|
Grant Smith (Mayor)
|
|
Debi Marshall-Lobb (Deputy Mayor)
|
|
Mark Arnott
|
Leonie Hapeta
|
|
Brent Barrett
|
Lorna Johnson
|
|
Rachel Bowen
|
Billy Meehan
|
|
Vaughan Dennison
|
Orphée Mickalad
|
|
Lew Findlay (QSM)
|
Karen Naylor
|
|
Roly Fitzgerald
|
William Wood
|
|
Patrick Handcock (ONZM)
|
Kaydee Zabelin
|
Council MEETING
14 February 2024
Order of Business
1. Karakia
Timatanga
2. Apologies
3. 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.
4. 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.
5. Public
Comment
To receive
comments from members of the public on matters specified on this Agenda or, if
time permits, on other matters.
(NOTE: If
the Council 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.)
6. Presentation
of the Part I Public Culture & Sport Committee Recommendations from its 7
February 2024 Meeting Page 7
7. Confirmation
of Minutes Page 9
“That the minutes of the
ordinary meeting of 7 February 2024 Part I Public be confirmed as a true and
correct record.”
Reports
8. 2024-34
Draft Long Term Plan Consultation Material Update Page 19
Memorandum, presented by David
Murphy, Chief Planning Officer and Cameron Mckay, Chief Financial Officer.
9. Long-Term
Plan - Rating System Page 25
Memorandum, presented by Steve
Paterson, Strategy Manager - Finance.
10. Rates Remission and
Postponement Policies Page 61
Memorandum, presented by Steve
Paterson, Strategy Manager - Finance.
11. Treasury Policy
(Including Liability Management & Investment Policy) Page 75
Memorandum, presented by Steve
Paterson, Strategy Manager - Finance.
12. Summary of Waste
Assessment 2023 Page 119
Memorandum, presented by Peter
Ridge - Senior Policy Analyst, and Natasha Hickmott - Activities Manager -
Resource Recovery and Sustainability.
13. Approval for the
Mayor to attend the 2024 Taipei Smart City Mayor's Summit Page 129
Memorandum, presented by
Gabrielle Loga, International Relations Manager.
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
|
|
15.
|
Purchase of 117-121 College Street (St. Marks
Presbyterian Church)
|
THIRD PARTY COMMERCIAL: Disclosing the information
could harm a company's commercial position
|
s7(2)(b)(ii)
|
|
16.
|
Purchase of 80 Waldegrave Street
|
THIRD PARTY COMMERCIAL: Disclosing the information
could harm a company's commercial position
|
s7(2)(b)(ii)
|
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].
|
Recommendations from
Committee
TO: Council
MEETING DATE: 14
February 2024
TITLE: Presentation
of the Part I Public Culture & Sport Committee Recommendations from its 7
February 2024 Meeting
Set out below are the recommendations only
from the Culture & Sport Committee meeting Part I Public held on 7 February
2024. The Council may resolve to adopt, amend, receive, note or not adopt any
such recommendations. (SO 2.18.1)
|
4-24
|
Te Manawa Museums
Trust: Draft Statement of Intent 2024-27
Memorandum, presented by
Sarah Claridge, Democracy & Governance Advisor.
The COMMITTEE RECOMMENDS
1. That
Council increase Te Manawa’s operational grant funding in the draft
Long-Term Plan 2024-34 to be:
|
2024/25
|
2025/26
|
2026/27
|
|
$3,833,599
|
$4,024,056
|
$4,217,826
|
|
Palmerston North
City Council
Minutes of
the Council Meeting Part I Public, held in the Council Chamber, First Floor,
Civic Administration Building, 32 The Square, Palmerston North on 07 February 2024,
commencing at 9.03am
|
Members
Present:
|
Grant Smith (The Mayor) (in the Chair)
and Councillors Debi Marshall-Lobb, Mark Arnott, Brent Barrett, Rachel Bowen,
Vaughan Dennison, Lew Findlay, Roly Fitzgerald, Patrick Handcock, , Billy
Meehan, Karen Naylor, William Wood and Kaydee Zabelin.
|
|
Apologies:
|
Vaughan Dennison (early departure),
Leonie Hapeta, Lorna Johnson (late arrival)
|
Councillor Lorna
Johnson entered the meeting at 9.17am
before consideration of clause 4-24. She was not
present for clauses 1-24 to 3-24 inclusive.
Councillor Orphee
Mickalad entered the meeting at 9.31am
during consideration of clause 4-24. He was not present for clauses 1-24
to 3-24 inclusive.
Councillor Vaughan
Dennison left the meeting at 11:24am. He was not
present for clauses 5.1-24 to 9-24 inclusive.
Councillor
Kaydee Zabelin left the meeting at 2.55pm. She was not present for clauses 5.3-24 to 9-24 inclusive.
|
|
Karakia
Timatanga
|
|
|
Deputy
Mayor Debi Marshall-Lobb opened the meeting with karakia.
|
|
1-24
|
Apologies
|
|
|
Moved Grant Smith, seconded Debi Marshall-Lobb.
RESOLVED
1. That
Council receive the apologies from Leonie Hapeta, Vaughan
Dennison (early departure), Lorna Johnson (late arrival).
|
|
|
Clause 1-24 above was carried 13 votes to 0, the voting being as
follows:
For:
The Mayor (Grant Smith) and Councillors Debi Marshall-Lobb, Mark
Arnott, Brent Barrett, Rachel Bowen, Vaughan Dennison, Lew Findlay, Roly
Fitzgerald, Patrick Handcock, Billy Meehan, Karen Naylor, William Wood and
Kaydee Zabelin.
|
|
2-24
|
Presentation - New Year's Honours 2024
Presentation, by Grant Smith,
The Mayor.
The Mayor honoured Ms Huhana
Manu, Dr Johanna Wood, Mrs Pearl Naulder and Mr Patrick Bronte for the work
they have done to better the community.
|
|
|
Moved
Grant Smith, seconded Debi Marshall-Lobb.
RESOLVED
1. That
Council note that congratulations have been conveyed on behalf of the Council
to the local recipients of the New Year’s Honours 2024.
|
|
|
Clause 2-24 above was
carried 13 votes to 0, the voting being as follows:
For:
The Mayor (Grant Smith) and
Councillors Debi Marshall-Lobb, Mark Arnott, Brent Barrett, Rachel Bowen, Vaughan
Dennison, Lew Findlay, Roly Fitzgerald, Patrick Handcock, Billy Meehan, Karen
Naylor, William Wood and Kaydee Zabelin.
|
|
3-24
|
Confirmation of Minutes
The minutes of the 6 December were re-confirmed by Council
as there was an error to the time the meeting went into confidential session.
|
|
|
Moved Grant Smith, seconded Debi Marshall-Lobb.
RESOLVED
1. That the minutes of the ordinary meeting
of 6 December 2023 Part I Public and Part II Confidential be confirmed as a
true and correct record.
2. That the minutes of the extraordinary
meeting of 13 December 2023 Part I Public be confirmed as a true and correct
record.
3. That the minutes of the ordinary meeting
of 18 December 2023 Part I Public and Part II Confidential be confirmed
as a true and correct record.
|
|
|
Clause 3-24 above was carried 13 votes to 0, the voting being as
follows:
For:
The Mayor (Grant Smith) and Councillors Debi Marshall-Lobb, Mark
Arnott, Brent Barrett, Rachel Bowen, Vaughan Dennison, Lew Findlay, Roly Fitzgerald,
Patrick Handcock, Billy Meehan, Karen Naylor, William Wood and Kaydee
Zabelin.
|
Councillor Lorna Johnson
arrived at the meeting at 9:17am
Reports
|
4-24
|
Endorsement of the Oranga Papaioea City Strategy and
plans as the foundation for the proposed Long Term Plan 2024-2034
Memorandum, presented by
Julie Macdonald, Strategy and Policy Manager, and Catheryn Anderson, Senior
Tenancy Officer.
Councillor Orphée Mickalad arrived at the meeting at 9:31am
Councillor Johnson moved an additional clause to the
Social Housing Guidelines to improve the clarity of the eligibility criteria
for social housing.
|
|
|
Moved
Grant Smith, seconded Debi Marshall-Lobb.
RESOLVED
1. That Council
endorse the draft Oranga Papaioea City Strategy as a foundation
document of the proposed Long Term Plan 2024-2034 (Attachment 1).
2. That Council
endorse the draft:
i. Mahere
whare Housing plan
ii. Mahere
hoahoa tāone Urban design plan
iii. Mahere
whakawhanake ohaoha Economic development plan
iv. Mahere
tūnuku Transport plan
v. Mahere
toi me ngā taonga tuku iho Arts and heritage plan
vi. Mahere
rēhia Recreation and play plan
vii. Mahere
tautāwhi hapori Community support plan
viii. Mahere
Whare Puna Mātauranga City Library Plan
ix. Mahere
haumaru hapori, hauora hapori Community safety and health plan
x. Mahere
āhuarangi hurihuri, toitūtanga, Climate change and sustainability
plan
xi. Mahere
mō te kanorau koiora me Te Awa o Manawatū Biodiversity and the
Manawatū River plan
xii. Mahere
taumanu para Resource recovery plan
xiii. Mahere
wai Water plan
xiv. Mahere
mana urungi, kirirarautanga hihiri Governance and active citizenship plan
as foundation documents of the proposed Long-Term
Plan 2024-2034 (Attachment 2).
|
|
|
Clause 4-24 above was carried 15 votes to 0, the voting being as
follows:
For:
The Mayor (Grant Smith) and Councillors Debi Marshall-Lobb, Mark
Arnott, Brent Barrett, Rachel Bowen, Vaughan Dennison, Lew Findlay, Roly
Fitzgerald, Patrick Handcock, Lorna Johnson, Billy Meehan, Orphée
Mickalad, Karen Naylor, William Wood and Kaydee Zabelin.
|
|
|
Moved Lorna Johnson, seconded William Wood.
RESOLVED
3. That Council endorse
the draft Social Housing Guidelines as an adjunct to the draft Mahere whare
Housing plan and as a foundation document of the proposed Long-Term Plan
2024-2034 (Attachment 3), including an additional clause as follows for
eligibility
“or
experiencing barriers to accessing housing in the private market and meeting
income and asset thresholds”
|
|
|
Clause 4-24 above was carried 15 votes to 0, the
voting being as follows:
For:
The Mayor (Grant Smith) and Councillors Debi
Marshall-Lobb, Mark Arnott, Brent Barrett, Rachel Bowen, Vaughan Dennison,
Lew Findlay, Roly Fitzgerald, Patrick Handcock, Lorna Johnson, Billy Meehan,
Orphée Mickalad, Karen Naylor, William Wood and Kaydee Zabelin.
|
|
|
Moved
Grant Smith, seconded Debi Marshall-Lobb.
RESOLVED
4. That Council note the
documents in Appendices 1, 2 and 3 of this memorandum will be shared with the
community as part of the consultation materials for the proposed Long Term
Plan 2024-2025.
|
|
|
Clause 4-24 above was carried 15 votes to 0, the
voting being as follows:
For:
The Mayor (Grant Smith) and Councillors Debi
Marshall-Lobb, Mark Arnott, Brent Barrett, Rachel Bowen, Vaughan Dennison,
Lew Findlay, Roly Fitzgerald, Patrick Handcock, Lorna Johnson, Billy Meehan,
Orphée Mickalad, Karen Naylor, William Wood and Kaydee Zabelin.
|
|
5-24
|
2024 Long Term Plan Consultation Material
Memorandum, presented by
David Murphy, Chief Planning Officer, Cameron McKay, Chief Financial Officer,
Chris Dyhrberg, Chief Infrastructure Officer and Debbie Perera, Audit
Director from Audit New Zealand.
The meeting adjourned at 11.02am
The meeting resumed at 11.24am
Councillor Vaughan Dennison
was not present when the meeting resumed at 11:24am
Councillor Naylor moved two additional recommendations
requesting more information on funding mechanisms for social housing and
animal control services, before considering whether to adjust the policy
ratios for these activities.
|
|
|
· Moved Karen Naylor, seconded William
Wood.
· RESOLVED
· 5. That the Chief Executive provide options to deliver
social housing within the current Policy limit, and until such time
Council agrees to operate outside of the current policy limit.
|
|
|
· Clause 5.1-24 above was carried 8
votes to 6, the voting being as follows:
· For:
· The Mayor (Grant Smith) and
Councillors Mark Arnott, Rachel Bowen, Roly Fitzgerald, Billy Meehan,
Orphée Mickalad, Karen Naylor and William Wood.
· Against:
· Councillors Debi Marshall-Lobb, Brent
Barrett, Lew Findlay, Patrick Handcock, Lorna Johnson and Kaydee Zabelin.
·
|
|
|
· Moved Karen Naylor, seconded William
Wood.
· RESOLVED
· 6. That the Chief Executive provide options to provide
Animal control services within the current Policy limit.
·
|
|
|
Clause 5.2-24 above was
carried 8 votes to 6, the voting being as follows:
For:
The Mayor (Grant Smith) and
Councillors Mark Arnott, Rachel Bowen, Roly Fitzgerald, Billy Meehan,
Orphée Mickalad, Karen Naylor and William Wood.
Against:
Councillors Debi
Marshall-Lobb, Brent Barrett, Lew Findlay, Patrick Handcock, Lorna Johnson
and Kaydee Zabelin.
|
|
|
The meeting adjourned at 12.18pm
The meeting resumed at 2.55pm
Councillor Kaydee Zabelin
was not present when the meeting resumed at 2.55pm
·
|
|
|
Moved
Grant Smith, seconded Debi Marshall-Lobb.
RESOLVED
1. That
Council proceed with an audit by Audit New Zealand of the draft Long Term
Plan (which would include the underlying information used by Council to
prepare the consultation document and supporting material listed in section
5.4, based on pending changes to the Local Government Act allowing for
unaudited consultation documents outlined in a letter from the Minister of
Local Government (contained in Attachment 1).
2. That Council
consider the attached draft Long Term Plan consultation document (Attachment
2) and supporting material (Attachments 3-8) and provide feedback so the Chief
Executive can make any changes and bring the material back to Council on 14
February 2024 for adoption for review (as determined under Recommendation 1).
3. That Council
note the updated planning assumption regarding total operational increases
for the 2024-34 Draft Long-Term Plan (contained in Table 3).
|
|
|
Clause 5.3-24 above was carried 13 votes to 0, the
voting being as follows:
For:
The Mayor (Grant Smith) and Councillors Debi
Marshall-Lobb, Mark Arnott, Brent Barrett, Rachel Bowen, Lew Findlay, Roly
Fitzgerald, Patrick Handcock, Lorna Johnson, Billy Meehan, Orphée
Mickalad, Karen Naylor and William Wood.
|
|
|
Moved
Grant Smith, seconded Karen Naylor.
RESOLVED
4. That Council
approve the proposed Revenue and Financing Policy (Attachment 9),
incorporating the changes subject to resolutions 5 and 6.
|
|
|
Clause 5.4-24 above was carried 9 votes to 4, the
voting being as follows:
For:
The Mayor (Grant Smith) and Councillors Debi
Marshall-Lobb, Brent Barrett, Rachel Bowen, Roly Fitzgerald, Billy Meehan,
Orphée Mickalad, Karen Naylor and William Wood.
Against:
Councillors Mark Arnott, Lew Findlay, Patrick Handcock
and Lorna Johnson.
|
|
6-24
|
Notice of Motion: Stop Using Class 4 Gambling Proceeds
Officers’ advice presented by Fiona Dredge, Commercial
Advisory Manager and Julie McDonald, Strategy and Policy Manager.
Councillor Barrett spoke to his Notice of Motion on Council
using Class 4 Gambling Proceeds.
|
|
|
Moved
Grant Smith, seconded Debi Marshall-Lobb.
RESOLVED
1. That Council
receive the memorandum titled “Officers' advice in response to Notice
of Motion on Class 4 Gambling proceeds ”.
|
|
|
Clause 6-24 above was carried 13 votes to 0, the
voting being as follows:
For:
The Mayor (Grant Smith) and Councillors Debi
Marshall-Lobb, Mark Arnott, Brent Barrett, Rachel Bowen, Lew Findlay, Roly
Fitzgerald, Patrick Handcock, Lorna Johnson, Billy Meehan, Orphée
Mickalad, Karen Naylor and William Wood.
|
|
|
Moved
Brent Barrett, seconded Roly Fitzgerald.
|
|
|
Note:
On the Notice of Motion: ‘That Council adopt a
policy to not apply for or use Class 4 Gambling proceeds’, the motion
was lost 4 votes to 9, the voting being as follows:
For:
Councillors Debi Marshall-Lobb, Brent Barrett, Roly
Fitzgerald and Patrick Handcock.
Against:
The Mayor (Grant Smith) and Councillors Mark Arnott,
Rachel Bowen, Lew Findlay, Lorna Johnson, Billy Meehan, Orphée
Mickalad, Karen Naylor and William Wood.
|
|
7-24
|
Future Development Strategy Update and Next Steps
Memorandum, presented by
Hannah White, Democracy and Governance Manager and Jonathan Ferguson-Pye,
City Planning Manager.
|
|
|
Moved
Grant Smith, seconded Debi Marshall-Lobb.
RESOLVED
1. That Council
delegate authority to the Palmerston North Future Development Strategy Joint
Steering Group to hear submissions on the draft Future Development Strategy,
to deliberate and to recommend the final adoption of the Future Development
Strategy to both Palmerston North City Council and Horizons Regional Council.
2. That the Joint
Steering Group Terms of Reference Delegations be amended to include (1).
3. That Council
note that both Palmerston North City Council and Horizons Regional Council
will need to adopt the Future Development Strategy prior to the adoption of
their Long-Term Plans 2024/34.
4. That Council
note that Palmerston North City Council will be the administering authority
for the special consultative procedure.
|
|
|
Clause 7-24 above was
carried 13 votes to 0, the voting being as follows:
For:
The Mayor (Grant Smith) and
Councillors Debi Marshall-Lobb, Mark Arnott, Brent Barrett, Rachel Bowen, Lew
Findlay, Roly Fitzgerald, Patrick Handcock, Lorna Johnson, Billy Meehan,
Orphée Mickalad, Karen Naylor and William Wood.
|
|
|
Director Vacancy - Central Economic Development
Agency
Report deferred until March
2024.
|
|
8-24
|
Trustee Vacancies - Te Manawa Museums Trust
Memorandum, presented by
Hannah White, Democracy & Governance Manager.
|
|
|
Moved Grant Smith, seconded
Debi Marshall-Lobb.
RESOLVED
1. That the Chief
Executive advertise the vacant trustees’ position on the Te Manawa
Museums Trust in February 2024.
|
|
|
Clause 8-24 above was
carried 13 votes to 0, the voting being as follows:
For:
The Mayor (Grant Smith) and
Councillors Debi Marshall-Lobb, Mark Arnott, Brent Barrett, Rachel Bowen, Lew
Findlay, Roly Fitzgerald, Patrick Handcock, Lorna Johnson, Billy Meehan,
Orphée Mickalad, Karen Naylor and William Wood.
|
|
9-24
|
Council Work Schedule
|
|
|
Moved
Grant Smith, seconded Debi Marshall-Lobb.
RESOLVED
1. That Council
receive its Work Schedule dated 7 February 2024.
|
|
|
Clause 9-24 above was
carried 13 votes to 0, the voting being as follows:
For:
The Mayor (Grant Smith) and
Councillors Debi Marshall-Lobb, Mark Arnott, Brent Barrett, Rachel Bowen, Lew
Findlay, Roly Fitzgerald, Patrick Handcock, Lorna Johnson, Billy Meehan,
Orphée Mickalad, Karen Naylor and William Wood.
|
|
|
Karakia
Whakamutunga
|
|
|
Deputy
Mayor Debi Marshall-Lobb closed the meeting with karakia.
|
The meeting finished at 4.10pm
Confirmed 14 February 2024
Mayor
Memorandum
TO: Council
MEETING DATE: 14
February 2024
TITLE: 2024-34
Draft Long Term Plan Consultation Material Update
Presented By: David
Murphy, Chief Planning Officer and Cameron Mckay, Chief Financial Officer
APPROVED BY: David
Murphy, Chief Planning Officer
Cameron McKay, Chief Financial
Officer
RECOMMENDATIONS TO Council
1. That Council
agree the Consultation Document for the Draft 2024-34 Long Term Plan
(Attachment 1) be provided to Audit New Zealand.
2. That Council
agree the Supporting Material for the Draft 2024-34 Long Term Plan
(presented in Attachments
3-10 to the Council meeting on 7 February 2024 with minor amendments
as directed at that meeting) to be provided to Audit New Zealand.
1. ISSUE
1.1 On
7 February 2024 Council considered the draft Consultation Document (CD) and
Supporting Material for the 2024 Long Term Plan (LTP). Council made some
changes to the CD and other informal feedback from Elected members suggested
other changes. These have been incorporated in the attached CD (Attachment 1).
1.2 Straightforward
and minor changes (at the meeting and in informal feedback from Elected
Members) were made to the Supporting Material. Because these changes are minor,
the Supporting Material has not been recirculated.
1.3 A
separate memorandum titled “Long-term Plan – Rating System”
has been presented to this meeting. The material covered by that memorandum
will be part of the Supporting Material.
2. BACKGROUND
2.1 Council
has to adopt its next LTP by 30 June 2024.
2.2 Developing
the LTP involves many steps. Previous steps were outlined in the Report to the
7 February 2024 Council meeting.
3. APProving
the CD and Supporting material for audit
3.1 At
the meeting on 7 February, Council resolved to proceed with an audit of the
LTP, including the underlying information used by Council to prepare the
consultation document and supporting material. This is based on pending changes
to the Local Government Act allowing for unaudited consultation documents.
3.2 The
7 February Council meeting also considered the draft CD and Supporting Material
and made resolutions for changes to be made prior to the documents coming back
to this meeting (14 February) for approval for audit. The documents have been
updated accordingly.
3.3 Major
changes to the CD include:
|
Page 10
|
Widen the list of Community
Wins
|
|
Page 20
|
Clarify roading building
costs
|
|
Page 23
|
Update to reflect Council
decisions to investigate options for Social Housing and Animal Control (in
light of Council’s current Revenue and Financing Policy limits)
Show that once Council has
more clarity around the type of housing developments it will pursue, it will
be able to develop better costs and revenue estimates
|
|
Page 27
|
Clarified rates as proportion
of funds needed to run the City
|
|
Page 33 & 38
|
Show the costs for each
community venues project
|
|
Pages 40-45
|
Show the costs for each
seismic strengthening project. Clarified proportion of external funding for
Library and Te Manawa
|
|
Page 50
|
Show impact of wastewater
project levy alongside proposed rates increases
|
|
Pages 52 - 55
|
Include examples of proposed
rates increases. Clarify that the costs shown are passed on Council’s
preferred hybrid rates model
|
|
Various pages
|
Update financial figures as
appropriate, including year 1 proposed rates increase of 11.7%
|
3.4 The
meeting also made the following resolutions regarding the Revenue and Financing
Policy:
· That the Chief Executive provide options to deliver
Social housing within the current Policy limit, and until such time Council
agrees to operate outside of the current policy limit.
· That the Chief Executive provide options to
provide Animal control services within the current Policy limit.
The options in these resolutions will
require some time to develop, especially for Social Housing. Staff will provide
an update on Animal Control Services in a Fees and Charges report to Council in
early March.
3.5 On
the 7 February 2024 the Culture and Sport Committee considered a report on the Te
Manawa Museums Trust: Draft Statement of Intent 2024-27. As part of this
Council resolved:
· That Council increase
Te Manawa’s operational grant funding in the draft Long-Term Plan 2024-34
to be:
|
2024/25
|
2025/26
|
2026/27
|
|
$3,833,599
|
$4,024,056
|
$4,217,826
|
Adding this into the proposed 2024-34 LTP means that rates
increases are now:
|
Draft LTP Annual Rate Increases
|
|
Year 1 24/25
|
Year 2 25/26
|
Year 3 26/27
|
Year 4 27/28
|
Year 5 28/29
|
Year 6 29/30
|
Year 7 30/31
|
Year 8 31/32
|
Year 9 32/33
|
Year 10 33/34
|
|
11.7%
|
9.9%
|
9.8%
|
9.0%
|
7.8%
|
6.6%
|
5.9%
|
6.1%
|
4.2%
|
4.2%
|
3.6 Officers
also received feedback from Elected Members on documents within the Supporting
Material. These changes have been made.
3.7 The
recommendations of this report will give Council’s approval for officers
to forward the updated CD and Supporting Material to Audit New Zealand. Audit
NZ can then review the underlying information used by Council to prepare the CD
and Supporting Material, as part of its audit of the final LTP.
3.8 Officers
will make any necessary changes to the CD and Supporting Material as a result
of the Audit NZ feedback and then present the CD and Supporting Material back
to Council for approval for consultation in March / April.
3.9 Feedback
was also received on the Strategy, plans and Asset Management Plan summaries.
These changes will be made prior to commencing consultation on the draft LTP.
4. next
steps
4.1 Council
will consult on the CD and Supporting Material from late March to late April.
4.2 Council
will consider all submissions and adopt the final LTP by 30 June.
4.3 Officers
will prepare the draft Development Contributions Policy, Future Development
Strategy and Waste Management and Minimisation Plan for consultation alongside
the CD and Supporting Material. Each of these will be brought to Council before
adoption for consultation.
5. Compliance
and administration
|
Does the Council 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
|
|
Contribution to Council’s strategic direction and to
social, economic, environmental and cultural well-being:
The recommendations contribute
to the development of the Council’s 2024- 34 Long-Term Plan. Hence,
they are about how Council could deliver its 2024 strategic direction and how
it could contribute to social, economic, environmental and cultural
wellbeing.
|
Attachments
|
1.
|
Draft Consultation Document (separately enclosed) ⇩
|
|
Placeholder for Attachment 1
ITEM 8/24 2024-34 Draft Long Term Plan Consultation
Material Update
Draft Consultation Document (separately enclosed)
Memorandum
TO: Council
MEETING DATE: 14
February 2024
TITLE: Long-Term
Plan - Rating System
Presented By: Steve
Paterson, Strategy Manager - Finance
APPROVED BY: Cameron
McKay, Chief Financial Officer
RECOMMENDATION TO Council
1. That Council
agree the rating information contained in the memorandum for
inclusion in the supporting material for the Draft Long-Term Plan 2024-34; and
that this be provided to Audit NZ.
1. ISSUE
An integral component of the Long-Term Plan (LTP) is the details
of the proposed rating system and particularly rates incidence for
2024/25. The modelling for this was not complete in time for
consideration at the Council meeting on 7 February 2024 and this report
provides the information required. It will form part of the supporting
information that is the subject of audit review prior to adoption for public
consultation in March.
2. BACKGROUND
At its meeting on 18 December
2023 Council resolved as follows:
“1. That,
in the drafting of the Long-Term Plan 2024-34, Council agree:
(c) To propose for
public consultation through the 2024-34 Long-term Plan process a change to the
rating system that involves the use of a hybrid system whereby part of the
rates is set using the land value as the base and the remainder the capital
value as the base.
2. That,
in the drafting of the Long-Term Plan 2023/24, Council agree: that the
split of the general rate requirements between land and capital value base be
(e) 70% land / 30% capital.
3. The
Council agree that the rating system change will occur from 1 July 2024 in one
step.
6. That
Council note that as the legislation requires there can be only one basis for
setting the general rate, then it will be necessary to introduce a
targeted rate to facilitate the change and Officers will prepare a proposal of
which activities the targeted rate would be proposed to fund and will present
this to Council on 7 February 2024.
7. That
the Chief Executive assume for the preparation of the draft supporting material
for the 2024-34 Long-term Plan:
7.1 The Uniform Annual
General Charge for 2024/25 will be $200;
7.2
There will be changes to the way some properties are categorised for
differential rating purposes and in particular those rural and semi-serviced
properties (between 0.2 and 5ha) on the fringe of the urban area of the City so
they pay general rates at levels more like those in the urban serviced area;
7.3 That Council agree:
• utilities
in the street will be categorised in the commercial/ industrial differential
category, and
• vacant
non-residentially zoned land will be categorised in the commercial/industrial
category (just for the purposes of the assessing of the capital value based
rate), and
• revised
differential surcharges will be used
8. That
Council agree that the community engagement material highlight the proposed
rates using the status quo, a full capital value based system and a hybrid
system.
9. That
the Chief Executive provide further advice about the desirability and practicability
of the adoption of a rates system transition remission policy.
10. That
Council note officers will recommend the adoption of an updated set of rates
remission and postponement policies with only minor amendments to recognise any
legislative changes at the Council meeting on 14 February 2024.
That moving to full capital
value rates system is also consulted on as Option B, alongside Council’s
preferred option.”
3. Modelling outcomes
The material considered by
Council in December was based on the rates set for 2023/24. Modelling has
now been undertaken using the draft budget figures for 2024/25 – assuming
an increase in the total rates requirement of 11.5%.
As part of the modelling
exercise it has been necessary to firm up the broad planning assumptions
endorsed in December and to make a number of additional assumptions.
This report contains the
following three options:
· Option
1 (Land Value) – assumes a land value based general rate with a
change to the differentials applied to rural/semi-serviced land (0.2 to 5ha) so
these mostly lifestyle type properties pay a general rate that is more like
that payable by urban residential properties (in the particular scenario used
the rate is 83% of the urban general rate).
· Option
2 (Hybrid) – Council’s preferred option – continues to
use a land value based general rate (with the same increase in the rates
payable by lifestyle properties as for option 1) but with the introduction of a
capital value based targeted rate (for all properties). The targeted rate
would be used to fund the majority of the costs of delivering the activities
associated with achieving Goal 1 (i.e. transport, economic development, urban
design and housing).
· Option
3 (Capital Value) – in this option all of the general rate would be
based on the capital value with revised differential surcharges. The
surcharges assumed are the same as those for the capital value component in
Option 2 except for the commercial/industrial category which has been reduced
from 220% to 210%. Without this change the share paid by the
commercial/industrial category would have been too high. These surcharges
are an important component of the system as they drive the share of the total
general rates borne by each differential category.
4. Differentials
(for preferred option)
Attachment 1 contains a description of the
Council’s rating system including the definitions planned to be used to
describe the various differential rating categories for both the general and
proposed new capital valued based targeted rate.
Section 5 of the attachment includes the proposed
differential factors to be used for each category. As endorsed by the
Council in December the differential for the rural/semi-serviced category (0.2
to 5 ha) is increased from 50% to 65% of the miscellaneous rate.
The proposed differentials for the capital value based
portion of the rates in Council’s preferred option have been set at
levels that will generate total rates from each category that are similar to
the current share of the total. The exceptions are for the
rural/semi-serviced (mostly lifestyle) properties where it is intended they pay
an increased share with rates more like those paid in the serviced urban
area. Also as endorsed by the Council in December vacant non-residentially
zoned land will be categorised in the commercial/industrial category (just for
the purposes of the assessing of the capital value based rate).
The report to the Council in December signalled further
testing was required on the level of differential surcharge to be applied for
rural/semi-serviced properties (> 5ha) as it was likely that with the
introduction of a portion based on capital value rates for many in this
category would be inadvertently reduced. As a result of the further
modelling this material assumes the differential for this category (for the
portion of the rates based on the capital value) will be increased from 25% to
35% of the miscellaneous rate.
5. UAGC
& targeted rates
All options assume a Uniform Annual General Charge (UAGC)
of $200 per rating unit as endorsed by the Council in December.
To fund the draft budgets for each activity fixed targeted
rates for services have been assumed as follows:
|
Charge type
|
Charge 2023/24
|
Option 1 LV 2024/25
|
Option 2 Hybrid 2024/25
|
Option 3 CV 2024/25
|
|
Water
|
$407
|
$419
|
$430
|
$452
|
|
Wastewater
|
$306
|
$373
|
$386
|
$409
|
|
Kerbside recycling
|
$148
|
$144
|
$144
|
$144
|
|
Rubbish & public recycling
|
$103
|
$64
|
$64
|
$64
|
The proposed fixed charges for water and wastewater vary
between the options as the costs of the water and wastewater will rise if a
portion of the rates is based on the capital value – the water and
wastewater networks in the streets become rateable and the water and wastewater
plant properties are capital intensive. To reflect the true cost of operating
the Council has a policy of charging itself rates on its own properties.
The table above does show a
reduction in the targeted rate for rubbish and public recycling. This is
due to the revenue assumptions being made in the draft LTP budgets. They
assume there will be increases to the charges for bulk acceptance of green
waste (from commercial operators). In addition, they assume the costs of
rubbish disposal will be covered from the sale of rubbish bags (in accordance
with the Revenue & Financing Policy). The preliminary assumption is that
the maximum retail price of rubbish bags may need to increase from $2.90 to
$3.80 to achieve this. This will be addressed in the fees and charges
report planned for early March.
As in the past three years a Palmy BID targeted rate will
be assessed on properties within a defined area of the central city to fund the
Palmy BID programme of $250k plus GST.
6. Metered
water charges
Metered water charges are legislatively deemed to be rates
and details of these are included in the rating system section of attachment
1. The metered water tariff comprises a fixed and a variable component.
The budget for 2023/24 assumes total revenue of $3.1m plus
GST will be obtained from metered water users.
The overall budgeted cost of water to be funded from rates
for 2024/25 has increased by approximately 5% over 2023/24. To reflect
this and maintain a fair comparison with the targeted rate for residential
consumers it is necessary to increase metered water charges by a comparable
amount, hence increasing the revenue assumption to $3.25m plus GST.
|
|
Annual charge 2023/24
|
Annual charge 2024/25
|
|
Up
to 25mm connection
|
$220.00
|
$230.00
|
|
>25mm
connection
|
$470.00
|
$490.00
|
|
|
Charge 2023/24
|
Charge 2024/25
|
|
Rate
per cubic metre
|
1.65313
|
1.78538
|
7. Attachments
Attachments
to this report include:
|
Attachment
|
What are they
|
|
1
|
A draft of the Rating System,
Rates and Funding Impact Statements section of the supporting information for
the LTP consultation document
|
|
2
|
Graph 1 showing proposed
rates levels for single unit residential properties for 2024/25 (for the
three scenarios)
Graphs 2-13 showing the rates
increases and decreases (compared with the actual for 2023/24) for each
scenario and by differential category
|
|
3
|
Tables 1-6 showing the
properties within each differential category that will receive the largest $
rates increase for 2024/25 if rates are assessed as proposed using the hybrid
scenario
|
8. Interpreting
the position
Although
the proposed increase in the overall rates requirement is 11.5% it is important
to note rates changes for individual ratepayers will vary significantly and be
dependent on the following:
· The
extent of exposure to changes in the level of fixed charges for services e.g.
charges for wastewater will increase significantly so ratepayers with multiple
pans or charges based on the number of separately used or inhabited portions
will experience larger percentage increases.
· The
ratio of the capital to land value of the property. If the ratio is
higher than the average for that category of property then the rates will
increase more than average and, if the ratio is less, the increase in rates
will be less than average.
· Whether
the property is categorised as rural/semi-serviced (0.2 – 5ha) in which
case the differential has been changed so the sum of the general rate, UAGC and
targeted rate based on the capital value that they pay is more like the rate
payable by urban serviced property of the same value.
· Whether
the property is non-residentially zoned vacant land in which case the
differential for the capital value based portion of the rates has been
increased.
As required by the Local Government (Rating) Act rates
will actually be assessed based on the nature and use of the property as at 30
June 2024. The capital value of properties is reviewed whenever there is
significant update or addition to it. It will be more important than in
the past that we keep these changes to the valuation roll up to date especially
as at 30 June.
9. NEXT
STEPS
Once approved by the Council the rates material will be
inserted in the relevant documents such as the Financial Strategy, Consultation
Document and supporting information. Following the review by Audit NZ any
corrections or updates required will be incorporated in material to be adopted
by the Council for consultation in March.
10. Compliance
and administration
|
Does the Council 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
|
|
Contribution to strategic
direction and to social, economic, environmental and cultural well-being
|
The framework for the rating system
and the distribution of the rates requirement amongst ratepayers is a key
component of the supporting material for the development of the Long-term
Plan and is one of the key matters that residents and ratepayers will take
interest in during the public engagement process.
|
|
|
|
Attachments
|
1.
|
Rating System, Rates & Funding Impact Statements ⇩ 
|
|
|
2.
|
Graphs 1-13 ⇩ 
|
|
|
3.
|
Tables 1-6 ⇩
|
|
Memorandum
TO: Council
MEETING DATE: 14
February 2024
TITLE: Rates
Remission and Postponement Policies
Presented By: Steve
Paterson, Strategy Manager - Finance
APPROVED BY: Cameron
McKay, Chief Financial Officer
RECOMMENDATION TO Council
1. That Council
adopt for consultation the draft Rates Remission and Postponement
Policies (Attachment 1).
1. ISSUE
1.1 Council’s
present Rates Remission and Postponement Policies were adopted on 25 June
2018. The Local Government Act 2002 (LGA) requires that such policies
must be reviewed at least once every six years using a consultation process
that gives effect to the requirements of section 82 of the LGA.
It is appropriate therefore to
conduct the review in conjunction with the consultation on the Long-Term Plan
(LTP).
2. BACKGROUND
2.1 The
Local Government (Rating) Act provides that councils may remit or postpone
rates but only if they have adopted appropriate rates remission and
postponement policies as outlined in sections 109 and 110 of the LGA and the
Council is satisfied the conditions and criteria of the policy are met.
2.2 Under
the present policies the following remissions were granted in 2022/23:
|
|
Remissions
($000)
GST exclusive
|
|
Community organisations
Arts, recreation & sporting organisations
Penalties
|
133
15
123
|
|
Wastewater charges for educational establishments
|
163
|
|
Wastewater charges for non-residential properties
|
14
|
|
Residential land in commercial or industrial areas
|
3
|
|
Total
|
$451
|
2.3 These
remissions were approved by officers acting under delegated authority. For remissions relating to community, arts, recreation and
sporting organisations, remissions were made taking into account the
recommendations of a panel comprising an elected member and officers from the
Finance & Community divisions of the Council.
2.4 Attached is a proposed draft of an updated version of the
Policies. From a practical perspective the present policy seems to be
working as intended and there are no real drivers for change.
2.5 The
proposed draft incorporates some minor changes to reflect legislative changes.
2.6 It
also includes a new policy relating to remissions for hardship as a result of
changes to the rating system.
2.7 The
policy is targeted toward individuals rather than businesses and is focused on
providing remissions in limited situations. It recognises incidence of
rates change each year and particularly in the year following the City
revaluation or when new services are made available or when a new residence is
built. Remissions are not intended to be given in such situations.
3 NEXT STEPS
3.1 Once
the draft is adopted, consultation will be undertaken in conjunction with the
LTP.
3.2 After
consideration of any submissions the final Policy will be adopted in June 2024.
4 Compliance and
administration
|
Does the Council 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?
|
Yes
|
|
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
|
|
Contribution to strategic
direction and to social, economic, environmental and cultural well-being
|
This proposed policy addresses
situations where the Council wishes to provide relief to the rating burden
places on ratepayers. It therefore contributes to community well-being.
|
|
|
|
Attachments
|
1.
|
Draft Remission & Postponement Policies ⇩
|
|
Memorandum
TO: Council
MEETING DATE: 14
February 2024
TITLE: Treasury
Policy (Including Liability Management & Investment Policy)
Presented By: Steve
Paterson, Strategy Manager - Finance
APPROVED BY: Cameron
McKay, Chief Financial Officer
RECOMMENDATIONS TO
Council
1. That Council
adopt the updated Treasury Policy, incorporating the Liability Management and
Investment Policy pursuant to section 102 of the Local Government Act 2002 (Attachment
1).
2. That Council
note it will review the specific borrowing limits contained in clause 3.6.1 of
the Treasury Policy as part of the process of developing its Financial Strategy
for the 2024-34 Long Term Plan, and that if the outcome of the review is that
there are changes to these limits, the Treasury Policy will be updated to
include these.
1. ISSUE
Council adopted its current
Treasury Policy on 26 August 2020. One of the terms of the Policy is that
it will be reviewed every three years. This report recommends the
adoption of an updated policy (attached) containing a number of changes to
reflect changed circumstances, although in practical terms they will not impact
materially on the way the treasury activity is managed.
2. BACKGROUND
Council is required under
section 102 of the Local Government Act 2002 to adopt a Liability Management
Policy and an Investment Policy. Section 105 (5) of the Act states that
consultation is not required for a liability management policy nor an
investment policy.
Palmerston North City Council
combines the two policies into one document called a Treasury Policy and the
latest version of this Policy was adopted by Council on 26 August 2020.
The Policy itself states it
will be reviewed three-yearly. A review has been undertaken in
conjunction with Council’s treasury advisors (PwC).
The present policy has been
operating effectively. However minor changes are proposed to remove
references to matters that are out of date and to reflect some changes in the
way the debt portfolio is now being managed.
Key changes proposed include:
· increasing
the $ amount of daily transactions that may be undertaken – this reflects
the increasing size of the Council’s debt portfolio. (page 8)
· enabling
the use of alternate debt forecasting scenarios as part of prudent interest
rate risk management. (clause 3.2.3)
· clarifying
the treatment (for various calculations) of debt raised for Council-Controlled
Organisations (such as Palmerston North Airport Limited). (clause 3.2.3)
· clarifying
the treatment of deposits held to pre-fund maturing debt. (clause 3.3.5)
· simplifying
the assessment of counterparty credit risk so that it focuses on the total
exposure to any particular bank rather than the individual components of the
exposure. This has been the one area of the policy which has been
difficult to comply with. The present policy breaks the exposure to an
individual bank into components (such as swap agreements, deposits etc).
It has meant that a term deposit may have exceeded the sub-limit but the
overall exposure to the bank was less than the overall limit. Our
advisors have indicated there is no good reason for retaining the sub-limits.
No change has been made to the
specific borrowing limits (3.6.1) but a footnote indicates these are being
reviewed as part of the development of the financial strategy for the 2024-34
Long-Term Plan and that if changes are approved through that process the Policy
will be consequentially updated.
3. NEXT STEPS
Once the updated Policy is
approved it will be made available to financial institutions, advisors and
published on Council’s website.
4. Compliance and administration
|
Does Council 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 & Enabling Council
|
|
The recommendations contribute
to the achievement of action/actions in Governance
and Active Citizenship
The action is: Ongoing review of
governance systems and structures to support Council’s effectiveness
and reputation
|
|
Contribution to strategic direction
and to social, economic, environmental and cultural well-being
|
As part of the legislative
framework for Council financial management there is a legislative requirement
to adopt borrowing management and investment policies. The borrowing
limits contained in these policies flow from Council’s Financial
Strategy.
|
|
|
|
Attachments
|
1.
|
Draft Treasury Policy for adoption - February 2024 ⇩ 
|
|
Memorandum
TO: Council
MEETING DATE: 14
February 2024
TITLE: Summary
of Waste Assessment 2023
Presented By: Peter
Ridge - Senior Policy Analyst, and Natasha Hickmott - Activities Manager -
Resource Recovery and Sustainability
APPROVED BY: David
Murphy, Chief Planning Officer
Chris Dyhrberg, Chief
Infrastructure Officer
RECOMMENDATIONS TO
Council
1. That Council
receive the Palmerston North City Council Waste Assessment 2023
(Attachment 1).
2. That Council
note the Palmerston North City Council Waste Assessment 2023 is now complete in
accordance with section 51 of the Waste Minimisation Act 2008.
3. That Council
confirm it has considered the Palmerston North Waste Management and
Minimisation Plan 2019 in light of the draft Palmerston North City Council
Waste Assessment 2023 and agree to develop a replacement Waste Management and
Minimisation Plan.
1. ISSUE
1.1 The
Ministry for the Environment (MfE) requires Council to receive the Waste
Assessment and make a specific resolution to review the Waste Management and
Minimisation Plan (WMMP) considering the new Waste Assessment.
1.2 The
purpose of this memorandum is to outline the key findings of the Waste
Assessment and how these have informed the development of the draft Resource
Recovery Plan (one of the 14 plans drafted for the Long-Term Plan. This will in
turn form the central components of the revised WMMP.
1.3 The
memorandum also recommends that the Council resolve to develop a replacement
WMMP for public consultation alongside the consultation on the draft 2024-34
Long-Term Plan.
2. BACKGROUND
2.1 The
Council is required by the Waste Minimisation Act 2008 to review its WMMP at
least once every six years. The Council adopted the current WMMP in 2019,
just before the development of the 2021-31 Long-Term Plan.
2.2 The
timing of this work meant that Council was limited in the decisions it could
make through the Long-Term Plan in the resource recovery activity, without also
affecting the WMMP (and potentially requiring additional consultation).
2.3 As
a result, elected members agreed to revisit the WMMP early, as part of the
2024-34 Long-Term Plan, so that the decisions and budgets could be better
aligned.
2.4 On
29 November 2023, the Sustainability Committee resolved:
“That the Committee agree Option 2 -
compile a draft Waste Management and Minimisation Plan (WMMP) for consultation concurrent
with the consultation or as part of the consultation on the Resource Recovery
Plan/Long Term Plan.”
2.5 Before
undertaking a review of the WMMP, the Council must prepare a waste assessment
in accordance with sections 50 and 51 of the Waste Minimisation Act 2008.
We contracted Eunomia to conduct the waste assessment on our behalf. The
period assessed was May – June 2022. The draft report was then used to
inform the development of the draft Resource Recovery Plan.
2.6 The
draft Waste Assessment must include comments from the Medical Officer of
Health. We provided the draft Waste Assessment to the Medical Officer of
Health in December 2023 and received their feedback in January 2024.
3. Summary
of Waste Assessment Findings
3.1 The
following is a summary of the key findings from the Waste Assessment. The
full document is included as Attachment 1 to this memorandum.
Total waste to landfill has increased[1]
3.2 The
total amount of waste being sent to landfill has increased since the last
assessment in 2017, from 794 tonnes per week to 894 tonnes per week in
2022.
3.3 This
increase is partly attributed to changes in how waste is managed – for
instance, road sweepings are now processed through the Matthews Ave RTS rather
than being sent directly to Bonny Glenn landfill by a private contractor.
3.4 However,
construction and demolition (C&D) waste and
industrial/commercial/institutional (ICI) waste has also increased, while waste
from residential sources and kerbside waste collections has decreased slightly.
3.5 The
amount of waste per capita has also increased, from 544kgs in 2017 to 607kgs in
2022 (based on seasonally adjusted waste volumes).
|
|
Tonnes per annum
|
|
Total seasonally adjusted waste to landfill
|
54,870
|
|
Population (2022, Council figure)
|
90,400
|
|
Total seasonally adjusted waste to landfill per capita
|
0.607 per capita
|
Table 1 -
total waste sent from Palmerston North to class 1 landfills 2022
3.6 Our
waste to landfill figure is slightly lower than the national average (630kgs)
and lower than the average for similar sized cities (750kgs).
The proportion of waste that could potentially be
diverted has decreased[2]
3.7 The
total amount of waste that could be diverted from class 1 landfills[3] has fallen
since 2017. As of 2022, we could potentially divert 45.9% of the waste that is
going to landfill. In 2017, this figure was 66%, which shows that we have
made progress in diverting more of our waste from landfill.
|
Palmerston North general waste diversion potential 2022
|
Proportion of total
|
Tonnes per week
|
Tonnes per annum
|
|
Recyclable and recoverable materials
|
|
Paper - Recyclable
|
3.7%
|
33
|
1,706
|
|
Paper – cardboard
|
3.3%
|
29
|
1,532
|
|
Plastic – recyclable
|
1.2%
|
10
|
536
|
|
Ferrous metals
|
2.8%
|
25
|
1,301
|
|
Non-ferrous metals
|
1.1%
|
10
|
533
|
|
Glass – recyclable
|
1.8%
|
16
|
857
|
|
Textiles – clothing
|
1.7%
|
15
|
803
|
|
Rubble
– Cleanfill
|
1.6%
|
14
|
733
|
|
Timber – Reusable
|
0.3%
|
3
|
151
|
|
Subtotal
|
17.5%
|
156
|
8,151
|
|
Compostable materials
|
|
Organics - food scraps
|
13.5%
|
121
|
6,307
|
|
Organics – compostable green waste
|
12.0%
|
107
|
5,598
|
|
New plasterboard
|
1.5%
|
14
|
709
|
|
Timber - Untreated/ Unpainted
|
1.4%
|
12
|
636
|
|
Subtotal
|
28.4%
|
254
|
13,250
|
|
TOTAL – Potentially divertible
|
45.9%
|
410
|
21,401
|
Table 2 - proportion of overall waste
potentially divertible from landfill 2022
3.8 The
biggest proportion of potentially divertible materials is organics – food
scraps and compostable green waste – accounting for more than half of the
potentially divertible material.
Kerbside waste collections account for over half of
potential waste diversion[4]
3.9 The
Waste Assessment looks at the different sources of waste to identify the
proportion of divertible material in each source. During the period of the assessment,
just over half of the divertible material found in waste was in kerbside
collections. However, non-Council (i.e. private operator) kerbside
collections alone accounted for over 40% of the total divertible material found
in waste. Again, most of the divertible material in kerbside collection
is organic material – food scraps and compostable green waste.
|
Matthews Ave RTS - Divertible materials by activity source -
May/June 2022
|
C&D
|
ICI
|
Landscaping & earthworks
|
Residential
|
Council kerbside rubbish
|
Other kerbside rubbish
|
|
|
Tonnes per week
|
|
Paper -
Recyclable
|
0.0
|
13.8
|
0.0
|
0.9
|
3.2
|
14.8
|
|
Paper -
Cardboard
|
1.7
|
24.4
|
0.0
|
1.3
|
0.4
|
1.6
|
|
Plastic -
Recyclable
|
0.1
|
5.0
|
0.0
|
0.1
|
0.9
|
4.2
|
|
Food scraps
|
0.0
|
29.2
|
0.1
|
1.3
|
29.7
|
60.6
|
|
Compostable
green waste
|
0.1
|
3.9
|
5.6
|
1.9
|
2.7
|
50.5
|
|
Ferrous metals
|
1.5
|
15.2
|
0.0
|
3.1
|
1.0
|
4.0
|
|
Non-ferrous
metals
|
0.0
|
7.8
|
0.0
|
0.1
|
0.4
|
1.9
|
|
Glass -
Recyclable
|
0.0
|
4.4
|
0.0
|
0.1
|
0.6
|
11.3
|
|
Textiles -
Clothing
|
0.0
|
8.3
|
0.0
|
1.5
|
1.8
|
3.7
|
|
Rubble -
Cleanfill
|
9.7
|
1.1
|
3.2
|
0.1
|
0.0
|
0.0
|
|
New plasterboard
|
13.4
|
0.2
|
0.0
|
0.1
|
0.0
|
0.0
|
|
Timber -
Reusable
|
2.0
|
0.8
|
0.0
|
0.1
|
0.0
|
0.0
|
|
Timber -
Untreated/ unpainted
|
5.6
|
5.7
|
0.0
|
0.8
|
0.0
|
0.0
|
|
TOTAL
|
34.0
|
119.7
|
9.0
|
11.4
|
40.6
|
152.6
|
Table 3 - tonnes of waste per week potentially divertible from
landfill, by type of material and by activity source May/June 2022
Larger bins have larger proportions of divertible
material[5]
3.10 Across the
three types of waste bins for kerbside collections (PNCC rubbish bag, 80L
wheelie bin, and 240L wheelie bin), the larger wheelie bin contains
comparatively more material that could be recycled (17.9% vs 9.6% in 60L PNCC
rubbish bags). The smaller 80L wheelie bins contained just 7.9%
potentially recyclable material. The larger bin also contains more
compostable material (71.6%) compared to the PNCC rubbish bags (64%) and
smaller wheelie bins (59.1%).
Figure 1
– percentages of potentially divertible material by material, and type of
container 2022
Key issues and responses[6]
3.11 The Waste
Assessment identified several key issues and set out some suggested actions for
Council to consider. The table below summarises those issues and sets out
how we have responded to those issues through the draft Resource Recovery Plan:
|
Issue
|
Response
|
|
Compliance with government
requirements for kerbside standardisation and performance standards requires
that Council provides a household kerbside food scraps collection.
Additionally, large amounts
of organise waste (particularly food waste) is going to class 1 landfill.
|
The draft Resource Recovery
Plan includes an action to develop a kerbside food scraps collection.
|
|
Low Council market share in
the domestic kerbside refuse market, which will create risk for Council in
monitoring progress towards government performance standards and is likely to
result in lower participation in recycling and food scraps collection services.
|
The draft Resource Recovery
Plan includes an action to review the service delivery options for kerbside
waste and recycling collections.
|
|
A significantly higher
proportion of divertible material in refuse placed out for private wheeled
bin collections, include the presence of green waste (which is very
insignificant in the Council refuse bag collection).
|
|
A general lack of data,
particularly relating to private waste collections and waste going to class
2-5 landfills
|
The existing Waste Management
and Minimisation Bylaw includes provisions for licensing commercial waste
collectors. This licensing system could be used to collect more and
better data about private waste collections. However, the complexity
and costs of developing a new licensing system is a significant barrier.
Changes to waste minimisation
legislation are anticipated in the next 12-18 months, which may change the
basis for waste licensing. Consequently, no actions are included in the
draft Resource Recovery Plan for 2024-2027.
|
|
Provision for reuse is
limited.
|
The draft Resource Recovery
Plan includes a contestable fund which provides funding to groups for
innovative recycling and reuse projects.
|
|
Proactive iwi liaison is
limited
|
The draft Resource Recovery
Plan does not include a specific action to address how we liaise with
iwi. However, the Council has a partnership agreement with
Rangitāne o Manawatū that sets out the expectations for how Council
staff will work with representatives from Rangitāne. This includes
Te Whiri Kōkō, which provides an opportunity to proactively discuss
resource recovery issues.
|
|
Medical waste management will
become an increasing issue with an ageing population.
|
The draft Resource Recovery
Plan does not include an action to address this issue. We have focussed
on actions likely to have the greatest impact on minimising waste to
landfill. Notwithstanding the conclusion of the Waste Assessment, the
proportion of medical waste is not a significant contributor to waste
disposal.
|
|
Disaster waste management
|
The draft Resource Recovery
Plan does not include a specific action addressing the issue of waste arising
during natural disasters.
|
4. Medical
Officer of Health Comments
4.1 Section
51 of the Waste Minimisation Act 2008 sets out the requirements for conducting
a waste assessment. It states that the Council, in making the assessment,
must consult the Medical Officer of Health.
4.2 The
Medical Officer of Health was provided with a draft copy of the Waste
Assessment. Their response is included as an appendix to the Waste Assessment
(Attachment 1).
Minimising waste to landfill also minimises impacts on
public health
4.3 The
Medical Officer of Health noted:
“We support reduction of waste being sent to landfill
through the aligned waste minimisation hierarchy, prioritising reuse,
recycling, and recovery of materials. This will decrease reliance on use
of landfills and will minimise the impacts of waste on our environment and
public health long term, including reducing emissions. The Waste Assessment
identifies a number of key initiatives that, if successful, will provide a
significant contribution to diversion of waste from landfill, most notably
organic waste.”
There are opportunities for improvement in the future
4.4 The
Waste Assessment included a gap analysis that identified areas where
improvements could be made. The Medical Officer of Health noted:
“Management of hazardous waste, e-waste and
medical waste are other areas noted within the Waste Assessment that provide opportunities
for improvement in the future. Increasing community awareness of and
accessibility to safe and cost-effective mechanisms for disposal of these waste
streams, will reduce the risks to human and environmental health which result
from utilisation of improper disposal methods for these materials.”
Partnership with community groups and mana whenua is key
4.5 The
Medical Officer of Health observed that achieving waste minimisation goals
requires collaboration across a range of stakeholder groups. The Medical
Officer of Health noted:
“We support partnership with mana whenua and key
stakeholders, such as community groups, to contribute to setting waste
minimisation goals and objectives. This is important as some of these
groups may not typically engage in formal submission processes. The
likelihood of implementing successful solutions to challenges in waste
minimisation and management will be greater with active and early community
engagement. Furthermore, strong community engagement in decision making
around waste minimisation actions will limit any unintended consequences to the
health of our communities from the actions taken (or any lack of
action).”
Support for vulnerable groups should be targeted
4.6 The
Medical Officer of Health stressed the importance of targeted and innovative
approaches to education to support vulnerable groups within the
community. They noted:
“Creating an environment that promotes waste
minimisation and behavioural change also requires a focus on supporting
vulnerable groups within the community, such as rural residents, people living
in low socioeconomic areas, and the elderly. Education strategies
outlined in the Waste Assessment are a good starting point, however specific
consideration of more targeted and innovative approaches to address barriers
such as accessibility and cost for vulnerable groups are necessary to improve
participation in safe and effective waste minimisation and management across
communities.”
5. ANalysis
5.1 Upon
completion of the Waste Assessment, Council is required to consider its WMMP
considering that Waste Assessment.
5.2 The
draft Waste Assessment provides the most recent view of the waste sector in
Palmerston North. It identifies key issues facing the city, and
challenges that Council faces both as a service provider and as a regulator.
5.3 While
some issues were prominently addressed in the 2019 WMMP, such as the high
proportion of food and organic waste, these remain significant issues in the
most recent Waste Assessment. Furthermore, the changes to waste
legislation outlined in the national Waste Strategy indicate we will need to
revise our plans for waste minimisation.
5.4 Preparing
a replacement WMMP is therefore an appropriate response to the findings of the
2023 Waste Assessment. It provides the Council with the opportunity to
revise and improve the actions in the current WMMP and set out a course of
action for the next six years to improve waste minimisation outcomes for our
city.
5.5 The
draft Resource Recovery Plan, which forms part of our strategic direction and
informs the draft Long-Term Plan, will be the basis for any replacement WMMP.
6. Next
Steps
6.1 If
Council agrees to review the WMMP considering the Waste Assessment, we will
draft a replacement WMMP for approval for public consultation. This
document will follow a similar format to the 2019 WMMP but will additionally
include the actions outlined in the draft Resource Recovery Plan.
6.2 The
draft WMMP will be presented to the Sustainability Committee on 13 March, for
approval for public consultation. Consultation on the draft WMMP will be
concurrent with the draft Long-Term Plan.
7. Compliance
and administration
|
Does Council 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 4: An Eco City
|
|
The recommendations contribute
to the achievement of action/actions in Resource
Recovery
The action is: Review the Waste
Management and Minimisation Plan
|
|
Contribution to strategic
direction and to social, economic, environmental, and cultural well-being
|
Receiving the Waste
Assessment and agreeing to review the WMMP will enable the community to have
input into the strategic direction for the resource recovery activity, and
for our WMMP to be aligned to that strategic direction.
|
|
|
|
Attachments
|
1.
|
Palmerston North Waste Assessment 2023 (attached separately)
|
|
Memorandum
TO: Council
MEETING DATE: 14
February 2024
TITLE: Approval
for the Mayor to attend the 2024 Taipei Smart City Mayor's Summit
Presented By: Gabrielle
Loga, International Relations Manager
APPROVED BY: David
Murphy, Chief Planning Officer
RECOMMENDATION TO Council
1. That Council
grant approval for the Mayor to travel to Taipei from 18 March to 23 March 2024
to attend the 2024 Taipei Smart City Mayors’ Summit.
1. ISSUE
1.1 This
memorandum outlines an opportunity for the Mayor to travel to Taipei from 18
March to 23 March 2024 in order to attend the 2023 Taipei Smart City
Mayors’ Summit, organised by the Taipei Computer Association (TCA), and
seeks approval for the Mayor to lead this international travel delegation as
Council business, under the Elected Member Expenses and Allowances Policy.
1.2 The
purpose of the trip would be to connect with leaders and decision-makers from
government and business sectors from around the world to exchange ideas and
explore opportunities in the collaboration of intelligent solutions for smart
city planning and implementation.
1.3 A
copy of the invitation, received on 15 January 2024, is included as Attachment
1.
2. BACKGROUND
2.1 Taipei
Computer Association was established in 1974 and is a leading industrial
organisation in Taiwan. Since 2014, it has been facilitating the Smart City
Summit and Expo, acting as a bridge to government, academic, general public and
international professional bodies.
2.2 Every
year, the Smart City Mayors’ Summit gathers city mayors and high-profile
municipal delegates from across nations to share and exchange their insights on
the latest governmental strategies and trends in smart cities. It is the
largest government-to-government network for promoting projects, connecting
with futurists and potential partners across industries and gaining global
influence at the marketplace in Asia-Pacific and beyond.
2.3 Palmerston
North has participated in the Taipei Smart City Mayors’ Summit for the
last four years. The Mayor presented on behalf of the city on all four
occasions (online in 2020 – 2022 and in-person in 2023).
2.4 The
Mayor would be accompanied by the International Relations and Education
Advisor. The Principal Advisor – Climate Change, who is already in Taiwan
on a research fellowship that eventuated from attendance at the 2023 summit,
will also attend.
2.5 This
year, there is an opportunity to present on:
a) Progress on reducing
Palmerston North City Council’s corporate carbon emissions;
b) Progress on Palmerston
North’s target of 30% reduction in greenhouse gas emission by 2031; and
c) The progress on Palmerston
North’s experiment with big data and artificial intelligence in city
management and public administration.
2.6 Items
a) and b) above will be based on information reported to the Sustainability
Committee during 2023. Item c) above is a piece of work that is under
development following Palmerston North City Council’s participation in
the 2023 Taipei Smart City Summit and Expo.
2.7 The
Mayor’s leadership of the delegation would secure the financial support
from the Taipei Computer Association via the complimentary government
delegation VIP package, which includes:
a) One return flight ticket for
Mayor
b) Four-nights’ accommodation
for all delegates
c) Transportation from the hotel
to event venue
2.8 The
complimentary government delegation VIP package will need to be recorded in the
gifts register and would be subject to the Local Government (Pecuniary
Interests Register) Amendment Act 2022. While the initial invitation expects a
delegation of 5, it has been confirmed that the financial support would be
provided for a smaller delegation.
2.9 Should
Council approve the Mayor to travel, the cost would be minimal and unlikely to
exceed $500 as flights and accommodation for the Mayor would be covered by the
Taipei Computer Association.
2.10 The dates
of travel will have limited impact on formal Council business. The Mayor would
be unable to attend the 20 March Community Committee, in-person at least.
3. NEXT
STEPS
3.1 Should
the recommendation be agreed, the International Relations Manager will liaise
with the Taipei Computer Association to accept the financial support package
for the delegation and proceed with travel bookings.
3.2 Following
the visit, Council will receive a report on the 2024 Taipei Smart City
Mayor’s Summit and Expo.
3.3 Council
passed the following resolution on 6 December 2023:
That the Chief Executive provide an annual plan for
international relations activity to Council
The focus since this resolution was passed has been on the
recent delegation to China and Japan. Work on the annual plan has commenced and
will be reported to Council to guide the international relations activities
during the 2024/25 financial year.
4. Compliance
and administration
|
Does Council 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 1: An Innovative and Growing City as well as Goal 4: An Eco City
|
|
The recommendations contribute to the achievement of
action/actions in Economic Development
The actions are:
· Support
initiatives that promote the city’s international reputation and
strengths
· Promote
Palmerston North’s interests to global partners
· Promote
the environmental wellbeing of city’s communities and sustainable development.
|
|
Contribution to strategic
direction and to social, economic, environmental and cultural well-being
|
The delegation outlined in
this report helps to promote the city’s international reputation in
climate change actions and sustainable urban development and explore
potential partners to enhance economic, educational and environmental
cooperation. The Mayor’s leadership of the delegation enables financial
support for the delegation and would contribute to its success.
|
|
|
|
Attachments
|
1.
|
Formal invitation letter to 2024 Smart City Summit and Expo ⇩ 
|
|
|
2.
|
Complimentary government delegation VIP package ⇩ 
|
|
|
3.
|
2024 Smart City Summit and Expo Kit ⇩ 
|
|
