Opportunity to save money through a combined facility and refurbishment costs being shared.

·    Shared operational costs.

·    Ensuring excellent facilities for Manawatu region, not just those in Palmerston North area.

Risks

·    Less control, another stakeholder.

·    No interest in concept from MDC.

·    Suitable land may not be available in an appropriate location.

·    Potential decrease in responsiveness and customer centricity caused by geographical dislocation.

Financial

Estimated to be around $2,000,000 + GST.

OPTION 4:

Outsource Service to a Private Supplier

Community Views

·    Opportunity to save money generally viewed favourably.

·    Improved animal welfare is generally well supported.

Benefits

·    Opportunity to save money through using a private facility.

·    Potential for lesser and fixed operational costs.

Risks

·    Less control, another stakeholder.

·    No suitable options identified.

·    Would require relocation of services.

Financial

Estimated to be $7,500 a month retainer and $20.00 per dog per day charge to the Council from the private provider.

 

Rationale for the recommendations

1.         Overview of the problem or opportunity

1.1       Council Officers in conjunction with consultants from WSP have reviewed the condition of the Council animal shelter and compared it against the new code of welfare amendment for the Temporary Housing for Companion Animals, to assess if the facility is fit for purpose.

1.2       A condition assessment of the facility was completed, and stakeholders consulted to understand what changes are required at the facility to meet both the code and user needs.

1.3       Information gathered from the condition assessment and received from staff confirms that the facility no longer meets the needs of the user and will require significant work to meet the code of welfare amendment.

1.4       Four Options were considered when assessing the future of the facility:

1.   Refurbishment of existing facility;

2.   New facility;

3.   Share facility with another Council;

4.   Outsource service to a private supplier.

1.5       In addition to ensuring that the animal shelter meets the requirements of the new Code of Welfare, Council Officers are wanting to expand the service that is provided from the facility to include an education space and re-homing area.

1.6       This expansion of services will require the facility to have an office area large enough to accommodate between six – eight staff at any one time and a meeting space to hold up to 30 people.

1.7       Council Officers engaged WSP to provide a report to assist in the decision making around the future of the city’s existing animal shelter by:

·    Data collection and scoping;

·    Analysis and Optioneering; and

·    Costing.

1.8       The report from WSP has formed the basis of this report and is attached for reference.

1.9       For clarity, there is currently no budget for any of the options within this report. Whichever option is chosen by Council will also require an approved additional budget as part of the 2020/21 Annual Budget process and following Long Term Plan.

1.10     The building and costs of meeting the new legislative requirements will materially increase the costs currently funded as part of the Animal Control activity. This will necessitate a review of the Revenue and Financing Policy as part of the 2021-2031 Long Term Plan process.

2.         Background and previous council decisions

Code of Welfare Amendment – Temporary Housing for Companion Animals

2.1       On the 1st October 2018 a new Code of Welfare amendment, “Temporary Housing for Companion Animals”, came into effect.

2.2       The purpose of this Code is to inform those in charge of animals in temporary accommodation about the standards they must achieve to meet their obligations under the Animal Welfare Act 1999.

2.3       A review and condition grade of Council’s facility found that the existing facility, in its current state, did not meet these obligations.

2.4       Key changes in the new animal welfare code state that the temporary housing of companion animal facilities must contain an “isolation” area to help prevent the spread of infectious diseases and infections.

2.5       This area needs to be accessed separately from other entry points into the facility which are used by other animals.

2.6       The facility also requires a “health assessment” room so that upon arrival, each animal can be assessed before entering the facility.

2.7       There is a need for the facility to be able to safely handle dangerous dogs. This area is to be located away from the main housing area.

Assessment of Existing Facility

2.8       A detailed condition assessment was completed to understand the condition of the facility and identify any significant defects.

2.9       The data recorded from the condition assessment was compared against standards in the new Animal Welfare Code criteria.

2.10     The new welfare standards include, but is not limited to, lighting, heating/ventilation, isolation management, disease prevention and management and safety.

2.11     Nine standards detailed in the new animal welfare code relate directly to the physical structure of the facility.

2.12     In its current state, only two of these standards are being fully meet.

2.13     The standards in the new code which are not being meet will require significant renewal works for the facility to comply with these new changes.

2.14     In addition to ensuring that the animal shelter meets the requirements of the new Code of Welfare, Council are wanting to expand the service that is provided from the facility to include an education space and re-homing area. This will require the facility to have an office area large enough to accommodate between six – eight staff at any one time and a meeting space to hold up to 30 people.

2.15     The below table provides a summary of the findings:

Minimum Welfare Standards

Complies

Doesn’t Comply

Drinking water for Terrestrial Animals

ü

 

Assessment on Admittance

 

ü

Contagious Diseases

 

ü

Providing for Behavioural Needs

 

ü

Housing Design and Construction

 

ü

General Facility Management

 

ü

Temperature

 

ü

Lighting

ü

 

Isolation Management

 

ü

 

2.16     The analysis of the existing facility in its current state no longer meets the needs of its users, and the size of the facility is not large enough to accommodate all that is now required under the new code of welfare.

3.         Description of options

3.1       Four Options were considered when assessing the future of the facility:

1.   Refurbishment of existing facility – Undertake substantial refurbishment works to meet code requirements;

2.   Build a new facility – build a new purpose-built facility on Council-owned land next to the existing facility;

3.   Share facility with another Council – relocate to a shared facility with another Council; and

4.   Outsource service to a private supplier – a private organisation to run the facility on Council’s behalf from a private facility.


4.         Analysis of options

Refurbishment of Existing Facility

4.1       The current location is well established. It sits on the town boundary in an area which has enough distance from residential housing to mitigate noise but is easily accessible by members of the public and staff.

4.2       Although the location of the facility has not been identified as a concern, there are several areas of the facility that have been identified by Council Officers as requiring improvement including:

·    The office area currently can accommodate two staff comfortably. There is now a need to be able to accommodate between six – eight staff. Due to the increased staff numbers the size of bathroom and kitchen facilities will also need increasing.

·    Officers have expressed a desire to be able host meetings on site and hold education/rehoming sessions. To achieve this there will need to be a significant addition to the facility.

·    Officers have also expressed concern regarding the extreme noise levels. Upon arrival “ear plugs” are made available as a mitigation measure.

4.3       In addition to these concerns, the new requirements of the Temporary Housing of Companion Animals, Code of Welfare, has highlight several areas that need significant upgrades. These are summarised in the below table.

Minimum Welfare Standards

Complies

Doesn’t Comply

Solutions

Drinking water for Terrestrial Animals

ü

 

 

Assessment on Admittance

 

ü

Can only be accommodated with a significant extension.

Contagious Diseases

 

ü

Can only be accommodated with a significant extension.

Providing for Behavioural Needs

 

ü

Parts of this could be meet by significant upgrades incl. kennel layout changes.

 

 

To achieve the correct kennel size requirements the kennels will require complete rebuilding.

Housing Design and Construction

 

ü

Parts of this could be meet by significant upgrades incl. replacement drains, kennel layout changes.

 

To achieve the new drainage standards, the concrete floor will require replacement.

General Facility Management

 

ü

Parts of this could be meet by significant upgrades incl. replacement drains, kennel layout changes.

Temperature

 

ü

Due to the construction of the building this standard is unachievable.

 

To achieve the required temperature levels the facility will require re-roofing.

Lighting

ü

 

 

Isolation Management

 

ü

Can only be accommodated with a significant extension.

 

4.4       Note the above solutions achieve the minimum work required to achieve compliance and just the refurbishment of the existing kennels, which will require demolition then rebuilding.

4.5       For clarity, this will not provide any of the enhanced user requirements (refurbished/ enlarged office space, education etc.) as these cannot be accommodated within the existing building space once compliance matters are achieved.

4.6       In summary, given the level of works required this work amounts to effectively a new facility, therefore a refurbishment of the existing facility is not considered viable as the costs would be the same or greater, once temporary re-location is considered during the refurbish works.


4.7       Below are the estimate costings for this option:

Area/ Component

Estimate Cost (excl. GST)

Design and Consent Provision

$300,000

Kennels and Associated Spaces

$1,184,000

Staff and Public Area (Front of House)

$42,750

Staff Only Area (Back of House)

$257,400

Exterior Works

$262,425

Demolition Costs – Kennel Area

$138,240

Contingency

$424,083

Total

$2,608,898 + GST

 

4.8       Please note:

·    No allowance has been made for loss of business during the refurbishment or costs associated with relocating the service to another site during works.

·    These would be additional costs to the above as they hard to determine until a programme of works and timelines are finalised. This will likely make the total costs greater than Option Two (re-build).

·    An increased contingency of 20% (vs. 15% for option 2 – a New built facility) has been applied for this option to allow for the inherent increased risk of unforeseen issues and emergent work.

4.9       Please refer to the attached report from WSP for a more thorough breakdown of costings.

New Facility

4.10     As mentioned above, the location of the existing facility has not been identified as a concern by staff. The facility currently sits within the town boundary and is easily accessible by both staff and members of the public.

4.11     There is land adjacent to the existing animal shelter that could be made available for the construction of a new facility.

4.12     A new facility being constructed adjacent to the existing would mean that “business as usual” could continue.

4.13     There would be no time pressure or cost of having to make alternative arrangements to keep the animal shelter operating from another site whilst the new facility was being built.

4.14     Construction of a new facility would meet all requirements detailed in the Temporary Housing of Companion Animals, Code of Welfare and the increased levels of service now required by PNCC.

4.15     A new facility would allow for the creation of dedicated, fit-for purpose spaces, located in such a way that isolation and spread of disease and can be effectively managed by staff as well as the use of best-practise materials to achieve temperature improvements etc.

4.16     Below are the estimate costings for this option:

Area/ Component

Estimate Cost (excl. GST)

Design and Consent Provision

$300,000

Kennels and Associated Spaces

$1,184,000

Staff and Public Area (Front of House)

$531,000

Staff Only Area (Back of House)

$257,400

Exterior Works

$262,425

Contingency

$391,094

Total

$2,925,919 + GST

 

4.17     Please note the above figures exclude relocation costs to the new site once built. This was done to provide an accurate comparison with option 1.

4.18     Please refer to the attached report from WSP for a more thorough breakdown of costings as well as concept sketches, layout, and proposal of construction materials.

Share Facility with another Council

4.19     The only other council in close enough geographic proximity is Manawatu District Council (MDC).

4.20     Council would essentially have three location opportunities within this option:

·    Base the facility at the current MDC location;

·    Base the shared facility at the current PNCC location; or

·    Built a new facility relocation to a more central location within the region.

4.21     Given the shared facility would be servicing the entire Manawatu and Palmerston North catchment area the most practical option would be the relocation to a more central area within the region and build a new facility. This created a risk of a potential decrease in responsiveness and customer centricity caused by a geographical dislocation

4.22     As a new facility would be built to meet user requirements it is expected the construction costs would be the same as detailed in Clause 4.16 above.

4.23     As the facility would likely be relocated, suitable land would likely need to be purchased for this move. This would be in addition to the construction costs. There would also be a risk of not being able to find suitable land for purchase.

4.24     Being a shared facility, the ownership split, and financial contribution towards the combined land purchase and construction costs, would need to be negotiated.

4.25     To allow a financial comparison between the options within this report, if a 60% contribution towards the new shared facility is assumed, PNCC’s contribution could be estimated to be close to $2,000,000.

4.26     Council Officers have approached MDC regarding a shared facility and undertaken a high-level review of requirements with them. Unfortunately, the concept was rejected by MDC, stating that “…they had spent some money and their pound now complies with the relevant animal welfare standards” so were not interested in proceeding with a shared facility.

Outsource Service to a Private Supplier

4.27     Five private boarding kennels were spoken to seeking interest in managing a “pound” facility on behalf of Council.

4.28     From the five kennels that were approached only one kennel showed a willingness to become involved.

4.29     This kennel wasn’t a suitable fit due to the size of the facility and its location to the city. The Council provided information to the kennel on the requirements in terms of compliance to the Welfare Code, but the kennel decided against continuing dialog due to the size of the financial investment required. For example, extra security fencing, cameras, isolation unit and quarantine etc.

4.30     Given the lack of available options, determining the exact cost of outsourcing was not progressed. However, a similar operation in Dunedin operates roughly on a $7,500 a month retainer and $20.00 per dog per day charge to the Council. It would be expected that a similar cost would be opted here.

5.         Conclusion

5.1       A condition assessment of the facility was completed, and stakeholders consulted to compare it against:

1.   The new code of welfare amendment for the Temporary Housing for Companion Animals; and

2.   Enhanced user requirements to meet the desired levels of service delivery.

5.2       This assessment demonstrates that the facility no longer meets the needs of the user and will require significant work to meet the code of welfare amendment.

5.3       A refurbishment schedule and associated costings for Option One to upgrade the existing facility to meet the new code of welfare has been complied. This also includes additions to provide the extra staff and enhanced service provision facilities (education / re-homing space).

5.4       It is not possible to meet all the requirements without effectively fully re-building on an element by element basis.

5.5       For Option Two a high-level design of a new facility incorporating all that is required both legally by the code of welfare and for the enhanced service delivery requirements has been completed and costed. The costings are based on building on the land already owned by Council.

5.6       The cost for Option One refurbishment of the existing facility is only marginally less than the cost of Option Two building a new purpose-built facility, which does not include hidden costs associated with refurbishing the facility such as loss of business or relocating the shelter to another facility while the refurbishment work is being undertaken.

5.7       Options Three and Four were investigated by Council Officers and found that neither of these options were considered suitable. From review of the available documents, WSP agrees with the Council Officer’s conclusion.

5.8       In conclusion, the costs to achieve a purpose-built animal shelter that incorporates all requirements of the new code and meets the enhanced service delivery requirements are only marginally higher than refurbishing the existing. It is felt that the result of what a new building achieves outweighs the extra costs in terms of having a compliant, fit for purpose facility.

5.9       Therefore, it is our recommendation that Option Two to build a new facility is progressed as the preferred option.

6.         Next actions

6.1       Begin designs for a new Animal Shelter in 2020/21 financial year that meets all requirements under the new Code of Welfare and ensure that it can accommodate a new education and rehoming area.

6.2       Commission a Quantity Surveyor as part of the above to confirm build costs estimates based on the initial design to ensure accurate budgeting for the 2021/22 financial year.

6.3       Begin construction in 2021/22.

7.         Outline of community engagement process

7.1       No specific consultation has been undertaken with the public to determine their preferred option, however, the Safe Community Plan provides clear direction that Council will ‘Plan and implement upgrade of the City Pound to comply with requirements of MPI Code of Welfare Temporary Housing of Companion Animals, including necessary security improvements.’


Compliance and administration

Does the Committee have delegated authority to decide?

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?

No

Are the recommendations inconsistent with any of Council’s policies or plans?

No

The recommendations contribute to Goal 3: A Connected and Safe Community

The recommendations contribute to the outcomes of the Connected Community Strategy

The recommendations contribute to the achievement of action/actions in the Safe Community Plan

The action is to: Plan and implement upgrade of the City Pound to comply with requirements of MPI Code of Welfare Temporary Housing of Companion Animals, including necessary security improvements.

Contribution to strategic direction and to social, economic, environmental and cultural well-being

Plan and implement upgrade of the City Pound to comply with requirements of MPI Code of Welfare Temporary Housing of Companion Animals, including necessary security improvements.

 

 

Attachments

1.

WSP Report - PNCC Animal Shelter Options - January 2020

 

    


PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator



PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator



PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

 

 


PALMERSTON NORTH CITY COUNCIL

 

Committee Work Schedule

TO:                                Finance & Audit Committee

MEETING DATE:           19 February 2020

TITLE:                            Committee Work Schedule

 

 

RECOMMENDATION(S) TO Finance & Audit Committee

1.   That the Finance & Audit Committee receive its Work Schedule dated February 2020.

 

 

Attachments

1.

Work Schedule

 

    


PDF Creator