Agenda of Council - 27 00 2021

Council

27 January 2021

Council

MINUTES

Minutes of an ordinary meeting of the Dunedin City Council held in the Edinburgh Room, Municipal Chambers, The Octagon, Dunedin on Monday 14 and Tuesday 15 December 2020, commencing at 9.00 am

PRESENT

Mayor	Mayor Aaron Hawkins
Deputy Mayor	Cr Christine Garey
Members	Cr Sophie Barker	Cr David Benson-Pope
	Cr Rachel Elder	Cr Doug Hall
	Cr Carmen Houlahan	Cr Marie Laufiso
	Cr Mike Lord	Cr Jim O'Malley
	Cr Jules Radich	Cr Chris Staynes
	Cr Lee Vandervis	Cr Steve Walker
	Cr Andrew Whiley

IN ATTENDANCE

Sandy Graham (Chief Executive Officer), Simon Drew (General Manager Infrastructure Services), Simon Pickford (General Manager Community Services), John Christie (Director Enterprise Dunedin), Robert West (Acting General Manager City Services), Graham McKerracher (Manager, Council Communications and Marketing), Jinty MacTavish (Principal Policy Advisor), Nicola Pinfold (Group Manager Community and Planning), Suzie Ballantyne (Policy Manager), Nicola Pinfold (Group Manager Community and Planning), David Bainbridge-Zafar (Group Manager Property), Jeanine Benson (Group Manager Transport), Carolyn Allan (Senior Management Accountant), Jeanette Wikaira (Kaiwhakamāherehere), Sharon Bodeker(Corporate Planner) and Clare Sullivan (Team Leader Civic) and Julian Tan (Audit NZ) and Monique Kruger (Audit NZ)

Governance Support Officers: Lynne Adamson, Lauren McDonald and Jenny Lapham

The Mayor acknowledged the passing of Clare Rutter, a former member of the Saddle Hill Community Board. He expressed gratitude for Ms Rutter’s service and commented that thoughts were with her family.

1 Public Forum

There was no Public Forum.

2 Apologies

There were no apologies.

3 Confirmation of agenda

Moved (Mayor Aaron Hawkins/Cr Rachel Elder):

That the Council:

Confirms the agenda without addition or alteration

That Item 11 – Dunedin City Council Annual Report for the year ended 30 June 2020 be taken following the morning tea adjournment as Julian Tan, external auditor will be in attendance to speak to the item.

Motion carried

4 Declarations of interest

Members were reminded of the need to stand aside from decision-making when a conflict arose between their role as an elected representative and any private or other external interest they might have.

Cr Doug Hall advised that he was no longer a trustee of the Hall Family Trust, Invercargill.

Moved (Mayor Aaron Hawkins/Cr Christine Garey):

That the Council:

a) Amends the Elected Members' Interest Register; and

b) Confirms the proposed management plan for Elected Members' Interests.

c) Notes the proposed management plan for the Executive Leadership Team’s Interests.

Motion carried (CNL/2020/109)

Reports

5 Zero Carbon guidance for the draft Ten Year Plan
	A report from Civic provided updates on initiatives underway to support Council to reflect its Zero Carbon 2030 target in the draft Ten Year Plan, and the timing of reporting to Council on these initiatives; the Dunedin Community Carbon Footprint 2018/19, based on an updated methodology; and high level guidance for Council on progressing towards the DCC’s Zero Carbon 2030 target through its decision-making on the draft Ten Year Plan.
	The Acting General Manager City Services (Robert West) and Principal Policy Advisor (Jinty MacTavish) spoke to the report and responded to questions.
Cr Carmen Houlahan entered the meeting at 9.07 am. Cr Doug Hall left the meeting at 9.38 am and returned to the meeting at 9.47 am. Councillors acknowledged the passing of Professor Jim Flynn, his work and the book he wrote on climate change.
	Moved (Cr David Benson-Pope/Cr Marie Laufiso): That the Council: a) Notes the update on Zero Carbon work programme initiatives related to the Ten Year Plan b) Notes the December 2020 update to the Dunedin Community Carbon Footprint 2018/19; and c) Notes the Zero Carbon guidance for the Ten Year Plan. Division The Council voted by division: For: Crs Sophie Barker, David Benson-Pope, Rachel Elder, Christine Garey, Doug Hall, Carmen Houlahan, Marie Laufiso, Mike Lord, Jim O'Malley, Jules Radich, Chris Staynes, Steve Walker, Andrew Whiley and Mayor Aaron Hawkins (14). Against: Cr Lee Vandervis (1). Abstained: Nil The division was declared CARRIED by 14 votes to 1 Motion carried (CNL/2020/110)

Moved (The Mayor/Cr Christine Garey):

That the Council:

Adjourns the meeting.

Motion carried

The meeting adjourned at 10.36 am and reconvened at 10.50 am.

11 Dunedin City Council Annual Report for the year ended 30 June 2020
	A report from Finance sought approval and adoption of the Annual Report for the Dunedin City Council for the financial year ended 30 June 2020.
	The Acting General Manager Finance (Gavin Logie) and Julian Tan (Audit NZ) responded to questions on the Dunedin City Council Annual Report.
	Moved (Cr Mike Lord/Cr Chris Staynes): That the Council: a) Approves the Dunedin City Council Annual Report for the financial year ended 30 June 2020. b) Delegates the Chief Executive the authority to make any minor editing required to the approved Annual Report for the year ended 30 June 2020. c) Authorises the Mayor and Chief Executive to sign the Statement of Compliance and Responsibility on behalf of Council. d) Authorises the Mayor and Chief Executive to sign the Letter of Representation to the auditor on behalf of Council. e) Receives the Audit Report on the Annual Report for the year ended 30 June 2020; and f) Adopts the audited Annual Report for the year ended 30 June 2020. Motion carried (CNL/2020/111)

6 Strategic Framework Refresh
	A report from Community and Planning provided an update on the findings of an initial evaluation of the Dunedin City Council’s Strategic Framework and noted the next steps in the process.
	The Acting General Manager City Services (Robert West) and Group Manager Community and Planning (Nicola Pinfold) spoke to the report and responded to questions.
Cr Doug Hall left the meeting at 11.18 am and returned at 11.20 am.
	Moved (Cr Sophie Barker/Cr Rachel Elder): That the Council: a) Notes the findings of the DCC Strategic Framework evaluation and the next steps in the refresh of the DCC Strategic Framework. b) Notes that staff would work with mana whenua and key stakeholders on a process for undertaking the review and report back to Council in May 2021 with a project plan. Motion carried (CNL/2020/112) with Cr Lee Vandervis recording his vote against.
7 Shaping Future Dunedin Transport Programme
	A report from Transport provided information on the projects, within the wider Shaping Future Dunedin Transport Programme, to be considered for inclusion in the Ten Year Plan 2021-31.
	The General Manager Infrastructure Services (Simon Drew) and Group Manager Transport (Jeanine Benson) spoke to the report and responded to questions.
Cr Carmen Houlahan left the meeting at 11.37 am and returned at 11.41 am. Cr Doug Hall left the meeting at 11.49 am. Cr Andrew Whiley left the meeting at 11.51 am and returned at 11.52 am.
	Moved (Cr Jim O'Malley/Cr David Benson-Pope): That the Council: a) Supports the six DCC projects of the Shaping Future Dunedin Transport Programme be included in the Draft Ten Year Plan 2021-31. i) Harbour Arterial Efficiency Improvements ii) Central City Parking Management iii) Princes Street Bus Priority and Corridor Safety Plan iv) Central Cycle and Pedestrian Improvements v) Park and Ride Facilities – Mosgiel and Burnside vi) Central City Bike Hubs – Parking and Facilities b) Notes that the timing of those projects to be included will be considered alongside the total capital budget and presented to the January 2021 meeting for approval.
Moved (The Mayor/Cr Christine Garey) That the Council: Adjourns the meeting. Motion carried The meeting adjourned at 12.36 pm and reconvened at 1.06 pm.
	The discussion continued on the Shaping Future Dunedin Transport Programme. It was agreed that the resolutions would be taken separately.
	Moved (Cr Jim O'Malley/Cr David Benson-Pope): That the Council: i) Supports the Harbour Arterial Efficiency Improvements project being included in the Draft Ten Year Plan 2021-31. Division The Council voted by division: For: Crs Sophie Barker, David Benson-Pope, Rachel Elder, Christine Garey, Marie Laufiso, Mike Lord, Jim O'Malley, Jules Radich, Chris Staynes, Steve Walker, Andrew Whiley and Mayor Aaron Hawkins (12). Against: Crs Carmen Houlahan and Lee Vandervis (2). Abstained: Nil The division was declared CARRIED by 12 votes to 2 Motion carried (CNL/2020/113)
	Moved (Cr Jim O'Malley/Cr David Benson-Pope): That the Council: ii) Supports the Central City Parking Management project being included in the Draft Ten Year Plan 2021-31. Division The Council voted by division: For: Crs Sophie Barker, David Benson-Pope, Rachel Elder, Christine Garey, Marie Laufiso, Mike Lord, Jim O'Malley, Chris Staynes, Steve Walker, Andrew Whiley and Mayor Aaron Hawkins (11). Against: Crs Carmen Houlahan, Jules Radich and Lee Vandervis (3). Abstained: Nil The division was declared CARRIED by 11 votes to 3 Motion carried (CNL/2020/114)
	Moved (Cr Jim O'Malley/Cr David Benson-Pope): That the Council: iii) Supports the Princes Street Bus Priority and Corridor Safety Plan project being included in the Draft Ten Year Plan 2021-31. Division The Council voted by division For: Crs Sophie Barker, David Benson-Pope, Rachel Elder, Christine Garey, Carmen Houlahan, Marie Laufiso, Mike Lord, Jim O'Malley, Jules Radich, Chris Staynes, Steve Walker, Andrew Whiley and Mayor Aaron Hawkins (13) Against: Cr Lee Vandervis (1). Abstained: Nil The division was declared CARRIED by 13 votes to 1 Motion carried (CNL/2020/115)
	Moved (Cr Jim O'Malley/Cr David Benson-Pope): That the Council: iv) Supports the Central Cycle and Pedestrian Improvements project being included in the Draft Ten Year Plan 2021-31. Division The Council voted by division For: Crs Sophie Barker, David Benson-Pope, Rachel Elder, Christine Garey, Marie Laufiso, Mike Lord, Jim O'Malley, Chris Staynes, Steve Walker, Andrew Whiley and Mayor Aaron Hawkins (11). Against: Crs Carmen Houlahan, Jules Radich and Lee Vandervis (3). Abstained: Nil The division was declared CARRIED by 11 votes to 3 Motion carried (CNL/2020/116)
Cr Doug Hall returned to the meeting 2.06 pm.
	Moved (Cr Jim O'Malley/Cr David Benson-Pope): That the Council: v) Supports the Park and Ride Facilities – Mosgiel and Burnside project being included in the Draft Ten Year Plan 2021-31. Division The Council voted by division: For: Crs Sophie Barker, David Benson-Pope, Rachel Elder, Christine Garey, Doug Hall, Carmen Houlahan, Marie Laufiso, Mike Lord, Jim O'Malley, Chris Staynes, Steve Walker, Andrew Whiley and Mayor Aaron Hawkins (13). Against: Crs Jules Radich and Lee Vandervis (2). Abstained: Nil The division was declared CARRIED by 13 votes to 2 Motion carried (CNL/2020/117)
	Moved (Cr Jim O'Malley/Cr David Benson-Pope): That the Council: vi) Supports the Central City Bike Hubs – Parking and Facilities project being included in the Draft Ten Year Plan 2021-31. Division The Council voted by division: For: Crs Sophie Barker, David Benson-Pope, Rachel Elder, Christine Garey, Doug Hall, Carmen Houlahan, Marie Laufiso, Mike Lord, Jim O'Malley, Jules Radich, Chris Staynes, Steve Walker, Andrew Whiley and Mayor Aaron Hawkins (14). Against: Cr Lee Vandervis (1). Abstained: Nil The division was declared CARRIED by 14 votes to 1 Motion carried (CNL/2020/118)
	Moved (Mayor Aaron Hawkins/Cr Jim O'Malley): That the Council: a) Notes that the timing of those projects to be included will be considered alongside the total capital budget and presented to the January 2021 meeting for approval. Motion carried (CNL/2020/119)

8 City to Waterfront (Bridge) Connection - Update
	A report from Community and Planning and Transport provided an update on the City to Waterfront Connection project following the business case process and the Council decision in May 2020 to defer the Dunedin Waterfront Revitalisation project due to economic uncertainties.
	The Group Manager Community and Planning (Nicola Pinfold) and Group Manager Transport (Jeanine Benson) spoke to the report and responded to questions. Mayor Aaron Hawkins left the meeting at 2:21 pm and Cr Christine Garey assumed the Chair. The Mayor returned to the meeting at 2:23 pm and resumed the Chair.
	Moved (Cr David Benson-Pope/Cr Steve Walker): That the Council: Notes that staff will work with mana whenua and other stakeholders to review the scope of the project to ensure it meets broader aspirations for the city including mana whenua cultural values and report back to Council in May 2021. Division The Council voted by division: For: Crs Sophie Barker, David Benson-Pope, Rachel Elder, Christine Garey, Doug Hall, Carmen Houlahan, Marie Laufiso, Mike Lord, Jim O'Malley, Jules Radich, Chris Staynes, Steve Walker, Andrew Whiley and Mayor Aaron Hawkins (14). Against: Cr Lee Vandervis (1). Abstained: Nil The division was declared CARRIED by 14 votes to 1 Motion carried (CNL/2020/120)

9 Public Toilets Review
	A report from Property noted that Council had requested a programme and costs be developed to address the need for more public toilets in the city, including a Changing Places bathroom.
During discussion, Crs Mike Lord, David Benson-Pope and Doug Hall left the meeting at 2:44 pm and returned at 2:46 pm
	The Acting General Manager City Services (Robert West) and Group Manager Property Services (David Bainbridge-Zafar) spoke to the report and responded to questions.
	Moved (Cr Marie Laufiso/Cr Christine Garey): That the Council: a) Notes that the Ten Year Plan 2021-31 consultation document would seek feedback on preferred locations for new public toilets to be constructed over the ten year period. b) Notes that decisions made on the capital budget option reports and the timing of those projects will be considered alongside the total capital budget and presented to the January 2021 meeting for approval. Motion carried (CNL/2020/121)
	Moved (Mayor Aaron Hawkins/Cr Christine Garey): That the Council: Adjourn the meeting. Motion carried (CNL/2020/122)
The meeting adjourned at 2:58pm and recommenced at 3:11pm. Cr Carmen Houlahan was absent from the meeting.
	Moved (Mayor Aaron Hawkins/Cr Christine Garey): That the Council: Extends the meeting length beyond 6 hours. Motion carried (CNL/2020/123)

10 General Rate Differential
	A report from Finance provided a review of the general rates differential and seeks a decision from Council on what approach it wishes to take for preparation of the 2021/22 Rating Method report for the Ten year plan Council meeting in January 2021.
	The Acting General Manager Finance (Gavin Logie) and Senior Management Accountant (Carolyn Allan) spoke to the report and responded to questions.
Cr Carmen Houlahan returned to the meeting at 3.14 pm.
	Moved (Cr Doug Hall/Cr David Benson-Pope): That the Council: Decides for the purposes of preparing the 2021/22 Rating Method report for the Ten Year Plan Council meeting in January 2021 to maintain the current general rate differentials. Division The Council voted by division: For: Crs David Benson-Pope, Rachel Elder, Christine Garey, Doug Hall, Carmen Houlahan, Marie Laufiso, Mike Lord, Steve Walker and Andrew Whiley (9). Against: Crs Sophie Barker, Jim O'Malley, Jules Radich, Chris Staynes, Lee Vandervis and Mayor Aaron Hawkins (6). Abstained: Nil The division was declared CARRIED by 9 votes to 6 Motion carried (CNL/2020/124)

12 Notice of Motion - NZ Sports Hall of Fame
	In accordance with Standing Order 26.1, a Notice of Motion had been received from Cr Sophie Barker. Cr Barker spoke to the Notice of Motion which was then considered by Council.
	It was agreed that the resolutions be taken separately.
	Moved (Cr Sophie Barker/Cr Marie Laufiso): That the Council: a) Request a staff report on options and costs to integrate the NZ Sports Hall of Fame into the Dunedin City Council’s Museum, Art Galleries and Attractions department for the 10 Year Plan Council meeting of 27 January 2021. Division The Council voted by division: For: Crs Sophie Barker, David Benson-Pope, Rachel Elder, Christine Garey, Doug Hall, Carmen Houlahan, Marie Laufiso, Mike Lord, Jim O'Malley, Jules Radich, Chris Staynes, Lee Vandervis, Steve Walker, Andrew Whiley and Aaron Hawkins (15). Against: Nil Abstained: Nil The division was declared CARRIED by 15 votes to 0 Motion carried (CNL/2020/125)

Moved (Cr Sophie Barker/Cr Marie Laufiso):

That the Council:

vi) Authorise $50,000 over expenditure from the Ara Toi budget subject to staff confirming that the money would be used to keep the facility open until June 2021.

Division

The Council voted by division:

For: Crs Sophie Barker, David Benson-Pope, Rachel Elder, Doug Hall, Carmen Houlahan, Marie Laufiso, Mike Lord, Jim O'Malley, Jules Radich, Chris Staynes, Lee Vandervis, Steve Walker, Andrew Whiley and Mayor Aaron Hawkins (14).

Against: Cr Christine Garey (1).

Abstained: Nil

The division was declared CARRIED by 14 votes to 1

Motion carried (CNL/2020/126)

Moved (Cr Sophie Barker/Cr Marie Laufiso):

That the Council:

vii) Request a staff report on the potential of a single integrated museums and visitor attraction structure for Council by December 2021.

Division

The Council voted by division:

For: Crs Sophie Barker, Rachel Elder, Doug Hall, Jules Radich, Lee Vandervis and Andrew Whiley (6).

Against: Crs David Benson-Pope, Christine Garey, Carmen Houlahan, Marie Laufiso, Mike Lord, Jim O'Malley, Chris Staynes, Steve Walker and Mayor Aaron Hawkins (9).

Abstained: Nil

The division was declared LOST by 9 votes to 6.

Moved (Mayor Aaron Hawkins/Cr David Benson-Pope):

That the Council:

Adjourn the meeting until 9:00am on Tuesday 15 December 2020.

Motion carried (CNL/2020/127)

The meeting adjourned at 4:30 pm and reconvened at 9.00 am on Tuesday 15 December 2020.

Resolution to exclude the public

Moved (Mayor Aaron Hawkins/Cr Chris Staynes):

That the Council:

Pursuant to the provisions of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987, exclude the public from the following part of the proceedings of this meeting namely:

General subject of the matter to be considered	Reasons for passing this resolution in relation to each matter	Ground(s) under section 48(1) for the passing of this resolution	Reason for Confidentiality
C1 Dunedin Performing Arts Feasibility Study - Revised Options Appraisal	S7(2)(b)(ii) The withholding of the information is necessary to protect information where the making available of the information would be likely unreasonably to prejudice the commercial position of the person who supplied or who is the subject of the information. S7(2)(h) The withholding of the information is necessary to enable the local authority to carry out, without prejudice or disadvantage, commercial activities.	S48(1)(a) The public conduct of the part of the meeting would be likely to result in the disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding exists under section 7.
C2 Low Emissions Heating Upgrade options / possible District Energy Scheme connection	S7(2)(h) The withholding of the information is necessary to enable the local authority to carry out, without prejudice or disadvantage, commercial activities.	S48(1)(a) The public conduct of the part of the meeting would be likely to result in the disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding exists under section 7.
C3 DCHL Matters	S7(2)(h) The withholding of the information is necessary to enable the local authority to carry out, without prejudice or disadvantage, commercial activities.	S48(1)(a) The public conduct of the part of the meeting would be likely to result in the disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding exists under section 7.

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, or Section 6 or Section 7 or Section 9 of the Official Information Act 1982, as the case may require, which would be prejudiced by the holding of the whole or the relevant part of the proceedings of the meeting in public are as shown above after each item.

Motion carried.

The meeting moved into confidential at 9.01 am.

..............................................

MAYOR

Council

27 January 2021

Council

MINUTES

Minutes of an ordinary meeting of the Dunedin City Council held in the Council Chamber, Municipal Chambers, The Octagon, Dunedin on Tuesday 08 December 2020, commencing at 10.00 am

PRESENT

Mayor	Mayor Aaron Hawkins
Deputy Mayor	Cr Christine Garey
Members	Cr Sophie Barker	Cr David Benson-Pope
	Cr Rachel Elder	Cr Doug Hall
	Cr Carmen Houlahan	Cr Marie Laufiso
	Cr Mike Lord	Cr Jim O'Malley
	Cr Jules Radich	Cr Chris Staynes
	Cr Lee Vandervis	Cr Steve Walker
	Cr Andrew Whiley

IN ATTENDANCE

Sandy Graham (Chief Executive Officer), Simon Drew (General Manager Infrastructure Services), Simon Pickford (General Manager Community Services), John Christie (Director Enterprise Dunedin), Gavin Logie (Acting General Manager Finance), Graham McKerracher (Manager, Council Communications and Marketing); Chris Henderson (Group Manager Waste and Environmental Solutions), Nicola Pinfold (Group Manager Community and Planning), Sean Jacobs (Senior Policy Analyst), Andrea Jones (Communication Team Leader), Richard Davey (Treasury Manager), Paul Henderson (Acting Group Manager Customer and Regulatory Services), Kevin Mechen (Secretary, District Licensing Committee) and Clare Sullivan (Team Leader Civic), Jeanette Wikaira (Kaiwhakamāherehere), and Jemma Adams (General Manager, Dunedin City Holdings) and Keith Cooper (Chairman, Dunedin City Holdings)

Governance Support Officer Lynne Adamson

1 Opening

Jambavati from the Hare Krishna community opened the meeting with a prayer.

2 Public Forum

2.1 Public Forum - Strath Taieri Heritage Park

Jacquie Lucas-Prattley and Richard Emerson spoke on behalf of the Concept Development Team, Strath Taieri Heritage Park. They provided an update on the Heritage Park/Project Steam venture and responded to questions.

2.2 Public Forum – Place Based Community Building

Tess Trotter and Joy Davis provided an update on key themes which arose from their report Resourcing Place-Based Community Building in Ōtepoti Dunedin which had been precirculated.

Moved (The Mayor/Cr Christine Garey):

That the Council:

Extends the public forum.

Motion carried

2.2 Public Forum – Place Based Community Building continued

Ms Trotter and Ms Davis the responded to questions and spoke of the benefits place based groups provided with linkage to wider support networks.

3 Apologies

There were no apologies.

4 Confirmation of agenda

Moved (Mayor Aaron Hawkins/Cr Christine Garey):

That the Council:

Confirms the agenda without addition or alteration.

Motion carried

5 Declarations of interest

Members were reminded of the need to stand aside from decision-making when a conflict arose between their role as an elected representative and any private or other external interest they might have.

Cr Mike Lord advised that he was the Chairperson of the Otago Rural Support Trust and the Federated Farmers Charitable Trust and was a Trustee of Otago Youth Adventure Trust.

Moved (Mayor Aaron Hawkins/Cr Christine Garey):

That the Council:

a) Amends the Elected Members' Interest Register; and

b) Confirms the proposed management plan for Elected Members' Interests.

c) Notes the proposed management plan for the Executive Leadership Team’s Interests.

Motion carried (CNL/2020/104)

6 Confirmation of Minutes

6.1 Ordinary Council meeting - 17 November 2020

Moved (Mayor Aaron Hawkins/Cr Christine Garey):

That the Council:

Confirms the public part of the minutes of the Ordinary Council meeting held on 17 November 2020 as a correct record.

Motion carried

6.2 Ordinary Council meeting - 24 November 2020

Moved (Mayor Aaron Hawkins/Cr Christine Garey):

That the Council:

Confirms the public part of the minutes of the Ordinary Council meeting held on 24 November 2020 as a correct record.

Motion carried

Minutes of Community Boards

7 Mosgiel-Taieri Community Board - 12 August 2020

Moved (Mayor Aaron Hawkins/Cr Christine Garey):

That the Council:

Notes the minutes of the Mosgiel-Taieri Community Board meeting held on 12 August 2020

Motion carried

8 Mosgiel-Taieri Community Board - 30 September 2020

Moved (Mayor Aaron Hawkins/Cr Christine Garey):

That the Council:

Notes the minutes of the Mosgiel-Taieri Community Board meeting held on 30 September 2020

Motion carried

9 Otago Peninsula Community Board - 24 September 2020

Moved (Mayor Aaron Hawkins/Cr Christine Garey):

That the Council:

Notes the minutes of the Otago Peninsula Community Board meeting held on 24 September 2020.

Motion carried

10 Saddle Hill Community Board - 24 September 2020

Moved (Mayor Aaron Hawkins/Cr Christine Garey):

That the Council:

Notes the minutes of the Saddle Hill Community Board meeting held on 24 September 2020

Motion carried

11 Strath Taieri Community Board - 24 September 2020

Moved (Mayor Aaron Hawkins/Cr Christine Garey):

That the Council:

Notes the minutes of the Strath Taieri Community Board meeting held on 24 September 2020.

Motion carried

12 Waikouaiti Coast Community Board - 30 September 2020

Moved (Mayor Aaron Hawkins/Cr Christine Garey):

That the Council:

Notes minutes of the Waikouaiti Coast Community Board meeting held on 30 September 2020.

Motion carried

13 West Harbour Community Board - 30 September 2020

Moved (Mayor Aaron Hawkins/Cr Christine Garey):

That the Council:

Notes the minutes of the West Harbour Community Board meeting held on 30 September 2020.

Motion carried

Reports

14 Kerbside Collections and Options
	A report from Waste and Environmental Solutions provided an update on the results of preliminary community engagement on alternative waste collection models for the Dunedin area, and to recommend a preferred option to be included for public consultation in the 10 year plan 2021–31.
	The General Manager Infrastructure Services (Simon Drew) and Group Manager Waste and Environmental Solutions (Chris Henderson) spoke to the report and responded to questions on the different options presented.
During discussion Cr Rachel Elder left the meeting at 11.01 am and returned at 11.04 am. Cr Mike Lord left the meeting at 11.08 am and returned at 11.10 am. Cr Doug Hall left the meeting at 11.17 am and returned at 11.23 am; he left the meeting at 11.50 am and returned at 11.53 am and left the meeting at 12.37 pm and returned at 12.41 pm.
	Moved (Cr Jim O'Malley/Cr Marie Laufiso): That the Council: a) Approves the “Four Bins plus one – separate food and green waste collection” option to be included in the Ten year plan 2021–31 consultation document as the preferred option. b) Approves the three bins enhanced status quo option to be included in the Ten year plan 2021–31 consultation document as the alternative option. c) Requests a report for the January Council meeting on alternative funding options including by way of the general rate. d) Notes that the options presented would not be suitable for all properties in the Central Activity Area. e) Notes that the options presented would not be suitable for all properties in the Rural collections area. Division The Council voted by division: For: Crs Sophie Barker, David Benson-Pope, Rachel Elder, Christine Garey, Doug Hall, Carmen Houlahan, Marie Laufiso, Mike Lord, Jim O'Malley, Jules Radich, Chris Staynes, Steve Walker, Andrew Whiley and Mayor Aaron Hawkins (14). Against: Cr Lee Vandervis (1). Abstained: Nil The division was declared CARRIED by 14 votes to 1 Motion carried (CNL/2020/105)

Moved Mayor Aaron Hawkins/Cr Christine Garey:

That the Council:

Adjourns the meeting and reconvenes at 1.30 pm.

Motion carried

The meeting adjourned at 12.43 pm and reconvened at 1.30 pm.

15 TEN Year Plan - Early engagement feedback
	A report from Corporate Policy summarised the feedback received through early engagement on the Ten Year Plan 2021–31.
	The Group Manager Community and Planning (Nicola Pinfold) and Senior Policy Analyst (Sean Jacobs) spoke to the report and responded to questions on the early engagement feedback.
	Moved (Cr Steve Walker/Cr Doug Hall): That the Council: Notes the feedback received from the community through early engagement on the Council’s 10 Year Plan 2021-31 and that feedback will inform reports on the Ten Year Plan. Motion carried (CNL/2020/106)

16 2020 Annual Reports for the Dunedin City Holdings Ltd Group
	A report from Finance appended the 2020 Annual Reports of Dunedin City Holdings Ltd (DCHL) Group companies.
	The Chairman, Dunedin City Holdings Limited (Keith Cooper) and General Manager, Dunedin City Holdings Limited (Jemma Adams) spoke and responded to questions on the Annual Reports of the Dunedin City Holding Companies Ltd Group.
	Moved (Cr Mike Lord/Cr Doug Hall): That the Council: Notes the 2020 Annual Reports of: - Dunedin City Holdings Ltd - Aurora Energy Ltd - City Forests Ltd - Delta Utility Services Ltd - Dunedin City Treasury Ltd - Dunedin Railways Ltd - Dunedin Stadium Property Trust Ltd - Dunedin Venues Management Ltd - Dunedin International Airport Ltd Motion carried (CNL/2020/107)

17 Waipori Fund - Quarter Ending September 2020
	A report from Dunedin City Treasury Limited provided information on the results of the Waipori Fund for the quarter ended 30 September 2020.
	The Acting General Manager Finance (Gavin Logie) and Treasury Manager (Richard Davey) spoke to the report and responded to questions.
	Moved (Cr Andrew Whiley/Cr Mike Lord): That the Council: Notes the report from Dunedin City Treasury Limited on the Waipori Fund for the quarter ended 30 September 2020. Motion carried (CNL/2020/108)

18 Financial Result - Period Ended 31 October 2020
	A report from Finance provided the financial results for the period ended 31 October 2020 and the financial position as at that date.
	The Acting General Manager (Gavin Logie) spoke to the report and responded to questions.
	Moved (Cr Mike Lord/Cr Doug Hall): That the Council: Notes the Financial Performance for the period ended 31 October 2020 and the Financial Position as at that date. Motion carried (CNL/2020/109)

19 Regulatory Subcommittee Recommendations on Submissions to the Proposed Trade Waste Bylaw 2020 and Proposed Stormwater Quality Bylaw 2020
	A report from Civic presented the findings of the Regulatory Subcommittee on submissions to the proposed Trade Waste Bylaw 2020 and the proposed Stormwater Quality Bylaw 2020.
	The Chairperson, Regulatory Subcommittee (Cr Andrew Whiley) spoke to the recommendations.
	Moved (Cr Andrew Whiley/Cr Jules Radich): That the Council: a) Notes that the Regulatory Subcommittee had heard and considered submissions on the proposed Trade Waste Bylaw 2020 and the proposed Stormwater Quality Bylaw 2020 as notified. b) Approves the recommended amendments to specific provisions of the proposed Trade Waste Bylaw 2020 and the proposed Stormwater Quality Bylaw 2020. c) Adopts the Trade Waste Bylaw as recommended by the Regulatory Subcommittee. d) Adopts the Stormwater Quality Bylaw as recommended by the Regulatory Subcommittee. e) Approves a date of effect for the Trade Waste Bylaw and the Stormwater Quality Bylaw of 1 February 2021. f) Revokes the Trade Waste Bylaw 2008 from 1 February 2021. Motion carried (CNL/2020/110)

20 Review of Dangerous and Insanitary Buildings Policy
	Crs Lee Vandervis and Carmen Houlahan withdrew from this item. A report from Customer and Regulatory Services provided an update on the review of the Dangerous and Insanitary Buildings Policy with a view to including ‘affected’ buildings. An affected building was defined as one that was adjacent, adjoining or nearby a dangerous building or dangerous dam.
	The General Manager Community Services (Simon Pickford) and Acting Group Manager Customer and Regulatory Services (Paul Henderson), spoke to the report and responded to questions.
	Moved (Cr Andrew Whiley/Cr Rachel Elder): That the Council: a) Notes the review of the Dangerous and Insanitary Buildings Policy b) Approves the statement of proposal and the proposed Dangerous, Insanitary and Affected Buildings Policy for consultation c) Appoints the following members to the Regulatory Subcommittee to hear and consider submissions and make recommendations to the Council: Cr Andrew Whiley (Chair), Cr Lee Vandervis and Cr Carmen Houlahan. Motion carried (CNL/2020/111)

21 Review of Gambling and TAB Venue Policy
	Crs Christine Garey; Marie Laufiso and Jules Radich withdrew from this item. A report from Customer and Regulatory Services provided an update on the review of the Gambling and TAB Venue Policy. It sought approval for the statement of proposal for consultation and requested that members be appointed to the Regulatory Subcommittee to hear and consider submissions.
	The General Manager Community Services (Simon Pickford) and Secretary, District Licensing Committee (Kevin Mechen) spoke to the report and responded to questions.
	Moved (Cr Andrew Whiley/Cr Chris Staynes): That the Council: a) Notes the update on the review of the Gambling and TAB Venue Policy b) Approves the statement of proposal at Attachment B and Gambling and TAB Venue Policy at Attachment A for consultation purposes c) Appoints the following members to the Regulatory Subcommittee: Cr Christine Garey (Chair), Cr Marie Laufiso and Cr Jules Radich. Motion carried (CNL/2020/112)

22 Warrant Cards 2019/20
	A report from Community Services provided an annual report of warrants issued by the Chief Executive Officer for the 12-month period ending 31 October 2020.
	The Chief Executive Officer (Sandy Graham) spoke to the report and responded to questions.
	Moved (Cr Chris Staynes/Cr Steve Walker): That the Council: Notes the Warrant Cards 2019/20 report for the 12 month period ending 31 October 2020. Motion carried (CNL/2020/113)

Resolution to exclude the public

Moved (Mayor Aaron Hawkins/Cr Christine Garey):

That the Council:

Pursuant to the provisions of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987, exclude the public from the following part of the proceedings of this meeting namely:

General subject of the matter to be considered	Reasons for passing this resolution in relation to each matter	Ground(s) under section 48(1) for the passing of this resolution	Reason for Confidentiality
C1 Ordinary Council meeting - 17 November 2020 - Public Excluded	S7(2)(b)(ii) The withholding of the information is necessary to protect information where the making available of the information would be likely unreasonably to prejudice the commercial position of the person who supplied or who is the subject of the information. S7(2)(c)(i) The withholding of the information is necessary to protect information which is subject to an obligation of confidence or which any person has been or could be compelled to provide under the authority of any enactment, where the making available of the information would be likely to prejudice the supply of similar information or information from the same source and it is in the public interest that such information should continue to be supplied.	.
C2 Kerbside Collection - Legal Issues	S7(2)(g) The withholding of the information is necessary to maintain legal professional privilege.	S48(1)(a) The public conduct of the part of the meeting would be likely to result in the disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding exists under section 7.
C3 Representation Review - Appointment of Independent Review Panel and Confirmation of Terms of Reference	S7(2)(a) The withholding of the information is necessary to protect the privacy of natural persons, including that of a deceased person.	S48(1)(a) The public conduct of the part of the meeting would be likely to result in the disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding exists under section 7.
C4 Foulden Maar	S7(2)(g) The withholding of the information is necessary to maintain legal professional privilege. S7(2)(i) The withholding of the information is necessary to enable the local authority to carry on, without prejudice or disadvantage, negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiations).	S48(1)(a) The public conduct of the part of the meeting would be likely to result in the disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding exists under section 7.
C5 Centre of Digital Excellence	S7(2)(g) The withholding of the information is necessary to maintain legal professional privilege. S7(2)(h) The withholding of the information is necessary to enable the local authority to carry out, without prejudice or disadvantage, commercial activities. S7(2)(i) The withholding of the information is necessary to enable the local authority to carry on, without prejudice or disadvantage, negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiations).	S48(1)(a) The public conduct of the part of the meeting would be likely to result in the disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding exists under section 7.
C6 New Zealand Masters Games Appointment of Trustee	S7(2)(a) The withholding of the information is necessary to protect the privacy of natural persons, including that of a deceased person.	S48(1)(a) The public conduct of the part of the meeting would be likely to result in the disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding exists under section 7.

That the meeting adjourn to enable media and members of the public to leave the room.

The meeting moved into confidential at 2.19 pm and concluded at 3.52 pm.

…………………………………………………….

MAYOR

Council

27 January 2021

Reports

Significant forecasting assumptions and community outcome indicators

Department: Community and Planning

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1 This report seeks approval of the significant forecasting assumptions and the community outcome indicators, which measure progress on the community outcomes, for inclusion in the 10 year plan.

RECOMMENDATIONS

That Council:

a) Approves, with any amendment the significant forecasting assumptions and the community outcomes indicators, for inclusion in the 10 year plan.

BACKGROUND

2 At its meeting on 25 August 2020, Council approved the first set of significant forecasting assumptions (growth and climate change projections) and the community outcomes for inclusion in the 10 year plan. This report seeks approval of the full set of significant forecasting assumptions and indicators for measuring the community outcomes, for inclusion in the 10 year plan.

DISCUSSION

Significant forecasting assumptions

3 Local government has a legislative requirement to provide significant forecasting assumptions as part of the 10 year plan. Schedule 10 (17) of the Local Government Act (LGA) provides the following:

(a) A long-term plan must clearly identify—

(a) all the significant forecasting assumptions and risks underlying the financial estimates:

(b) without limiting the generality of paragraph (a), the following assumptions on which the financial estimates are based:

(i) the assumptions of the local authority concerning the life cycle of significant assets; and

(ii) the assumptions of the local authority concerning sources of funds for the future replacement of significant assets:

(c) in any case where significant forecasting assumptions involve a high level of uncertainty,

(i) the fact of that uncertainty; and

(ii) an estimate of the potential effects of that uncertainty on the financial estimates provided.

Impacts of COVID-19 on the 10 year plan

4 The impacts of COVID-19 have been considered in the significant forecasting assumptions presented for approval (Attachment A).

5 The significant forecasting assumptions highlight the potential impacts arising from the uncertainty around a significant or protracted COVID-19 community outbreak and from the longer term impacts on migration, visitor numbers, the economy and the community of the COVID-19 pandemic.

6 In the 2020/21 Annual Plan, the DCC anticipated a reduction in operating revenue of $6.5 million, due to the impacts of COVID-19. The DCC may experience further revenue challenges as a result of a significant or protracted outbreak of COVID-19. There is also a risk of reduced revenue from the Waipori Fund and DCC companies as a result of national and global economic changes arising from COVID-19.

7 In 2019/20, there was a delay in delivery of some services and capital programmes due to COVID-19 alert levels. DCC staff could also face increased pressure to deliver functions under stringent business continuity protocols if further significant or protracted outbreaks occur in the future.

8 In June 2020, the DCC’s growth scenarios were reviewed by consultants Infometrics to assess the potential impacts of the pandemic on the 10 year plan growth assumptions. Infometrics projected minimal changes to pre-COVID population, dwelling and rating unit projections, in part due to the longer term planning horizons for these projections. Infometrics projected the increase in returning New Zealanders would offset a decline in international migration, although there is a high degree of uncertainty associated with these post-COVID projections. More regular monitoring and updating of growth data will be required in this uncertain environment to minimise the risk of under or over-delivery of growth related infrastructure.

9 Infometrics prepared post-COVID visitor projections in June 2020. Infometrics predicts international visitors to Dunedin are not expected to recover to pre-COVID (2019) levels until 2031, although total visitors recover earlier due to the growth in domestic visitors.

10 Short term economic indicators have shown that economic activity in Dunedin city has remained resilient in 2020 post-lockdown despite the stringent public health restrictions put in place nationally earlier in 2020. Although there is uncertainty regarding the pathway of recovery out of COVID-19, the Dunedin economy is expected to hold up and recover relatively well as delivery of public sector funded projects will continue as planned. In particular, the new Hospital rebuild as well as Council and University led projects are likely to shore up Dunedin’s wider economic activity. As the rebuild and other major projects get underway, increased demand within the construction, engineering, manufacturing, ICT and technology sectors is anticipated. This will likely further stimulate job opportunities in these sectors.

11 There is uncertainty on the medium to long term impacts of COVID-19 on the Dunedin economy. Enterprise Dunedin will continue to work closely with Dunedin businesses to understand the impacts of COVID-19 on the Dunedin economy and impacted sectors.

Other significant forecasting assumptions

12 As in previous 10 year plans, the significant forecasting assumptions also include assumptions on:

a) demographic change

b) growth and urban development

c) climate change, zero carbon, resilience and civil defence

d) levels of service

e) finance and asset management; and

f) future legislative changes.

13 The assumptions for climate change, zero carbon 2030, resilience and civil defence and future legislative changes highlight the impact of the uncertainty in these areas on the 10 year plan financial forecasts and the potential for the DCC to face increased costs as a result of climate change.

Community outcome indicators

14 On 25 August 2020, Council approved the ‘rolling over’ of the community outcomes from the 10 year plan 2018-28, with minor updates. As there are only minor updates to the community outcomes, staff recommend that the community outcomes indicators are carried over for this 10 year plan, with the exception of two indicators that have proved difficult to measure. Staff recommend these are changed as follows:

a) Replace ‘Urban development capacity’ with ‘number of new residential building consents issued in the past twelve months’, for the indicator that relates to the priority of ‘A city that enables a prosperous and diverse economy’.

b) Remove ‘water quality of Dunedin lakes and rivers using Land Air Water Aotearoa measures’ as this information relates to a number of waterways and there is no aggregate measure of water quality that could be used as a community outcome indicator for water, wastewater and stormwater systems.

15 Updated Treaty and sustainability indicators are being considered and will be presented to Council as part of the May deliberation meetings.

OPTIONS

16 Council is required under the LGA to have significant forecasting assumptions and community outcomes as part of the 10 year plan. Options have not been presented but Council is able to modify the significant forecasting assumptions and community outcome indicators.

NEXT STEPS

17 The supporting documentation with any amendment, will be included in, and used to support the development of the draft 10 year plan.

Signatories

Author:

Suzie Ballantyne - Policy Manager

Authoriser:

Robert West - Acting General Manager City Services

Sandy Graham - Chief Executive Officer

Attachments

	Title	Page
⇩a	Draft Significant Forecasting Assumptions	53
⇩b	Draft Community Outcome Indicators	66

SUMMARY OF CONSIDERATIONS

Fit with purpose of Local Government

This decision enables democratic local decision making and action by, and on behalf of communities, and promotes the social, economic, environmental and cultural wellbeing of the Dunedin communities, taking a sustainable development approach.

Fit with strategic framework

	Contributes	Detracts	Not applicable
Social Wellbeing Strategy	☒	☐	☐
Economic Development Strategy	☒	☐	☐
Environment Strategy	☒	☐	☐
Arts and Culture Strategy	☒	☐	☐
3 Waters Strategy	☒	☐	☐
Spatial Plan	☒	☐	☐
Integrated Transport Strategy	☒	☐	☐
Parks and Recreation Strategy	☒	☐	☐
Other strategic projects/policies/plans	☒	☐	☐

The 10 year plan contributes to the objectives and priorities of the strategic framework. The community outcome indicators and significant forecasting assumptions are a key component of the work to support the development of the 10 Year Plan.

Māori Impact Statement

A treaty indicator working group was set up for the 10 Year Plan 2018-28 and Māori specific data is now measured for the community outcome indicators where data is available.

Sustainability

The significant forecasting assumptions and community outcome indicators reflect the DCC’s sustainability goals.

10 Year Plan/Annual Plan / Financial Strategy /Infrastructure Strategy

The significant forecasting assumptions underpin the 10 year plan and Financial and Infrastructure Strategies.

Financial considerations

The significant forecasting assumptions highlight the extent of uncertainty in key assumptions that underpin the financial forecasts in the 10 year plan, and the potential impacts of this uncertainty on these financial forecasts.

Significance

This report is of low significance in terms of the DCC’s Significance and Engagement Policy.

Engagement – external

There has been no external engagement on these forecasting assumptions or outcome indicators. There will be full community engagement on the draft plan, which will include the community outcome indicators and significant forecasting assumptions.

Engagement - internal

A cross-Council team contributed to the development of the significant forecasting assumptions.

Risks: Legal / Health and Safety etc.

There are no known risks.

Conflict of Interest

There are no known conflicts of interest.

Community Boards

There are no known impacts to community boards of Council approving the community outcome indicators and significant forecasting assumptions.

Council

27 January 2021

10 Year Plan 2021-31 Proposed Levels of Service

Department: Corporate Policy

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1 The Local Government Act 2002 requires that the 10 year plan includes a statement of the intended Levels of Service (LOS) for each group of activities undertaken by Council. LOS statements explain what services Council will provide to its community, and how much of those services will be provided.

2 The purpose of this report is to seek approval for proposed LOS statements for each group of activities, for inclusion in the draft 10 Year Plan 2021-31 (draft plan).

3 A review of the current LOS statements has been undertaken to provide more clarity about services the Council delivers and assist Council to monitor progress towards Zero Carbon 2030 targets. A list of tracked recommended changes is outlined in Attachment A, and an untracked version is in Attachment B.

4 On 14 December 2020 Council requested a report in May 2021 outlining a project plan for a strategic framework refresh. Further work is required to ensure that LOS statements, measures, and reporting, align with Council strategic framework and Resident Opinion Survey (ROS) reporting and monitoring. It is proposed that a review of LOS statements and measures be undertaken in parallel to the strategic framework refresh to ensure future alignment of LOS statements and measures with strategic priorities.

RECOMMENDATIONS

That the Council:

a) Approves the proposed Levels of Service statements, measures and targets, with any amendments, for inclusion in the draft 10 Year Plan 2021-31.

b) Notes that staff will work on a process for undertaking a review of Levels of Service statements and measures to align with the Strategic Framework refresh work, with a report back to Council in May 2021 on progress and with a project plan.

c) Notes that staff will be changing the quarterly activity report templates to incorporate performance tracking against 10 Year plan 2021-31 Levels of Service statements and various other reporting measures.

BACKGROUND

5 Schedule 10, section 4 of the Local Government Act 2002 (LGA) provides:

“A long term plan must, in relation to each group of activities of the local authority, include a statement of the intended levels of service provision that specifies-

(a) any performance measures specified in a rule made under section 261B for a group of activities described in clause 2(2); and

(b) the performance measures that the local authority considers will enable the public to assess the level of service for major aspects of groups of activities for which performance measures have not been specified under paragraph (a); and

(c) the performance target or targets set by the local authority for each performance measure; and

(d) any intended changes to the level of service that was provided in the year before the first year covered by the plan and the reasons for the changes; and

(e) the reason for any material change to the cost of a service.”

6 LOS set out for the community what activities they can expect from Council, and they have measures and targets that can be used to assess the level of achievement. Council is required to report on its achievement of the levels of service through its Annual Report.

7 Under section 261B of the LGA (referred to in 4 (a) above), mandatory performance measures have been set by the Department of Internal Affairs through its “Non-Financial Performance Measures Rules 2013”, for the following group of activities, and must be used by councils:

· Water supply

· Sewerage and the treatment and disposal of sewage;

· Stormwater drainage; and

· The provision of roads and footpaths.

8 Whilst section 261B of the LGA sets out mandatory performance measures, it does not set mandatory targets for these measures, which are set by individual Councils.

9 The activity groups for the draft plan are shown in Attachment C. The only change from the structure in the 10 Year Plan 2018-28 is to rename ‘Libraries and museums’ to ‘Ara Toi (Arts and Culture)’.

DISCUSSION

10 In the report “Matters arising from our audits of the 2018-28 long-term plans” from the Office of the Auditor General, the following comments were made about performance frameworks:

“It is important that the council selects the forecast performance measures and targets well to provide a meaningful picture of its activities and levels of service. This includes considering aspects of service and performance that are of greatest importance to the community and reflect the financial significance of the activity.”

“We would like to see performance frameworks that provide greater clarity about the main matters a council is working on. The Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment had a similar view about presenting clear information.”

11 This approach from the Office of the Auditor General aligns with the Council’s commitment to present clear, transparent information. With these comments in mind, a review of each group of activities’ LOS statements, measures and targets has been undertaken as part of the development of the draft plan. This review considered if any amendments were required to reflect changes in service delivery and strategic direction, while ensuring good, clear wording. It also considered if LOS statements could be improved to better describe the services that Council provides to the community.

12 Proposed amendments to LOS statements and measures have been made to provide improvements in terms of;

· More straight-forward language

· Providing clarity about the services council delivers

· Better alignment between LOS statements, measures and targets

13 New LOS statements have been proposed for projects Council has agreed to, e.g., Mosgiel Pool and the South Dunedin Library and Community Complex. Council may decide that further LOS statements are to be included in the Plan following decisions made at its deliberations meeting in May 2021, e.g. for performing arts and Shaping Future Dunedin projects. The LOS statements for proposed projects would be confirmed following decisions made.

14 Introduction of new LOS statements and measures that help monitor progress towards Council’s Zero Carbon Target 2030 are being proposed. These, and existing LOS statements and measures that will help monitor progress towards Council’s Zero Carbon 2030 target are marked with a green leaf symbol - .

15 The strategic and policy directions considered to support the inclusion of additional zero carbon related LOS statements and measures include the following:

· Te Ao Tūroa / Dunedin’s Environment Strategy

· DCC Carbon Management Policy 2017

· Council’s Zero Carbon 2030 resolution

· Integrated Transport Strategy

· The Energy Plan 1.0

· DCC Emissions Reduction and Management Plan

· DCC Waste Management and Minimisation Plan

16 Further work is required to ensure that LOS statements, measures, and targets align with Council’s strategic framework and Resident Opinion Survey (ROS) reporting and monitoring. It is proposed that a further review of LOS statements and measures is undertaken in parallel with the strategic framework refresh to ensure future alignment of LOS statements and measures with strategic priorities. A project plan is being developed to undertake this work and will be presented to Council at its May 2021 10 year plan deliberations meeting.

17 Staff will work on incorporating reporting of 10 Year Plan 2021-31 LOS statements, measures and targets into new Committee quarterly report templates to ensure regular reporting and Council oversight.

Financial impact

18 Budgets have been developed based on the proposed LOS. Changes to LOS statements, measures or targets may have a financial impact. For example, the proposed level of service in relation to the percentage of sealed road network that is resurfaced proposes a target of “greater than or equal to 6% of the network in m2”. Should Council decide to amend this target to achieve a higher percentage of resurfacing, there would be a financial impact.

OPTIONS

19 The options in this report are to decide on the Levels of Service statements, measures and targets to include in the draft 10 year plan 2021-31.

Option One – Approve the proposed Levels of Service statements, measures and targets, with any amendment (Recommended Option)

20 This option seeks Council approval of the proposed LOS statements, measures and targets, as provided for in Attachment B, with any amendments, for inclusion in the draft 10 year plan 2021-31, noting that further work will be undertaken to align these with the revised Strategic Framework.

Advantages

· The Levels of Service statements provide greater clarity of the services provided by Council.

· There is better alignment between Levels of Service statements, measures and targets.

· Levels of Service statements and measures that will help monitor progress towards Council’s Zero Carbon 2030 targets are identified.

· The future alignment of LOS statements, measures and targets to be undertaken as part of the Strategic Framework review will enable integrated reporting on progress towards achieving strategic priorities.

Disadvantages

· There are no identified disadvantages.

Option Two – Retain the Levels of Service statements, measures and targets that are in the current 10 year plan 2018-28 (Status Quo)

21 Council does not approve the amended Levels of Service statements, measures and targets, and retains those that are in the current 10 year plan 2018-28.

Advantages

· There are no identified advantages.

Disadvantages

· Improvements in terms of simpler language, clarity and identification of new initiatives would not be recognised.

· The Levels of Service statements and measures that will help monitor progress towards Council’s Zero Carbon 2030 target would not be identified.

NEXT STEPS

22 If approved, the proposed LOS will be included in the draft 10 year plan 2021-31.

23 Amendments to new LOS statements, measures and targets will be made, where necessary, following decisions made at the May 2021 10 year plan deliberations meeting.

24 Committee quarterly activity report templates are being revised to incorporate performance tracking against LOS statements, measures and targets to ensure regular reporting and Council oversight (among other changes).

25 A review of LOS statements measures and targets to make further improvements and alignment with Council strategic framework will be progressed, with a report back to Council in May 2021 on progress and with a project plan.

Signatories

Author:	Sharon Bodeker - Corporate Planner
Authoriser:	Robert West - Acting General Manager City Services

Attachments

	Title	Page
⇩a	Levels of Service track changes	77
⇩b	Levels of Service	105

SUMMARY OF CONSIDERATIONS

Fit with purpose of Local Government

This decision enables democratic local decision making and action by, and on behalf of communities, and promotes the social, economic, environmental and cultural well-being of communities in the present and for the future.

Fit with strategic framework

	Contributes	Detracts	Not applicable
Social Wellbeing Strategy	☒	☐	☐
Economic Development Strategy	☒	☐	☐
Environment Strategy	☒	☐	☐
Arts and Culture Strategy	☒	☐	☐
3 Waters Strategy	☒	☐	☐
Spatial Plan	☒	☐	☐
Integrated Transport Strategy	☒	☐	☐
Parks and Recreation Strategy	☒	☐	☐
Other strategic projects/policies/plans	☒	☐	☐

The draft 10 year plan contributes to all of the objectives and priorities of the strategic framework as it describes the Council’s activities, the community outcomes, and provides a long term focus for decision making and coordination of the Council’s resources, as well as a basis for community accountability. Levels of Service impact on all areas of Council service delivery.

Māori Impact Statement

There are no specific Levels of Service relating to Treaty obligations, however Levels of Service will be updated as part of the Strategic Framework review project that will include this.

Sustainability

The draft 10 year plan contains new content regarding the Council’s approach to sustainability. Levels of Service that will help monitor progress towards Council’s Carbon Zero 2030 target are marked with a green leaf symbol -

LTP/Annual Plan / Financial Strategy /Infrastructure Strategy

Levels of Service are included in the 10 year plan.

Financial considerations

There are financial implications to altering the proposed Levels of Service.

Significance

Levels of Service are included in the 10 year plan, which is considered to be significant in terms of the Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy, and will be consulted on using the special consultative process.

Engagement – external

There has been no external engagement.

Engagement - internal

There has been cross-council internal engagement.

Risks: Legal / Health and Safety etc.

There are no identified risks.

Conflict of Interest

There are no known conflicts of interest.

Community Boards

Levels of Service affect all areas of the community including those with Community Boards. There are no levels of service that directly relate to Community Boards.

Council

27 January 2021

Residents' Opinion Survey 2019/20 results

Department: Community and Planning

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1 This report provides a summary of the annual results of the 2019/20 Residents’ Opinion Survey (ROS) (Attachment A).

2 The Dunedin City Council (DCC) has commissioned a ROS every year since 1994. This is the first time in recent years the results have been formally reported to Council.

3 This year’s survey was conducted over the 12 months from 1 July 2019 to 30 June 2020. COVID-19 does not appear to have had any across the board impacts on this year’s survey results. Residents’ overall satisfaction with the DCC increased slightly from 52% in 2018/19 to 54% in 2019/20. Results in other areas showed both increases and decreases and this report provides a summary of the findings.

RECOMMENDATIONS

That the Council:

a) Notes the annual results of the 2019/20 Residents’ Opinion Survey.

BACKGROUND

4 The Residents’ Opinion Survey (ROS) is the principal mechanism by which the DCC measures residents’ satisfaction with a wide range of its services and facilities. It has been commissioned by the DCC every year since 1994 and provides an annual snapshot of residents’ satisfaction.

5 The annual results are publicly released every year. This is the first time in recent years that the results have been directly reported to the Council. The results are an important component of the DCC’s integrated monitoring framework, and will feed into upcoming strategic work on:

· Non-financial reporting and forecasting

· Levels of service

· Strategic framework

6 Participants are randomly selected from the electoral roll, with a target sample size of 1,200 residents each year. Some groups of residents are more likely to respond to ROS than others, younger people in particular are harder to reach through sample surveys like ROS. The results are weighted to known population distributions based on 2018 census data for age, gender, ethnicity and location to reduce sample bias due to the differential response rate.

7 Since 2016, the ROS has been conducted on a monthly, rather than annual basis, to provide for analysis of trends throughout the year.

8 In 2019, Gravitas Research & Strategy Limited (Gravitas) was selected to conduct ROS following a public procurement process.

9 Gravitas is a social research agency that provides social and market research services including consultancy, large and small-scale surveys using a range of methods, qualitative research and evaluation. They have conducted projects for a range of local government organisations such as Auckland City Council and Greater Wellington Regional Council, as well as public sector organisations such as NZ Police and States Services Commission.

10 Gravitas has worked with the DCC to make changes to the survey, including improvements to the questionnaire e.g. edits to question and content text for clarity, and changes to the calculation of monthly data to increase accuracy.

11 The ROS 2019/20 was conducted over the 12 months from 1 July 2019 to 30 June 2020. A total of 4,800 survey invitations were sent during these 12 months and 1,373 responses were received. This is a response rate of 32% compared with 28% in 2018/19. The results have a margin of error of +/-2.6%.

DISCUSSION

ROS 2019/20 results report

12 The ROS 2019/20 results report has been prepared by Gravitas (Attachment A).

13 Statistically significant differences in results from the previous year, or between users and non-users of facilities, are indicated throughout the report by black arrows. These differences are statistically significant at a 95% confidence level.

COVID-19 effects

14 An analysis of the results of quarters one and two of 2020, with the last two quarters of 2019, was undertaken to determine if there were differences pre and post-COVID. However, no across the board impacts on satisfaction were identified. There were noticeable declines in visitation to various facilities in early 2020, as facilities were impacted by the COVID-19 lockdown.

15 Staff will continue to monitor ROS results in 2020/21 for any longer-term impacts of COVID-19. While there are no COVID-19 specific questions included in ROS, some COVID-19 specific questions were included in the Quality of Life survey in 2020. Results from the Quality of Life survey will be released within the first quarter of this year.

Summary of findings

Overall Satisfaction with the DCC

16 Residents’ overall satisfaction with the DCC slightly increased from 52% in 2018/19 to 54% in 2019/20.

Overall value for money

17 Satisfaction with overall value for money declined from 46% in 2018/19 to 42% in 2019/20. This follows a trend from the previous year, where satisfaction decreased from 52% in 2017/18 to 46% in 2018/19.

18 Residents commented on the need to reduce rates/no rates increase, wanting more value for money, and for the DCC to spend more wisely e.g. on core infrastructure, or focus on reducing debt.

Transport

19 Satisfaction with roads, footpaths, lighting and parking remains low, consistent with previous years. Overall, only 30% of residents are satisfied, 32% are neutral and 38% are dissatisfied with the roading network. Dissatisfaction remains highest with availability of parking in the central city, with 64% dissatisfied, 17% neutral and 20% satisfied. Half of residents (51%) are also dissatisfied with availability of on-street metered parking and flow of traffic at peak times, with only 23% and 24% satisfied with each respectively.

20 Satisfaction with aspects of transport have been steadily decreasing over the last few years. Residents’ identified parking as a major issue, as well as poor traffic flows, and poor quality roads. These issues raised were also featured amongst residents’ top two priorities for the DCC for this year.

Public consultation

21 Satisfaction with the amount of public consultation undertaken decreased from 48% in 2018/19 to 38% in 2019/20. Residents’ commented that the DCC needed more consultation on key projects and improved transparency and noted the importance of listening to the public.

DCC communications

22 Satisfaction with keeping residents informed deceased from 63% in 2018/19 to 58% in 2019/20. Satisfaction with DCC staff remains high, 78% of residents are satisfied with how well staff communicated with them. Residents’ noted that staff were friendly, helpful and professional. Concerns mainly arose from unresolved issues, dissatisfaction with the outcome or long wait times for resolution.

Planning and urban design

23 Satisfaction with the overall look and feel of the city has decreased this year down to 70%, compared to 75% in 2018/19. This has been gradually decreasing since 2016/17. Looking specifically at the central city retail area, satisfaction with its look and feel has also decreased to 65% compared to 69% in 2018/19.

Sustainability

24 The percentage of residents who perceive Dunedin as a sustainable city decreased this year (-8 percentage points). The percentage of residents who agree that the DCC is a leader in encouraging the development of a sustainable city, dropped 4 percentage points in 2019/20.

Other findings

25 Other findings from the 2019/20 survey were:

· Increase in satisfaction for some facilities such as the cemeteries (increase of +5 percentage points), Moana Pool (+4 percentage points) and the Edgar Centre (+3 percentage points).

· An increase in satisfaction with the control of noise (+4 percentage points) and a decrease in satisfaction with parking enforcement (-7 percentage points).

· A decrease in satisfaction with community pools in 2019/20, down 10 percentage points. Most comments on pools relate to the Mosgiel Pool needing an upgrade/replacement.

26 A summary document outlining performance measures that increased or decreased by 3 percentage points or more is attached (Attachment B).

Top priorities for DCC

27 Residents also provided their top two priorities for the DCC for this year. The top two priorities featured in the responses include more parking, and more environmentally friendly focus e.g. dealing with climate change issues such as coastal erosion and providing for recycling options. Other priorities also include maintaining infrastructure, better traffic flow management, improving public transport and more. A summary of the comments is provided below and on page 71 of Attachment A.

Correlation analysis

28 A performance versus importance correlation analysis was also undertaken by Gravitas (see pages 73-76 of Attachment A). This analysis considers the relationship of each measure in the survey to the overall satisfaction question.

29 The correction analysis plots facilities and services by importance versus performance. Investing in improvements in areas that residents consider are of high importance, but which are not currently performing, would be expected to boost overall satisfaction with the DCC.

30 In 2019/20, the correction analysis highlighted planning and urban design as an area of high importance and high performance.

31 Parks, reserves and open spaces, sport and recreational facilities, waste management and contact with staff were areas of lower importance but high performance in 2019/20.

32 DCC communications, roading, performance of Mayor and councillors and Community Boards were areas that were of high importance but lower performance in 2019/20. These areas strongly influenced residents’ overall satisfaction ratings in 2019/20. Improvement in these areas would be expected to boost overall satisfaction with the DCC.

33 Regulatory services and water services were areas that the correlation analysis highlighted as lower importance and lower performance in 2019/20.

NEXT STEPS

34 The 2019/20 ROS results report will be uploaded onto the DCC website. Gravitas will continue to deliver the ROS survey on a monthly basis.

35 The ROS results provide important data for monitoring the DCC’s performance. The feedback will be used to inform areas of improvement for DCC services and facilities and feed into upcoming work on strategic priorities and levels of service.

Signatories

Author:

Suzie Ballantyne - Policy Manager

Authoriser:

Robert West - Acting General Manager City Services

Sandy Graham - Chief Executive Officer

Attachments

	Title	Page
⇩a	DCC 2019/20 ROS Annual Results Report	129
⇩b	Summary of 2019/20 ROS key findings 3 percent or more increase and decrease	210

SUMMARY OF CONSIDERATIONS

Fit with purpose of Local Government

The ROS survey enables democratic local decision making and action by, and on behalf of communities.

Fit with strategic framework

	Contributes	Detracts	Not applicable
Social Wellbeing Strategy	☒	☐	☐
Economic Development Strategy	☒	☐	☐
Environment Strategy	☒	☐	☐
Arts and Culture Strategy	☒	☐	☐
3 Waters Strategy	☒	☐	☐
Spatial Plan	☒	☐	☐
Integrated Transport Strategy	☒	☐	☐
Parks and Recreation Strategy	☒	☐	☐
Other strategic projects/policies/plans	☒	☐	☐

The ROS contributes to all aspects of the strategic framework as it gauges resident’s opinions on DCC services and performance across the board.

Māori Impact Statement

No specific impact identified. The ROS survey is based on a randomly selected sample of the Dunedin population.

Sustainability

The ROS survey asks about residents’ perception of Dunedin as a sustainable city, and whether the DCC is a leader in encouraging the development of a sustainable city. The results for these measured dropped in 2019/20.

LTP/Annual Plan / Financial Strategy /Infrastructure Strategy

The ROS survey asks about resident’s satisfaction with the ‘value for money’ of the services provided by the DCC.

Financial considerations

There are no direct financial considerations.

Significance

The significance of this report is low, in terms of Council’s Significance and Engagement policy, as it is for noting only.

Engagement – external

The ROS survey is a form of external engagement.

Engagement - internal

ROS survey results are available to management and staff monthly, and some results have been reported to Council committees quarterly. Reporting of ROS results will be considered as part of future work on non-financial reporting, levels of service and strategic framework refresh.

Risks: Legal / Health and Safety etc.

There are no known risks.

Conflict of Interest

There are no known conflicts of interest.

Community Boards

ROS survey result breakdowns are available at a community level, which includes Community Board areas.

Council

27 January 2021

Climate 2030 Rapid Review, and DCC emissions reduction opportunities

Department: Civic

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1 This report presents the findings of the Climate 2030 Rapid Review, and work to date on the update of the Dunedin City Council’s (DCC’s) Emissions Reduction Plan.

2 It also provides an assessment of the alignment of 10 year plan budgets against the emissions reduction opportunities identified through these two work streams.

3 The report also includes an update on how climate change adaptation considerations raised in the Rapid Review are being incorporated into 10 year plan budgets.

RECOMMENDATIONS

That the Council:

a) Notes the findings of the Climate 2030 Rapid Review, and work to date on the update of the DCC Emissions Reduction Plan.

b) Notes the assessment of alignment of 10 Year Plan against the emissions reduction opportunities identified through these two work streams.

BACKGROUND

4 In December 2020, a ‘Zero Carbon Guidance for the 10 Year Plan’ report was presented to Council setting out high level guidance on promoting progress against the DCC’s Zero Carbon 2030 target, through its decision-making on the draft 10 Year Plan.

5 It recommended priority sectors for DCC investment to achieve emissions reduction. The report also committed to presenting the final Climate 2030 Rapid Review report, alongside a long list of potential DCC Emissions Reduction Plan initiatives, and their status in the 10 Year Plan, to Council in January 2021.

6 The Council resolved as follows:

Moved (Cr David Benson-Pope/Cr Marie Laufiso):

That the Council:

a) Notes the update on Zero Carbon work programme initiatives related to the Ten Year Plan

b) Notes the December 2020 update to the Dunedin Community Carbon Footprint 2018/19; and

c) Notes the Zero Carbon guidance for the Ten Year Plan.

Division

The Council voted by division:

For: Crs Sophie Barker, David Benson-Pope, Rachel Elder, Christine Garey, Doug Hall, Carmen Houlahan, Marie Laufiso, Mike Lord, Jim O'Malley, Jules Radich, Chris Staynes, Steve Walker, Andrew Whiley and Mayor Aaron Hawkins (14).

Against: Cr Lee Vandervis (1).

Abstained: Nil

The division was declared CARRIED by 14 votes to 1

Motion carried (CNL/2020/110)

DISCUSSION

Climate 2030 Rapid Review

7 Coffey Services (NZ) Limited, in conjunction with a team of specialists, has conducted a rapid review of DCC’s work programmes (and service and activity measures), with both a climate change mitigation and adaptation focus. It involved a desktop review of initiatives underway, and workshops with staff from teams across the organisation. Findings have been iteratively fed into Council’s draft 10 Year Plan preparations. The final Climate 2030 Rapid Review report is included as Attachment A.

8 From a climate change mitigation perspective, the Rapid Review sought to check alignment of existing and planned work programmes with the DCC’s emissions reduction ambitions and Zero Carbon 2030 target, and to identify initiatives to reduce and/or offset Dunedin’s greenhouse gas emissions. Key findings and emissions reduction opportunities identified by the Rapid Review are set out below, as part of an assessment of alignment of draft 10 Year Plan budgets with identified emissions reduction opportunities.

9 A climate change adaptation perspective was also considered as part of the Rapid Review, with initiatives and opportunities identified that will help DCC and the city to become more resilient and to adapt to the effects of climate change. However, there are fewer team-specific ‘quick win’ initiatives identified, as this was not the primary focus of the review.

10 Many of the broad recommendations from the Rapid Review in terms of climate change adaptation relate to integrated strategic direction and target setting, planning, communications, asset management, data collection, monitoring and performance management systems.

11 It is envisaged that some of these elements will be key components of the planned strategic framework refresh process, in alignment with the Thriving Cities’ City Portrait development and mana whenua partnership discussions.

DCC Emissions Reduction Plan update

12 The DCC’s Carbon Management Policy (2017) serves as a public commitment to identify, manage and minimise carbon emissions, including to consider the impact of current and proposed business activities on the DCC’s carbon footprint.

13 The DCC has been monitoring and managing organisational emissions since 2013/14, through participation in the Toitū carbonreduce programme. It provides a verification and audit service for annual emissions reporting.

14 As part of the programme, the DCC submits an Emissions Inventory Report every year, and an Emissions Management and Reduction Plan (EMRP) every three years. An EMRP includes emissions reduction targets and lists actions that are intended to be taken to reduce emissions. The baseline inventory was established using 2013/14 data, and the first DCC EMRP was approved by the Executive Leadership Team in early 2015.

15 2018/19 marked the end of the first target period set under the Council’s EMRP. Targets were not achieved.

16 To maintain ‘carbonreduce’ status under the Toitū programme, the DCC will need to show, in its 2019/20 reporting (currently underway) a reduction in emissions on baseline year, by a measure acceptable to Toitū. In the event that this is not achieved, Toitū status will be changed to ‘verified inventory’ until reductions are demonstrated.

17 A refresh of the EMRP has been progressed, in parallel with, and to help inform, draft 10 Year Plan development.

18 This has involved working with staff from each of the teams responsible for significant elements of the organisation’s emissions profile to understand the sources of emissions, and to identify the possible nature and timing of any interventions to reduce emissions. This work stream has informed, and been informed by, the Climate 2030 Rapid Review, and as such, there is some overlap in the findings. The most significant emissions sources have been the focus for this work, and are discussed below, as part of an assessment of alignment of draft 10 Year Plan budgets with identified emissions reduction opportunities.

19 In addition, to enable the Carbon Management Policy to be operationalised in relation to organisational emissions, consideration is being given to:

a) expanding the Scope 3 emissions inclusions in reporting, to encompass major contracts and staff travel to and from work (with Procurement/Transport);

b) establishing an improved data management platform for organisational emissions, that would support greater visibility over emissions throughout the year, and introduction of an associated performance management framework for teams;

c) oversight and management processes to promote DCC-wide ownership and evolution of emissions reduction initiatives and reporting; and

d) setting new targets for the organisation’s emissions.

Alignment of draft 10 Year Plan budgets with identified emissions reduction opportunities

20 This section presents an assessment of the alignment of draft 10 Year Plan budgets with emissions opportunities identified through the Rapid Review and the update of the DCC Emissions Reduction Plan, in five parts:

a) general work that will promote emissions reduction across all sectors;

b) opportunities to progress reduction in transport sector emissions;

c) opportunities to progress reduction in waste sector emissions;

d) opportunities to progress reduction of emissions from the stationary energy sector;

e) opportunities to contribute to nationwide decarbonisation efforts through renewable energy generation.

21 While the focus of these sections is primarily on city-wide emissions, the opportunities discussed pick up the majority of initiatives considered to have high emissions reduction potential in terms of the DCC’s operational emissions.

22 While many of the opportunities are already funded, there are a number for which there is no specific provision in draft capital or operational budgets. As set out in the Chief Executive’s report, it is proposed that appropriate funding is identified within existing budgets through prioritisation and achieving efficiencies.

All sectors

City-wide emissions

23 The Climate 2030 Rapid Review report includes some general findings that are not sector specific, but rather, are seen as key to progressing city-wide emissions reduction generally.

24 From a climate change mitigation perspective, development of a ‘programme plan’ is recommended, including:

· More specific climate change mitigation targets, including interim targets and offsetting targets, and the potential costs and timelines for achieving these targets, based on a number of scenarios;

· Assessment, ranking and prioritisation of potential climate change mitigation initiatives, and engagement with stakeholders in this process;

· Development of suitable measures to track progress towards achieving the above specific targets (e.g. Levels of Service and associated performance measures);

· A focus on risks and opportunities associated, and communication of these;

· Development of partnership and collaboration mechanisms and structures, both internal to the DCC and with stakeholders;

· Integration with other DCC programmes, strategies and plans, and other related regional and national climate change initiatives; and

· Review mechanisms.

25 The Rapid Review report also emphasises the value of greater collaboration across the DCC in relation to Zero Carbon ambitions, and the importance of embedding an emissions reduction focus into asset management, procurement and performance management.

26 A Zero Carbon work programme for 2021/22 – 23/24 has been developed and costed, including resourcing to:

a) produce a Zero Carbon Plan for the city, in partnership with the community and key stakeholders, and facilitate its implementation;

b) finalise a new DCC Emissions Reduction Plan as a ‘living document’, and facilitate its implementation;

c) improve management of, and reporting on, emissions reduction (both operational and city-wide);

d) support staff, suppliers and the community to reduce emissions (both operational and city-wide, including through policy, planning, asset management and procurement processes, and training/engagement); and

e) support improved internal and external communication and collaboration on Zero Carbon-related deliverables.

27 $831,000 has been included in the draft 10 year plan Corporate Policy operating budgets to progress the Zero Carbon work programme. This budget includes some staff and reprioritised existing resource, and includes some provision for Energy Plan co-ordination and sustainability. The intention is that all DCC teams will embed delivery on the Zero Carbon 2030 target into their business-as-usual, as policy, processes and guidance are developed, as well as a Zero Carbon Plan for the city.

Transport sector

28 The Transport sector was assessed as Dunedin’s largest source of emissions in 2018/19, accounting for 39% of total gross emissions (land transport 25%; marine transport 12%; air transport 2%).

29 In terms of the DCC’s operational emissions, air travel and diesel consumption in fleet cars were each the source of approx. 1% of the DCC’s total reported emissions in 2018/19. Petrol consumption in fleet cars, taxi use, and private vehicle use charged back to the Council were each responsible for less than 1% of the DCC’s total reported emissions.

30 The Climate 2030 Rapid Review report sets out several ‘mitigation levers’ and associated opportunities for emissions reduction in the transport sector, primarily focusing on land transport emissions. It also identifies some ‘quick wins’ and ‘next steps’ to promote emissions reduction. An assessment of the alignment of the draft 10 Year Plan budget with these is set out in Attachment B.

31 Investment in reducing transport sector emissions has been assessed as the highest priority in terms of achieving the Council’s Zero Carbon 2030 target. While the general direction of Transport-related capital investment in the 10 Year Plan is likely to support reductions in transport sector emissions over time, the speed and extent of changes required to achieve the Zero Carbon 2030 target represents a departure from business-as-usual.

32 The degree to which emissions reduction in the transport sector will be achieved by 2030 will be determined by staff capacity, the level of DCC investment in infrastructure and service provision, and degree to which partner agencies are equally focussed on facilitating a rapid low emissions transition. The Climate 2030 Rapid Review recommends, in the first instance, a range of reviews and studies to ensure that existing investment programmes are optimising mode shift opportunities, and that efforts are integrated across agencies. There is currently no specific provision in budgets for a number of these initiatives.

33 In addition, the Rapid Review emphasises the importance of urban form to outcomes for transport emissions, and the need for tight integration of land use and transport system planning. Appropriate resourcing to achieve this link will be essential, particularly in the implementation of the National Policy Statement – Urban Development (NPS-UD) and the development of a Future Development Strategy. There is provision within City Development operational budgets to implement the NPS-UD, and to process a Future Development Strategy for Dunedin. Staff capacity within Transport needs to be assessed, and will be as part of the ongoing review of staff prioritisation.

34 Work will also need to be undertaken on the Code of Subdivision and Development (2010) to help guide the shape and form of new development.

35 In terms of reducing emissions from marine and air transport, the DCC’s influence in these areas primarily come down to the focus and nature of economic development spend, and advocacy to central Government. It is recommended that opportunities in these areas are explored during the development of the city-wide Zero Carbon Plan.

Stationary energy sector

36 In 2018/19, emissions from the stationary energy sector were assessed as comprising 12% of Dunedin’s total emissions. In terms of the DCC’s total reported emissions in 2018/19:

· 9% resulted from electricity use;

· 5% resulted from LPG consumption; and

· 2% resulted from diesel consumption for stationary energy purposes.

37 The final draft of the Climate 2030 Rapid Review focuses primarily on DCC-owned assets from a stationary energy perspective. The initial phase of the Emissions Reduction Plan review has also identified opportunities for emissions reduction from stationary energy use across the DCC’s assets.

38 An assessment of the alignment of the draft 10 Year Plan budget with initiatives considered to have the highest potential to reduce the DCC’s emissions from stationary energy, is set out in Attachment D.

39 Reducing emissions from stationary energy sources relies on contributions from a range of Council teams. Attachment E sets out the DCC’s largest users of electricity and LPG (2018/19 data).

40 Each of the teams managing these assets has different opportunities, and faces different challenges, to implementing change.

3 Waters

41 The current high priority for 3 Waters is on addressing operational health & safety risks, failing assets and reactive operational expenditure, process challenges and compliance risks. It is therefore difficult to enable immediate improvements to plant and processes from an emissions reduction perspective.

42 While emissions data relating to 3 Waters emissions from stationary energy sources is reasonable, historically DCC reporting of emissions associated with biological processes from wastewater treatment has relied on generic national emissions factors and is unlikely to be particularly accurate, nor a good basis upon which to design interventions. There are also challenges with 3 Waters data quality and access to this data.

43 Some aspects of the initial Year 1-3 renewals provided for in draft 3 Waters budgets may provide some operational carbon benefits (e.g. optimisation of aeration, incinerator modifications, addition of a flare at Mosgiel WWTP) but measuring improvement would be difficult given baselining and data issues.

44 There is an opportunity associated with the business case for the reform programme (which includes asset management improvements), and System Planning.

a) The asset management improvements include capability and capacity, data gathering and capital delivery processes which could all have Zero Carbon-related objectives.

b) The System Planning projects provide an opportunity to baseline the current operational carbon emissions from treatment and network processes, and to build Zero Carbon-related ambitions into the optioneering phase, which would in turn align 3 Waters expenditure with Zero Carbon ambitions closer to 2030.

45 The following steps have been identified as mechanisms to promote alignment of these 3 Waters work programmes with Zero Carbon ambitions:

· explicitly referencing Zero Carbon ambitions in the critical success factors associated with the business case;

· including baselining of current operational carbon emissions from treatment and network processes in system planning (to be considered through the business case process);

· clearly defining in the objectives for the System Plans, the outcomes sought to give effect to Council’s Zero Carbon ambitions (to be informed by an updated DCC Carbon Management Policy); and

· supplementing the 3 Waters operational and asset management teams with staff that are able to act as project representation for both asset management and System Planning work (to be considered through the reform business case process).

46 The identified initiatives have not always been prioritised in the work plan but these are now being reviewed for inclusion.

47 While this work is underway, there may be opportunities to reduce 3 Water emissions through Council-wide projects coordinated centrally (e.g. roll out of LED lighting).

48 Given the importance of improved availability of data to support energy management improvements within 3 Waters in the medium term, the DCC-wide upgrade of building management systems, currently underway, will consider including 3 Waters facilities.

Property Services

49 Property Services spends $1.2 million per annum on electricity, and manages a number of DCC facilities that use LPG for heating. Historically, energy management company Smart Power have been contracted to recommend improvement initiatives.

50 The DCC has an existing Collaboration Agreement with the Energy Efficiency and Conservation Authority (EECA), a Crown entity established under section 20 of the Energy Efficiency and Conservation Act 2000.

51 Under this Agreement, the DCC qualifies for co-funding support to investigate and implement energy saving initiatives. Energy audits have been undertaken at a number of facilities in recent years and gains made.

52 Under the EECA Collaboration Agreement, the DCC qualifies for an energy graduate support scheme, which funds up to 75% of an energy graduate’s wage over two years. Funding is contingent on achieving a minimum 2GWh per annum energy saving (with an approximate current cost of $200,000).

53 Recruitment of an energy graduate role is currently underway. The role will focus on delivering energy efficiency improvements and emissions reduction across the organisation. To achieve 2GWh of savings, the energy graduate is likely to focus on the DCC’s largest energy users in the first instance.

54 Capital interventions to achieve the requisite 2GWh of energy savings will be progressed through reprioritisation of existing resource and/or on a business case basis.

55 Another key project underway is the upgrade of building management systems, and associated energy monitoring improvements. This will ensure energy use is better able to be managed in general operations, asset management, and design of new infrastructure. Implementation of this project is fully funded in draft Property Services capital budgets.

56 Draft 10 Year Plan budgets also include provision to achieve reductions in emissions associated with stationary energy use in Octagon-area buildings.

Other teams

57 Transport, Parks and Recreation Services and Ara Toi Group staff are responsible for the day-to-day management of a range of assets/facilities that have high energy use. Most notable is the streetlight network, and Moana Pool.

58 Discussions with staff across the organisation have highlighted an opportunity to improve emissions management by way of targeting training relating to day-to-day energy management. Establishing an internal training and support network for DCC staff managing property, plant and equipment is being explored by Human Resources, Corporate Policy and Property Services, to be delivered within draft 10 Year Plan operational budgets.

59 Draft 10 Year Plan budgets include provision to achieve reductions in emissions associated with stationary energy use both in the streetlights network and Moana Pool.

60 From an aquatics perspective, there is provision included in draft Parks and Recreation Services budgets for an EECA-subsidised audit of Moana Pool mechanical and pool water systems by an aquatic specialist, prior to planned upgrades. Delivering this for other aquatic facilities, as recommended by the Rapid Review, would require reprioritisation of existing resources.

City-wide stationary energy emissions reduction

61 In terms of further possible actions to support city-wide reductions in emissions from the Stationary Energy sector, the Climate 2030 Rapid Review identified support for Enviroschools’ work to decarbonise school energy systems, and advocacy for wider adoption of green building rating tools. The DCC’s role in these, and other city-wide stationary energy emissions reduction opportunities, could be explored through the development of the city-wide Zero Carbon Plan.

Additional renewable energy generation opportunities

62 Under the methodologies used to determine both city-wide and DCC emissions, renewable electricity generated by the DCC does not directly contribute to emissions reduction if it is solely exported to the National Grid. However, if the electricity generated is used on-site, and/or is generated using greenhouse gases that would otherwise be emitted, it contributes to emissions reduction at both scales. Given this, most identified renewable energy generation opportunities are discussed in relation to the sector in which they have the potential to cut emissions. Examples include:

· Solar: there is provision in the budget for a solar farm on the Green Island Landfill site upon closure, and 3 Waters will consider during System Planning opportunities for solar PV to displace existing grid-drawn electricity use from sites with high energy use

· Anaerobic digestion/maximising use of biogas: there is provision in the budget to maximise landfill gas collection and associated electricity generation at Green Island until closure, and electricity generation is also being investigated as part of processing options for waste.

63 The two exceptions to this, for which no immediate potential to directly reduce DCC or city-wide emissions has been identified, sit within 3 Waters network:

· Micro-hydro: there is significant head pressure in the gravity-fed water supply network delivering water from Deep Stream/Deep Creek to Mt Grand WTP. A 2010 Opus report stated that there appears to be some potential for further micro-hydro installations within the treated water network, with locations with the most potential being Maori Hill, Wingatui, Beta Street, Epsilon Street and North End reservoirs. While this may be able to be explored through the Water System Plan, given the timing of the reform programme, it is likely that any development of these resources would be undertaken by the new Water entity.

· Wastewater thermal energy: a 2017 Smart Alliances report identified approximately 7,000kW of thermal energy available within the Metropolitan wastewater network, and up to 10,000kW for periods of the day. The report has been and continues to be provided to potentially interested parties, but there has been no interest to date in tapping heat in the network. The Green Island and the Mosgiel wastewater networks have not been mapped.

Alignment of draft 10 year plan budget with identified adaptation opportunities

64 The main adaptation focus for the DCC is the South Dunedin Future programme - a collaborative and integrated work programme delivered by the DCC, Otago Regional Council and the community to address climate resilience challenges. South Dunedin is the primary focus of adaptation activities for the DCC due to the major climate change challenges South Dunedin faces. These are in the form of rising sea levels, ground water and flooding risks as a low-lying area built on a former coastal wetland.

65 The South Dunedin Future Programme is structured to focus on the following project areas:

a) Dynamic Adaptive Policy Pathways Development

b) Partnership/Relationship Management

c) Community Engagement

d) Short term initiatives

e) Community resilience activities

f) Technical Data

66 The related South Dunedin flood alleviation and St Clair-St Kilda Coastal plan projects, legal aspects of climate change adaptation and business-as-usual resilience activities are closely related pieces of work that are being developed and delivered in alignment with the South Dunedin Future programme.

67 $500,000, including some staff resource, has been allocated in Corporate Policy’s 10 year plan operational budget for South Dunedin Future. Other adaptation work will be resourced from existing budgets across multiple teams. The South Dunedin flood alleviation and St Clair-St Kilda Coastal plan projects are provided for in 3 Waters budgets.

OPTIONS

68 As this report presents information for noting only, no options have been identified.

NEXT STEPS

69 The shape and focus of the Zero Carbon work programme and related projects from 2021/22 onwards will be determined by Council’s decisions on the 10 Year Plan.

Signatories

Author:	Jinty MacTavish - Principal Policy Advisor
Authoriser:	Robert West - Acting General Manager City Services

Attachments

	Title	Page
⇩a	Climate 2030 Rapid Review report	225
⇩b	Transport sector emissions reduction opportunities - alignment assessment	355
⇩c	Solid waste sector emissions reduction opportunities - alignment assessment	366
⇩d	Stationary energy sector emissions reduction opportunities - alignment assessment	373
⇩e	DCC's largest electricity and LPG users (2018/19)	379

SUMMARY OF CONSIDERATIONS

Fit with purpose of Local Government

The Zero Carbon work programme is anticipated to promote the social, economic and environmental well-being of communities in the present and for the future, by facilitating a transition to a low carbon economy.

Fit with strategic framework

	Contributes	Detracts	Not applicable
Social Wellbeing Strategy	☒	☐	☐
Economic Development Strategy	☒	☐	☐
Environment Strategy	☒	☐	☐
Arts and Culture Strategy	☐	☐	☒
3 Waters Strategy	☒	☐	☐
Spatial Plan	☒	☐	☐
Integrated Transport Strategy	☒	☐	☐
Parks and Recreation Strategy	☐	☐	☒
Other strategic projects/policies/plans	☒	☐	☐

The Zero Carbon work programme has been assessed as directly contributing to the goals of the Economic Development and Environment Strategies, with clear links to the 3 Waters Strategy, Spatial Plan, Social Wellbeing Strategy, and Integrated Transport Strategy, Energy Plan 1.0, the DCC’s Carbon Management Policy and the DCC’s Emissions Management and Reduction Plan. Action to reduce emissions is also likely to have co-benefits that contribute to the goals of the Arts and Culture Strategy.

Māori Impact Statement

The Māori Participation Working Party, Kāti Huirapa Rūnaka ki Puketeraki and Ōtākou Runaka have all signalled their in principle support to work collaboratively on city-wide emissions reduction initiatives. Discussions about establishment of a Zero Carbon 2030 Alliance are being progressed in parallel with 10 Year Plan development.

Sustainability

Climate change mitigation/emissions reduction efforts are considered key to sustainability. ‘Climate Action’ is one of the United Nation’s Sustainable Development Goals, reflecting the centrality of action on climate change to the achievement of sustainable development. Without significant cuts to emissions, climate change impacts will further accelerate, with commensurate negative impacts on the social, environmental, cultural and economic wellbeing of New Zealand communities. Conversely, actions to reduce emissions generally have significant co-benefits in terms of community wellbeing.

LTP/Annual Plan / Financial Strategy /Infrastructure Strategy

The extent to which the DCC’s Zero Carbon 2030 target is achievable depends on decisions made across a wide range of budget lines as part of the 10 Year Plan process. The guidance set out in this report is provided to support Council to promote emissions reduction through its decision-making on the draft 10 Year Plan.

Financial considerations

As this report presents guidance only, there are no financial considerations.

Significance

As this report presents guidance only, it is considered low significance in terms of the Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy.

Engagement – external

This report draws on the advice provided by a number of consultants - Coffey Services (NZ) and subconsultants Ekos, Powell Fenwick, Calibre, KPMG and Abley.

Engagement - internal

The Climate 2030 Rapid Review has involved workshops with teams across the organisation (Transport, 3 Waters, Parks and Recreation Services, Property Services, Waste and Environmental Solutions, Events and Community Development, Enterprise Dunedin, Customer and Regulatory Services, Ara Toi, City Development). Initial work on the Emissions Reduction Plan has involved discussions with a more limited range of teams.

Risks: Legal / Health and Safety etc.

It is considered that there are some reputational risks for the DCC associated with non-delivery on emissions reduction ambitions, given the target adopted by Council in 2019.

Conflict of Interest

No conflict of interest has been identified.

Community Boards

There has been no engagement to date with Community Boards as part of the Zero Carbon work programme.

Council

27 January 2021

PDF Creator

Council

27 January 2021

Community Housing - Strategy and Policy Review update

Department: Property

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1 The purpose of this report is to update Council on the review of the Dunedin City Council Housing Policy 1997 and the Dunedin City Social Housing Strategy 2010-2020.

2 This report also proposes that feedback be sought in the 10 year plan 2021-2031 consultation document on three key areas of the Community Housing portfolio (prioritisation of tenants, funding for the portfolio, and growth of the portfolio) to inform the next stage of the review.

3 Staff will report back to Council with recommendations during deliberations on the 10 year plan 2021-2031 in May 2021.

RECOMMENDATIONS

That the Council:

a) Approves that the 10 year plan 2021-2031 consultation document will seek feedback on prioritisation of DCC Community Housing tenants by including the following question;

- Do you support the DCC prioritising its community housing for people aged 65 and over?

b) Approves that the 10 year plan 2021-2031 consultation document will seek feedback on funding for the DCC Community Housing portfolio by including the following question;

- Do you support rates being used to subsidise rents for DCC community housing?

c) Approves that the 10 year plan 2021-2031 consultation document will seek feedback on growth of the DCC Community Housing portfolio by including the following question;

- Should the DCC build more community housing units?

d) Notes that public submissions will be used to inform the next stage of the review of the Dunedin City Council Housing Policy 1997 and the Dunedin City Social Housing Strategy 2010-2020.

BACKGROUND

4 Council passed the below resolution on 29 January 2020;

Moved (Cr Marie Laufiso/Cr Chris Staynes):

That the Council:

a) Notes that the Community Housing portfolio is forecast to return a deficit of $600k in the draft 2020/21 budget.

b) Notes that staff will carry out a full review of both the Dunedin Housing Policy 1997, and the Social Housing Strategy 2010-2020 as part of the 10-year Plan process.

Motion carried (CAPCC/2020/020)

5 Following the resolution, Community Housing Solutions (the consulting arm of Community Housing Aotearoa) were commissioned to undertake an initial review of the Dunedin City Council Housing Policy 1997 (the policy) and the Dunedin City Social Housing Strategy 2010-2020 (the strategy).

6 Social housing is defined as the provision of accommodation assistance for individuals and families whose housing needs or circumstances are not adequately provided for by the private sector.

7 The first stage of the review has highlighted the changes to Dunedin’s housing environment since both the policy and strategy were written, and the complexity of Council’s role in the city’s housing sector.

8 The housing market in Dunedin has changed since the strategy was written in 2009, with the demand for housing from population growth exceeding the construction of new houses in recent years.

9 The average house value in Dunedin has increased from $340,000 in 2016, to more than $500,000 in 2020, and the average residential rental costs have increased from $280 per week in 2016, to more than $380 per week in 2020.

10 In April 2018 the Mayors Taskforce for Housing was convened to bring forward recommendations that would guide stakeholders and the wider community to meet the city’s long-term housing needs. The taskforce was asked to consider the areas of;

· Social housing

· Emergency housing

· Affordable housing

· Healthy housing

11 The Mayors Taskforce for Housing work resulted in the Housing Action Plan for Dunedin 2019-2039 (the Housing Action Plan). Council agreed in May 2019 to adopt the actions outlined in the Housing Action Plan and take a ‘stewardship’ role in implementing and advocating for the plan.

12 This report focuses on DCC as a landlord and provider of social housing through the Community Housing portfolio. The Housing Action Plan looks at wider housing issues in the city, with an update to the Community and Culture Committee due in February 2021.

Dunedin City Social Housing Strategy 2010-2020

13 The Dunedin City Social Housing Strategy 2010-2020 provides the platform for the consideration of social housing issues across Dunedin.

14 The strategy outlines three key principles:

i) The Council’s role as a lead provider of social housing in Dunedin, particularly for older persons.

ii) That the Council will maintain the current breakeven approach for setting rents for Council housing tenants who meet the income and asset thresholds.

iii) The Council will play a lead role in facilitating a partnership approach amongst all social housing providers and other key agencies in addressing social housing issues.

15 The accompanying implementation plan focused on refurbishing existing DCC Community Housing units for the first five years (2010-2015), then on investing in five to seven new units per year in the next five year period (2016-2020), up to a total cap of 1,000 units.

16 The initial stage of the review of the strategy has found that Community Housing units have been refurbished in line with the strategy, but Council has not invested in new units, and the portfolio now consists of 936 units.

Dunedin City Council Housing Policy 1997

17 The Dunedin City Council Housing Policy 1997 includes goals and objectives, along with management mechanisms that control the way the Community Housing portfolio is operated.

18 The policy responds to factors that were driving the housing environment in 1997. At that time, on average 7% of DCC Community Housing units were untenanted, which led to a widening of the eligibility and prioritisation criteria for DCC Community Housing.

19 Changes to the housing environment in Dunedin since the policy was written mean that components of the policy are no longer adequately aligned to housing need in the city, and rents are no longer achieving breakeven rent at “no direct cost to the ratepayer”.

20 The initial stage of the review of the policy has focused on objective two of the policy, ‘the provision of accommodation’, and its associated mechanisms.

Objective 2

Provide accommodation for those whose needs are not otherwise adequately met in the community provided there is no direct cost to the ratepayer. Council’s primary focus is on the provision of housing for older persons, particularly those with limited financial means. It also has an interest in providing housing for younger persons with disabilities and/or limited financial means. Council does not have a focus on providing housing for larger families.

DISCUSSION

21 The first stage of the review has highlighted the changes to Dunedin’s housing environment since both the policy and strategy were written, and the complexity of Council’s role in the city’s housing sector.

22 To inform the next stage of the review, consultation as part of the 10 year plan 2021-2031 is proposed in three key areas;

i) Prioritisation

ii) Funding

iii) Growth

Priorisation

23 The policy provides the following eligibility criteria to apply for a DCC Community Housing unit:

· New Zealand citizens or permanent residents

· aged over 18

· good tenancy history and able to live co-operatively with others on the site.

24 The policy then outlines priorities for placement into a unit, and eligible applicants are placed on a waitlist under one of four priority groups.

i) Priority 1 – Aged 55 and over, and income below limit, and assets below limit.

ii) Priority 2 – Aged 55 and over

iii) Priority 3 – Aged 54 and under, and income below limit, and assets below limit.

iv) Priority 4 – Aged 54 and under

25 The minimum age for priority 1 was 60 years of age prior to the adoption of the policy, which introduced a lower age of 55 at a time when demand for housing was lower.

26 The table below shows the population projections for several age cohorts, which show that the population aged 65 will increase significantly over the next 20 years, while the 55 to 64 cohort will shrink.

Age group	2018	2028	2038	2018-38
24 and under	49,060	48,795	47,804	-3%
25 to 54	44,386	45,609	47,182	+6%
55 to 64	15,982	15,524	13,108	-18%
65 and over	21,093	28,747	34,225	+62%
Total	130,520	138,674	142,318

Table 1 – Demographic projections

27 Currently 174 people on the waiting list fall into the priority 1 group – of these, 122 are aged over 65 years. Since June 2018, three new tenants under the age of 55 have been housed.

28 The portfolio has historically served older persons and the current tenant profile is predominately pensioners. Kāinga Ora (central government housing) provision in Dunedin is more targeted toward families, therefore Council providing affordable rental accommodation for pensioners has complemented provision from central government.

29 It is proposed that the 10 year plan 2021-2031 consultation document will seek feedback on prioritisation of DCC Community Housing tenants by including the following question;

· Do you support the DCC prioritising its community housing for people aged 65 and over?

Funding

30 Since its inception in the 1940s, the DCC community housing portfolio was intended to operate on a breakeven basis; effectively providing accommodation for tenants, at no direct cost to ratepayers.

31 Consultation in 2009, undertaken as part of the strategy development, demonstrated that there was support for Council to continue to provide community housing at no cost to ratepayers.

32 The policy sets rents at breakeven level and requires that depreciation be used to fund redevelopment and renewals. In practice, rent increases have not kept pace with cost increases, leading to the portfolio being subsidised by approximately 10-15% in recent years.

33 A table showing rental increases from 2005 is below (increases for 2020 were postponed to 1 January 2021 due to COVID-19):

	Increase from previous year
2005	$2 per week
2006	$2 per week
2007	$10 per week
2008	$12 - $23 per week
2009	No increase
2010	$8 - $15 per week
2011	$9 - $12 per week
2012	$3 - $6 per week
2013	No increase
2014	No increase
2015	No increase
2016	No increase
2017	No increase
2018	$9 per week
2019	$1 - $3 per week
2020	No increase

Table 2 – Rent increases

34 Five years out of the last fifteen years have achieved breakeven, with a deficit of $700k forecast for the 2020/21 year and a deficit of $880k forecast in the draft budget for the 2021/22 year.

35 It is proposed that the 10 year plan 2021-2031 consultation document will seek feedback on funding for the DCC Community Housing portfolio by including the following question;

· Do you support rates being used to subsidise rents for DCC community housing?

Growth

36 DCC has not increased the size of the Community Housing portfolio for many years, as the city population was historically steady, and demand for housing was low.

37 In 2009, as housing demand began to increase, the strategy included a direction to invest in five to seven new units per year up to a total cap of 1,000 units. However, no new units have been added to the portfolio since 2010.

38 Most of the portfolio’s 936 units were built in the 1950s and 1960s, with 87% built before 1980 and no new units have been built since 2010.

Graph 1 – Age of housing units

39 Breakeven rents allow for renewal and refurbishment of existing housing units to be funded from depreciation, but does not provide sufficient funding to buy new land or build new housing units.

40 DCC continues to renew and refurbish existing units from depreciation funding, including the ongoing refurbishment of 37 units at the Palmyra housing site, and the renewal of ten units at the School Street housing site.

41 Any capital funding to grow the DCC Community Housing portfolio would likely need to be funded by additional borrowing.

42 No capital funding is currently included in the draft 10 year plan 2021-2031 to grow the DCC Community Housing portfolio, and Council will be asked to consider this once submissions from 10 year plan 2021-2031 are received.

43 It is proposed that the 10 year plan 2021-2031 consultation document will seek feedback on growth of the DCC Community Housing portfolio by including the following question;

· Should the DCC build more community housing units?

OPTIONS

44 The review of the Dunedin City Council Housing Policy 1997 and the Dunedin City Social Housing Strategy 2010-2020 is ongoing, and this report proposes that feedback be sought in the 10 year plan 2021-2031 consultation document, to inform the next stage of the review.

45 Feedback is proposed in three key areas;

i) Prioritisation

ii) Funding

iii) Growth

46 Staff will report back to Council with recommendations during deliberations on the 10 year plan 2021-2031 in May 2021.

47 Council has the option to include any or all of the proposed questions in the 10 year plan 2021-2031 consultation document.

Option One – Approve the proposed questions, with any amendments, for inclusion in the 10 year plan 2021-2031 consultation document (Recommended Option)

48 This option seeks Council approval of the proposed questions, with any amendments, for inclusion in the 10 year plan 2021-31 consultation document.

49 Do you support the DCC prioritising its community housing for people aged 65 and over?

50 Do you support rates being used to subsidise rents for DCC community housing?

51 Should the DCC build more community housing units?

Advantages

· Resident feedback from the questions will inform the next stage of the review of the Dunedin City Council Housing Policy 1997 and the Dunedin City Social Housing Strategy 2010-2020.

Disadvantages

· There are no identified disadvantages.

Option Two – Do not include any questions on housing for inclusion in the 10 year plan 2021-2031 consultation document

52 Under this option Council does not include any questions related to the Community Housing portfolio in the 10 year plan 2021-31 consultation document.

Advantages

· There are no identified advantages.

Disadvantages

· The next stage of the review of the Dunedin City Council Housing Policy 1997 and the Dunedin City Social Housing Strategy 2010-2020 will be uninformed by resident feedback.

NEXT STEPS

53 Should Council approve the inclusion of the proposed questions, feedback will be sought through the 10 year plan 2021-31 consultation document on three key areas;

i) Prioritisation

ii) Funding

iii) Growth

54 This feedback will inform the next stage of the review, and staff will report back to Council with recommendations during deliberations on the 10 year plan 2021-2031 in May 2021.

55 The next stage of the review will include a review of rent setting mechanisms for the Community Housing portfolio.

56 A report will be presented to the Community and Culture committee in February outlining progress made to date on the Housing Action Plan, and the development of a project plan to ensure cross sector progress on housing initiatives across the city.

Signatories

Author:	David Bainbridge-Zafar - Group Manager Property Services
Authoriser:	Robert West - Acting General Manager City Services

Attachments

	Title	Page
⇩a	Attachment A - DCC Community Housing Policy 1997	390
⇩b	Attachment B - Dunedin City Social Housing Strategy 2010-2020	399

SUMMARY OF CONSIDERATIONS

Fit with purpose of Local Government

This decision enables democratic local decision making and action by, and on behalf of communities.

This decision promotes the social well-being of communities in the present and for the future.

This decision promotes the economic well-being of communities in the present and for the future.

Fit with strategic framework

	Contributes	Detracts	Not applicable
Social Wellbeing Strategy	☒	☐	☐
Economic Development Strategy	☒	☐	☐
Environment Strategy	☐	☐	☒
Arts and Culture Strategy	☐	☐	☒
3 Waters Strategy	☐	☐	☒
Spatial Plan	☒	☐	☐
Integrated Transport Strategy	☐	☐	☒
Parks and Recreation Strategy	☐	☐	☒
Other strategic projects/policies/plans	☒	☐	☐

Council decisions will also affect the Social Housing Strategy 2010-2020.

Māori Impact Statement

Property Services do not record whakapapa information of the Community Housing tenants and are therefore unable to determine the impact of this decision for Māori.

Sustainability

There is no implications for sustainability.

LTP/Annual Plan / Financial Strategy /Infrastructure Strategy

This report contains decisions relating to the Long Term Plan (LTP).

Financial considerations

Financial implications will be dependent on Council decisions.

Significance

Community Housing is listed as a Strategic Asset. This decision is considered medium in terms of the Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy.

Engagement – external

Community Housing Aotearoa were engaged to carry out an initial review, and engaged informally with relevant stakeholders.

Engagement - internal

There has been internal engagement with Community Development and Planning teams.

Risks: Legal / Health and Safety etc.

There are no identified risks.

Conflict of Interest

There is no identified conflict of interest.

Community Boards

There are no implications for Community Boards.

Council

27 January 2021

Review of the Significance and Engagement Policy

Department: Community and Planning

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1 This report provides an update on the review of the Significance and Engagement Policy (SEP) and proposes amendments to the SEP for Council consideration for inclusion in the draft 10 year plan 2021-31.

2 The SEP establishes a general approach for determining the significance of Council decisions and sets out when and how the Council will engage the community in its decision-making relative to the significance of the decision.

3 The SEP also contains a schedule of strategic assets, which are specific assets or groups of assets which are considered strategically important to achieve and promote the current or future wellbeing of the community and the priorities of the Dunedin City Council (DCC)’s Strategic Framework.

4 The review of the SEP has identified changes which are proposed for inclusion in the revised SEP (see Attachment A), and the need for further assessment of the schedule of strategic assets.

5 It is recommended that further assessment of the schedule of strategic assets is undertaken in alignment with the 2021 strategic framework refresh, three waters reform developments and additional legal review. An updated schedule of strategic assets will be provided to Council for consideration as part of the 2022/2023 Annual Plan deliberations

RECOMMENDATIONS

That the Council:

a) Approves the revised Significance and Engagement Policy for inclusion in the draft 10 year plan.

b) Notes that staff will undertake further review of the schedule of strategic assets and provide an update for consideration as part of the 2022/2023 Annual Plan deliberations.

BACKGROUND

6 The DCC’s current SEP was first adopted on 24 November 2014, and then reviewed in 2017 for the 10 year plan 2018-28. The 2017 review focused on legislative changes around materiality.

7 The current SEP states that the policy “will be reviewed at least once every three years, and within 12 months following each triennial election” (section 8 of the SEP).

8 The purpose of the SEP, as per section 76AA of the Local Government Act 2002 (LGA), is:

(a) to enable the local authority and its communities to identify the degree of significance attached to particular issues, proposals, assets, decisions, and activities; and

(b) to provide clarity about how and when communities can expect to be engaged in decisions about different issues, assets, or other matters; and

(c) to inform the local authority from the beginning of a decision-making process about—

(i) the extent of any public engagement that is expected before a particular decision is made; and

(ii) the form or type of engagement required.

9 The LGA also requires (schedule 10, clause 11) that a summary (or other description) of a local authority’s SEP is contained within the long-term plan.

DISCUSSION

10 The SEP provides the guiding principles on how to determine the significance of a Council proposal, decision or matter and provides a definition and schedule of ‘strategic assets’. There are four assessment criteria collectively considered to determine the degree of significance (from low to high). All Council reports include an assessment of the significance of a decision in the summary of considerations.

Review

11 The current SEP has been reviewed and is still considered fit for purpose as it provides a framework for assessing the significance of decisions and an outline of engagement approaches in line with the International Association of Public Participation (IAP2) spectrum of public participation.

12 Minor amendments are proposed to the SEP to provide further clarity for staff implementing the policy. These include:

a) Adding in ‘businesses’ where the policy refers to groups to engage with, as well as consistently adding in ‘organisations’, ‘groups’, ‘individuals’ and ‘communities’ (sections 2.3, 7.1 and 7.5)

b) Adding in reference to Council’s ‘community outcomes’ in section 2.4

c) Adding ‘financial’ impact on the significance scale, for the ‘impact on Council’s finances, capacity and capability’ assessment criteria in section 2.5

d) Minor edits to the Figure 2 flowchart to improve clarity for DCC departments assessing when and who to engage with

e) Adding more examples of engagement activities that DCC might use – both in person and/or online in Figure 3: Types of Engagement Activities

f) More consistently referencing ‘engagement tools, activities or processes’ in the Figure 2 flowchart and throughout section 7 as well as adding ‘The Council will be flexible in its engagement approach and be responsive to new ideas’ in section 7.1.

g) Inserting the list of IAP2 Core Values into section 5, and adding that the Council’s will take a principle-based approach to its community engagement activities ‘in alignment with the international association for public participation (IAP2) Core Values’ in section 5.2.

h) Changing ‘Fortune Theatre” to ‘231 Stuart Street (Formerly the Fortune Theatre)’ in Schedule 2 to reflect the change in use of this asset.

13 On 25 November 2020, the Māori Participation Working Party (MPWP) considered the SEP principles in respect of engagement with Māori. The current SEP notes the ‘unique perspectives of Māori in the city’ in section 5.2 under the principles of engagement. Although the principles of engagement are not listed in priority order, the MPWP suggested that this principle be elevated up the list, and wording revised to ‘We will engage with Māori in the city in a way that is reflective of tikanga and kawa’. This amendment has been made to the revised SEP.

Strategic assets

14 Local government has a legislative requirement to provide a schedule of strategic assets in its SEP. Section 76AA of the LGA states:

Significance and Engagement Policy

(3) The policy adopted under subsection (1) must list the assets considered by the local authority to be strategic assets.

15 Section 5 of the LGA provides the following definition of strategic assets:

strategic asset, in relation to the assets held by a local authority, means an asset or group of assets that the local authority needs to retain if the local authority is to maintain the local authority’s capacity to achieve or promote any outcome that the local authority determines to be important to the current or future well-being of the community; and includes—

(a) any asset or group of assets listed in accordance with section 76AA(3) by the local authority; and

(b) any land or building owned by the local authority and required to maintain the local authority’s capacity to provide affordable housing as part of its social policy; and

(c) any equity securities held by the local authority in—

(i) a port company within the meaning of the Port Companies Act 1988:

(ii) an airport company within the meaning of the Airport Authorities Act 1966.

16 The current SEP contains a schedule of Strategic Council-Owned assets, varying from individual assets such as Moana Pool, to groups of assets such as the transportation network. It defines a strategic asset as ‘strategically important to achieve and promote the current or future well-being of the community and the priorities of the Strategic Framework’.

17 Review of the SEP has found that the schedule of strategic assets needs further consideration. One minor change is proposed in the revised SEP; from ‘Fortune Theatre’ to ‘231 Stuart Street (Formerly the Fortune Theatre)’ to reflect the change in usage of this asset.

18 As noted to Council on 14 December 2020, the Strategic Framework refresh project is also progressing in 2021, and this may impact upon which strategic assets or groups of assets are considered strategically important to achieve and promote the current or future wellbeing of the community and the priorities of the Strategic Framework. The three waters reform programme will also be progressed in 2021, which is expected to impact upon strategic assets.

19 It is anticipated that an update to the SEP schedule of strategic assets will be provided to Council for consideration as part of the 2022/2023 Annual Plan deliberations.

OPTIONS

Option One – (Recommended Option) Approve the revised Significance and Engagement Policy and note that staff will undertake further review of the schedule of strategic assets.

20 Council approves the revised Significance and Engagement Policy, as attached, for inclusion in the draft 10 year plan 2021-31.

Advantages

· Fulfils the DCC commitment to review the SEP once every three years.

· Provides clarity amendments to the existing SEP as part of the development of the draft 2021-31 10 year plan.

· Responds to feedback from the Māori Participation Working Party.

Disadvantages

· No disadvantages identified.

Option Two – (Status Quo) Do not adopt the revised Significance and Engagement Policy

21 Council does not approve the revised Significance and Engagement Policy, as attached, for inclusion in the draft 10 year plan 2021-31, and the current SEP is included in the draft 10 year plan 2021-31.

Advantages

· Provides opportunity for further assessment of the schedule of strategic assets before any updates are made to the SEP.

Disadvantages

· Misses an opportunity to provide clarity amendments to the existing SEP as part of the development of the draft 2021-31 10 year plan.

· Does not respond to feedback provided by the Māori Participation Working Party.

NEXT STEPS

22 If Council approves the revised Significance and Engagement Policy, it will be included in the draft 10 year plan 2021-31.

23 Staff will progress further assessment of the schedule of strategic assets and provide an update to Council for consideration as part of the 2022/2023 Annual Plan deliberations.

Signatories

Author:	Nicola Pinfold - Group Manager Community and Planning
Authoriser:	Robert West - Acting General Manager City Services

Attachments

	Title	Page
⇩a	Revised Significance and Engagement Policy	430

SUMMARY OF CONSIDERATIONS

Fit with purpose of Local Government

This decision enables democratic local decision making and action by, and on behalf of communities.

Fit with strategic framework

	Contributes	Detracts	Not applicable
Social Wellbeing Strategy	☒	☐	☐
Economic Development Strategy	☒	☐	☐
Environment Strategy	☒	☐	☐
Arts and Culture Strategy	☒	☐	☐
3 Waters Strategy	☒	☐	☐
Spatial Plan	☒	☐	☐
Integrated Transport Strategy	☒	☐	☐
Parks and Recreation Strategy	☒	☐	☐
Other strategic projects/policies/plans	☒	☐	☐

The SEP outlines how the Council will engage with the community and this includes any discussion in relation to Council’s strategic priorities. The SEP also lists the DCC’s strategic assets, which contribute to delivery of the DCC’s strategic priorities.

Māori Impact Statement

Proposed amendments to the SEP have been informed by feedback from the Māori Participation Working Party and Aukaha.

Sustainability

There are no known implications for sustainability.

LTP/Annual Plan / Financial Strategy /Infrastructure Strategy

The SEP will be included in the draft 10 year plan 2021-31.

Financial considerations

There are no financial implications associated with approving the SEP in the draft 10 year plan 2021-31.

Significance

This decision is considered low in terms of the Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy, as the report recommends minor clarity amendments to the SEP itself.

Engagement – external

The Māori Participation Working Party and Aukaha have been consulted.

Engagement - internal

There has been internal engagement with DCC staff and the Senior Leadership Team.

Risks: Legal / Health and Safety etc.

There are no identified risks.

Conflict of Interest

There are no known conflicts of interest.

Community Boards

There are no specific impacts for Community Boards although there are strategic assets in various Community Board areas.

Council

27 January 2021

Revenue and Financing Policy

Department: Corporate Policy

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1 A Revenue and Financing Policy is required by the Local Government Act. It sets out how Council’s operating and capital expenditure will be funded, and the sources of those funds.

2 This report seeks Council approval for the draft Revenue and Financing Policy (the draft Policy), to be used in the preparation of the 10 year plan 2021-31.

RECOMMENDATIONS

That the Council:

a) Approves the Revenue and Financing Policy, with any amendment, to be used in the preparation of the 10 year plan 2021-31.

BACKGROUND

3 Section 102 of the Local Government Act 2002 (LGA) requires all councils to prepare and adopt a Revenue and Financing Policy. The policy must set out:

· How operating and capital expenditure will be funded; and

· The sources of those funds.

4 Section 103 (2) LGA sets out the funding sources that are available, and they are as follows:

· General rates including:

o Choice of valuation system;

o Differential rating; and

o Uniform annual general rates.

· Targeted rates;

· Lump sum contributions;

· Fees and charges;

· Interest and dividends from investments;

· Borrowing;

· Proceeds from the sale of assets;

· Development contributions;

· Financial contributions under the Resource Management Act 1991;

· Grants and subsidies;

· Regional fuel taxes under the Land Transport Management Act 2003; and

· Any other source.

5 The Revenue and Financing Policy must show how the local authority has complied with section 101(3) of the LGA, which provides that Council must consider the following for each activity:

· Community outcomes to which the activity primarily contributes;

· The distribution of benefits between the community as a whole, any identifiable part of the community, and individuals;

· The period over which the benefits are expected to occur;

· The extent to which the actions or inactions of particular individuals or a group contribute to the need to undertake the activity;

· The cost and benefits, including consequences for transparency and accountability, of funding the activity distinctly from other activities; and

· The overall impact of any allocation of liability for revenue needs on the current and future social, economic, environmental and cultural wellbeing of the community.

DISCUSSION

6 A review has been undertaken of the current Revenue and Financing Policy (10 year plan 2018-28) for each activity of Council, to consider all matters identified in section 101(3) of the LGA, (as described in paragraph 6 above) and determine if any changes are appropriate.

7 The matters identified in section 101(3) of the LGA are discussed below.

8 Community outcomes to which the activity primarily contributes - Local Authorities must have specified community outcomes under the LGA. Section 5 of the LGA defines Community outcomes as:

“Community outcomes means the outcomes that a local authority aims to achieve in order to promote the social, economic, environmental, and cultural well-being of its district or region in the present and for the future.”

9 At its meeting on 25 August 2020, Council confirmed the community outcomes, as shown in Attachment B.

10 The draft Policy at Attachment A shows the community outcomes that each of the activities contribute to.

11 The distribution of benefits between the community as a whole, and any identifiable part of the community, and/or individuals - this consideration is often referred to as the public/private good split or the user pays principle. An activity may generate public benefits, private benefits, or a mixture of both. Public benefits are those that benefit the whole community. Private benefits are those that benefit identifiable parts of a community and / or individuals.

12 Examples of funding sources for the types of benefits are shown in table 1.

Table 1 – types of benefit

Types of benefit

Examples of Funding Sources

Public benefit

General Rates

Grants

Private benefit

Targeted rates

Fees and Charges

Development Contributions

13 The draft Policy has considered the benefits generated by each activity of Council.

14 The period over which the benefits are expected to occur - this is sometimes referred to as the intergenerational equity principle. If assets have a long service life, consideration should be given to the time period over which they are funded. If future generations will benefit from the provision of the assets, then it may be considered appropriate that they contribute to the funding of those assets.

15 The extent to which the actions or inactions of particular individuals or a group contribute to the need to undertake the activity - this principle is also known as the exacerbator pays principle, for example, enforcement work is undertaken because of the actions or inactions of individuals such as non-compliance with consent conditions, unregulated building activity etc.

16 The cost and benefits, including consequences for transparency and accountability, of funding the activity distinctly from other activities - If consideration is being given to funding an activity differently from other activities, e.g., establishing a new and separate targeted rate, then it is prudent to also consider matters such as the scale of the activity and the costs of administering a separate funding mechanism.

17 The overall impact of any allocation of liability for revenue needs on the current and future social, economic, environmental and cultural wellbeing of the community - the overall impact of the combined policies are to be considered, including affordability, barriers to the accessibility of some services, and alignment with Council’s strategic direction.

Summary of review

18 The table below shows the current Revenue and Financing Policy and the draft Policy for each activity of Council. Proposed changes are discussed in the notes below.

Table 2 – current and draft Revenue and Financing Policy’s

Activity	2018-28 Policy		Draft 2021-31 Policy		Comments
	Rates Revenue %	Other Revenue %	Rates Revenue %	Other Revenue %
*Roading and footpaths*
Transport	62%	38%	62%	38%	Note 1
3 Waters
Water supply	80%	20%	80%	20%
Wastewater	98%	2%	98%	2%
Stormwater	98%	2%	99%	1%	Note 2
*Waste management*
Landfills	1%	99%	0%	100%	Note 3
Refuse / recycling collection, clean up days	62%	38%	75%	25%	Note 3
Waste minimisation	0%	100%	0%	100%
*Reserves and recreational facilities*
Aquatic services	55%	45%	55%	45%
Cemeteries (parks and burials)	50%	50%	50%	50%
Crematorium	0%	100%	0%	100%
Dunedin Botanic Garden	98%	2%	98%	2%
Parks and reserves	96%	4%	96%	4%
*Property*
Community housing	0%	100%	0%	100%	Note 4
Other property	-	-	45%	55%	Note 4
*Ara Toi*
Ara Toi services	-	-	100%	0%	Note 5
Dunedin public art gallery	85%	15%	85%	15%
Dunedin public libraries	95%	5%	98%	2%	Note 5
Lan Yuan Chinese Garden	75%	25%	75%	25%
Olveston	33%	67%	33%	67%
Otago Museum levy	100%	0%	100%	0%
Toitū Settlers Museum	92%	8%	92%	8%
*Regulatory services*
Animal services	20%	80%	10%	90%	Note 6
Building services	33%	67%	25%	75%	Note 6
Environmental health	65%	35%	65%	35%
Liquor licensing	35%	65%	10%	90%	Note 6
Parking operations	0%	100%	0%	100%
Parking services (enforcement)	2%	98%	2%	98%
*Economic development*
Economic development and marketing	90%	10%	90%	10%
Visitor Centre (i-Site)	55%	45%	60%	40%	Note 7
*Community and planning*
Community development and events	95%	5%	95%	5%
City development	100%	0%	100%	0%
Resource consent management	60%	40%	60%	40%
*Governance and support services*
Civic and governance support services	100%	0%	100%	0%
Corporate support	77%	23%	90%	10%	Note 8
Warm Dunedin	100%	0%	100%	0%

Note 1 – Roading and footpaths

19 The current policy provides for 62% general rates and 38% other revenue, which is primarily made up of Waka Kotahi NZ Transport Agency’s Funding Assistance Rate subsidy. Subsidy rates are set by government and vary depending on the nature of the work being completed, and the current areas of government focus, e.g., road safety. The costs not funded by grants provide a public benefit to the community and are funded through general rates.

Note 2 – Stormwater

20 Stormwater funding is currently based on the wastewater revenue policy, with targeted rates of 98% charged on properties within the scheme area. Other revenue of 2% for wastewater includes trade waste charges, however these do not apply to stormwater.

21 It is proposed that the Policy for stormwater is amended to provide 99% targeted rates and 1% of other revenue for connection fees and development contributions only, being approximately $116,000 on budgeted costs of $9.6 million.

22 Council charges a drainage rate that incorporates both stormwater and wastewater. It is recommended that work be undertaken during the 2021/22 year to split this rate into the two components, as this will likely be needed as part of the 3 waters reform.

Note 3 – Waste Management

23 Landfills – this activity provides a private benefit to those using the landfill. Landfill fees recover the cost of this activity, and so it is recommended that the policy be amended from 1% rates revenue and 99% other revenue, to 100% other revenue to reflect this.

24 Refuse/recycling and clean up days – this activity is estimated to cost $6.7 million, and is currently funded 75% from rates, being a mix of targeted rates for recycling kerbside collection and general rates for litter bins and clean up days. Other revenue of 25% is recovered from the purchase of black bags for refuse collection, estimated as $1.7 million.

25 A new revenue policy will be required with the introduction of a new kerbside collection service in 2022/23. Funding options are presented in the report “Kerbside Collection Funding Options” for consideration at the 27 January 2021 Council meeting.

Note 4 - Property

26 Community housing – at the 27 January 2021 meeting, Council will consider a report “Community Housing – Strategy and Policy Review Update”, proposing that feedback be sought on funding for the DCC Community Housing portfolio through the 10 year plan consultation document. It is therefore recommended that this revenue policy remains unchanged with 100% recovery of costs through other revenue, pending a decision at Council’s deliberations meeting in May 2021.

27 Other property– this activity does not have a current policy. It is made up of properties held for investment purposes that achieve positive returns through rental incomes, property held for the community e.g., community halls and public toilets, and operational properties that owned and occupied by the DCC.

28 Other revenue of approximately $10.5 million is received on investment properties and some of Council’s operational properties that are rented to external parties. The balance of costs is recovered through approximately $8.8 million of rates. It is recommended that this policy reflects the current recovery of costs, being 45% rates revenue and 55% other revenue.

Note 5 – Ara Toi

29 Ara Toi - this activity, estimated to cost approximately $730,000, does not have a current policy. It includes the provision of arts grants, City of Literature, and providing advice to the arts and culture sector. These activities provide a public benefit and are funded 100% general rates. It is recommended that the policy reflects this.

30 Dunedin public libraries – the current policy is 95% from general rates, with 5% from fees and charges, for late returns, borrowing “Hotpicks” etc. The chargeable services at the library are reducing because of an increase in digital use by library users, and this is reflected in the actual recovery of 3% fees and charges over the past two years. It is recommended that the policy is amended to recover 98% from general rates and 2% from fees and charges, being approximately $215,000 on costs of $10.7 million.

Note 6 – Regulatory services

31 Animal services – the current policy provides for 20% public benefits funded from rates and 80% private benefit funded from dog registration fees. The level of dog registration fees being received is approximately $1.5 million, and now covers approximately 90% of the cost of this activity, budgeted to be $1.7 million. It is recommended that the Policy be amended to reflect the actual recovery.

32 Building services – the current policy provides for 33% rates funding, and 67% from building consent fees. The level of building consent fees being received now covers approximately 75% of the cost of this activity. It is recommended that the Policy be amended to reflect what is being achieved, and for 2021/22 this is estimated to be $6.7 million of other revenue on costs of $8.6 million.

33 Liquor Licensing - the current policy provides for 35% public benefits funded from rates and 65% private benefit funded from liquor licensing fees. The actual fee revenue received recovers approximately 90% of the cost of this activity. As fees are set by statute, it is recommended that the policy is amended to 10% rates and 90% other revenue on an estimated cost of $510,000.

Note 7 – Economic Development

34 Visitor centre (i-Site) - Other revenue of 45% received by the visitor centre is primarily from commission income from the sale of tours and accommodation bookings, and is demand driven. It is recommended that the policy is amended to 60% general rates and 40% other revenue on an estimated cost of $1.1 million, which reflects the actual recoveries through i-Site pre COVID-19. It is acknowledged that with the current downturn in the tourism industry, this proposed revenue policy will not be attainable in the short term.

Note 8 – Governance and support services

35 Corporate Support – This activity includes corporate leadership, business information systems, finance and other internal support for all areas of council. The cost of this activity is approximately $37 million, of which $25 million is recovered through internal charges to other areas of council and are therefore funded in accordance with their respective revenue policies.

36 It is recommended that the policy is amended to reflect only those costs (i.e., $12 million) that cannot be recovered through internal charges. This split would be 90% general rates and 10% other revenue, reflecting the recoveries that have been achieved in recent years.

Proposed Policy and Budget

37 Table 3 below shows a comparison of the draft policy with the draft 2021-22 budget.

38 The draft Policy sets out the revenue sources following consideration of each of the matters identified in section 101(3) of the LGA. The budget sets out what the estimated recovery of costs is likely to be in the first year of the 10 year plan 2021-31, having considered the current environment, and the impacts of COVID-19.

39 In any budget year, there is likely to be a level of variability between the policy and the budget, but it would not be expected to be more than +/- 5%.

Table 3 – Draft policy and draft budgets comparison

	2021-2031 Draft Policy		2021/22 Budgets		Variance
Activity	Rates Revenue %	Other Revenue %	Rates Revenue %	Other Revenue %	Within +/- 5%
Roading and footpaths group
Transport	62%	38%	64%	36%	✓
Three Waters
Water supply	80%	20%	81%	19%	✓
Waste water	98%	2%	97%	3%	✓
Stormwater	99%	1%	99%	1%	✓
Waste management group
Landfills	0%	100%	0%	100%	✓
Refuse/recycling collection and clean ups days	75%	25%	75%	25%	✓
Waste minimisation	0%	100%	0%	100%	✓
Reserves and recreational facilities group
Aquatic services	55%	45%	62%	38%	Note 9
Cemeteries (parks and burials)	50%	50%	50%	50%	✓
Crematorium	0%	100%	0%	100%	✓
Dunedin Botanic Garden	98%	2%	99%	1%	✓
Parks and reserves	96%	4%	93%	7%	✓
Property group
Community housing	0%	100%	9%	91%	Note 10
Other property	45%	55%	46%	54%	✓
Ara Toi group
Ara Toi services	100%	0%	97%	3%	✓
Dunedin Public Art Gallery	85%	15%	89%	11%	✓
Dunedin Public Libraries	98%	2%	97%	3%	✓
Lan Yuan Chinese Garden	75%	25%	95%	5%	Note 11
Olveston	33%	67%	71%	29%	Note 11
Otago Museum levy	100%	0%	100%	0%	✓
Toitū Otago Settlers Museum	92%	8%	91%	9%	✓
Regulatory services group
Animal Services	10%	90%	11%	89%	✓
Building Services	25%	75%	22%	78%	✓
Environmental Health	65%	35%	70%	30%	✓
Liquor Licensing	10%	90%	19%	81%	Note 11
Parking Operations	0%	100%	0%	100%	✓
Parking services (enforcement)	2%	98%	10%	90%	Note 11
Economic development group
Economic development and marketing	90%	10%	96%	4%	Note 12
Visitor centre (i-Site) *	60%	40%	79%	21%	Note 11
Community and planning group
Community development and events	95%	5%	94%	6%	✓
City development	100%	0%	100%	0%	✓
Resource consent management	60%	40%	61%	39%	✓
Governance and support services group
Civic & governance support services	100%	0%	100%	0%	✓
Corporate support services	90%	10%	91%	9%	✓
Warm Dunedin	100%	0%	100%	0%	✓

40 Note 9 - The estimated cost of aquatic services for 2021/22 is $9.1 million and other revenue is estimated to be $3.4 million in the 2021/22 year. The fees and charges for this activity are currently being reviewed. It is recommended that during the 2021/22 year, the revenue policy for this activity is reviewed with the review of fees.

41 Note 10 - Community housing has been discussed in paragraph 26 above.

42 Note 11 – The budgets have been prepared, taking into account the impacts of COVID-19.

43 Note 12 – The Economic Development activity receives other revenue from external partners for specific projects. This will vary from year to year, depending on the planned projects in any one year.

OPTIONS

44 Council is required to have a Revenue and Financing Policy as part of the 10 year plan. Options have not been presented but Council is able to modify the draft Revenue and Financing Policy.

NEXT STEPS

45 If Council assesses for any activity that the revenue split is different to that proposed, amendments to the fees and charges schedule will be made to reflect those changes.

46 The approved Revenue and Financing Policy will form part of the supporting documentation for the 10 year plan consultation.

Signatories

Author:	Sharon Bodeker - Corporate Planner
Authoriser:	Gavin Logie - Acting General Manager Finance

Attachments

	Title	Page
⇩a	Revenue and Financing Policy	451
⇩b	Community Outcomes	476

SUMMARY OF CONSIDERATIONS

Fit with purpose of Local Government

Fit with strategic framework

	Contributes	Detracts	Not applicable
Social Wellbeing Strategy	☒	☐	☐
Economic Development Strategy	☒	☐	☐
Environment Strategy	☒	☐	☐
Arts and Culture Strategy	☒	☐	☐
3 Waters Strategy	☒	☐	☐
Spatial Plan	☒	☐	☐
Integrated Transport Strategy	☒	☐	☐
Parks and Recreation Strategy	☒	☐	☐
Other strategic projects/policies/plans	☒	☐	☐

The 10 year plan contributes to the objectives and priorities of the strategic framework as it describes the Council’s activities, the community outcomes, and provides a long term focus for decision making and coordination of the Council’s resources, as well as a basis for community accountability. The Revenue and Financing Policy is a key component of the development of the 10 year plan.

Māori Impact Statement

There are no known impacts for tangata whenua.

Sustainability

The Revenue and Financing Policy considers the overall impact of its funding requirements on the current and future social, economic, environmental and cultural wellbeing of the community, when setting the policy.

LTP/Annual Plan / Financial Strategy /Infrastructure Strategy

The Revenue and Financing Policy does not impact on levels of service provided but provides for how the activities of Council are funded.

Financial considerations

The financial impacts are discussed in the report.

Significance

Proposed changes to the Revenue and Financing Policy are not considered significant in terms of the Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy. The Policy will be included in the supporting documentation for consultation on the 10 year plan.

Engagement – external

There has been no external engagement in the development of the Revenue and Financing Policy.

Engagement - internal

Staff and managers from across Council have been consulted on in the review of the Revenue and Financing Policy.

Risks: Legal / Health and Safety etc.

There are no identified risks.

Conflict of Interest

There are no known conflicts of interest.

Community Boards

There are no implications for Community Boards.

Council

27 January 2021

Rates Remission and Postponement Policy

Department: Corporate Policy

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1 The Local Government Act (LGA) provides that local authorities may have a rates remission policy and a rates postponement policy. Any policy adopted must be reviewed every six years and be consulted on.

2 A review of Council’s Rates Remission and Postponement Policy (the Policy) has been undertaken, and minor changes to the Policy are proposed. The Policy with tracked changes is provided at Attachment A.

3 The purpose of this report is to seek Council’s approval of the changes and approve that the Policy be consulted on through the 10 year plan consultation process.

RECOMMENDATIONS

That the Council:

a) Approves the proposed Rates Remission and Postponement Policy, with any amendments.

b) Approves that the policy be consulted on through the 10 year plan consultation process.

BACKGROUND

4 Section 102(3) of the LGA provides that a local authority may adopt either or both of the following policies:

· A rates remission policy;

· A rates postponement policy.

5 Polices adopted under that section must state the objectives sought to be achieved by the remission and postponement of rates, and the conditions and criteria to be met for rates to be remitted or postponed.

6 The policies must be reviewed at least once every six years and be consulted on.

DISCUSSION

7 Council’s Policy was last reviewed in 2015. In accordance with the LGA, a review has now been undertaken, and some minor amendments are proposed to be made to the Policy. These changes are summarised below:

Section of Policy	Detail of change
4.3 – removal of “or the penalty refers to the previous rating year.	The policy provides that a request for remission of a penalty of less than $100 in the current year does not need to be made in writing, but that any similar request for prior years penalties must be in writing. The proposed amendment would treat all penalties less than $100 the same.
6.2 – removal of “non”	Correcting an error in the current policy – reference should be “contiguous”, not “non-contiguous”.
7 – new policy for remission of certain targeted rates for a family flat.	If a property has a main dwelling and a second, self-contained dwelling that is for the owner’s own use, this would be assessed as having two separately used and inhabited parts, and therefore attract two kerbside, water and other rates. Declaration forms must be completed by these ratepayers for one set of rates to be remitted. This should be included in the policy.
10 – new policy for unexpected events	A general “catch all” provision to cover any other event not captured by the policy. Any decision to remit rates and/or penalties would require a resolution of Council.

OPTIONS

8 As this review is required by legislation, there are no options.

NEXT STEPS

9 The proposed policy including any amendments will be consulted on as part of the 10 year plan consultation.

Signatories

Author:	Sharon Bodeker - Corporate Planner
Authoriser:	Gavin Logie - Acting General Manager Finance

Attachments

	Title	Page
⇩a	Rate Remissions and Postponement Policy - track changes	483
⇩b	Rate Remission and Postponement Policy	492

SUMMARY OF CONSIDERATIONS

Fit with purpose of Local Government

This decision enables democratic local decision making and action by, and on behalf of communities.

Fit with strategic framework

	Contributes	Detracts	Not applicable
Social Wellbeing Strategy	☐	☐	☒
Economic Development Strategy	☐	☐	☒
Environment Strategy	☐	☐	☒
Arts and Culture Strategy	☐	☐	☒
3 Waters Strategy	☐	☐	☒
Spatial Plan	☐	☐	☒
Integrated Transport Strategy	☐	☐	☒
Parks and Recreation Strategy	☐	☐	☒
Other strategic projects/policies/plans	☒	☐	☐

The review of the Rates Remission and Postponement Policy contributes to the Financial Strategy and Revenue and Financing Policy.

Māori Impact Statement

There are no known impacts for tangata whenua.

Sustainability

There are no implications for sustainability.

LTP/Annual Plan / Financial Strategy /Infrastructure Strategy

Any decision to change the rating policies may impact on the 10 year plan, Annual Plan and Financial Strategy.

Financial considerations

There are no financial implications for Council from the proposed amendments.

Significance

The proposed amendments to the policy are considered of low significance in terms of the Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy. The policy will however be consulted on in accordance with the requirements of the Local Government Act.

Engagement – external

There has been no external engagement in reviewing this policy.

Engagement - internal

Finance staff have been engaged in the review of this policy.

Risks: Legal / Health and Safety etc.

There are no identified risks.

Conflict of Interest

There are no known conflicts of interest.

Community Boards

There are no implications for Community Boards.

Council

27 January 2021

DCC Submission on the University of Otago's Vision 2040 Discussion Paper

Department: Community and Planning

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1 This report seeks approval of a draft Dunedin City Council (DCC) submission (Attachment A) to the University of Otago on the ‘Vision 2040’ discussion paper (Attachment B).

RECOMMENDATIONS

That the Council:

a) Approves the draft DCC submission to the University of Otago on the ‘Vision 2040’ discussion paper.

Background

2 The University of Otago (the University) is seeking feedback on its discussion paper ‘Vision 2040’. This document reviews and re-sets the University’s strategic direction for the next 20 years.

3 The DCC submitted to the University’s previous vision document in 2013.

4 The Mayor and the Chief Executive met electronically with the Vice-Chancellor and Director of Strategy, Analytics and Reporting in November 2020 to discuss the University’s strategic direction.

5 The DCC was granted and extension to the timeframe to allow it to consider the matter at its first meeting in 2021.

Discussion

6 The University’s proposed guiding principles are:

· honouring the Treaty Partnership

· sustainability

· social responsibility

· academic freedom.

7 The University’s strategic imperatives to 2040 are:

· excellence in research

· excellence in teaching

· outstanding student experience

· outstanding campus environments

· commitment and citizenship

· sustaining capability.

8 Overall, the draft DCC submission is supportive of the University’s vision as it is complementary to the city vision of Dunedin being one of the world’s great small cities.

9 The submission supports the University’s guiding principles, particularly regarding the Treaty of Waitangi and sustainability, as these are aligned with the key principles underpinning the DCC strategic framework.

10 However, the submission notes that there is an opportunity to strengthen the commitment to working in partnership with the DCC. This is particularly relevant in the ‘outstanding student experience’ (pages 12-13) and ‘outstanding campus environments’ (pages 14-15) sections of the discussion document.

Options

Option one (recommended option) – Approve the submission (with or without amendment)

11 Approve the DCC submission to the University on the ‘Vision 2040’ discussion paper.

Advantages

· Opportunity to show support for the University’s strategic vision, and highlight the strategic partnership between the DCC and the University.

Disadvantages

· There are no identified disadvantages for this option.

Option Two – Do not approve the submission

12 Do not approve the DCC submission to the University on the ‘Vision 2040’ discussion paper.

Advantages

· There are no identified advantages for this option.

Disadvantages

· Missed opportunity to show support for the University’s strategic vision, and highlight the strategic partnership between the DCC and the University.

Next Steps

13 If approved, the submission will be sent to the University. Staff and Council’s elected representatives will continue to work in partnership with the University through the Tertiary Sector Steering Group structure and through involvement in joint project teams on major projects.

Signatories

Author:	Nicola Pinfold - Group Manager Community and Planning
Authoriser:	Robert West - Acting General Manager City Services

Attachments

	Title	Page
⇩a	DCC submission on Vision 2040	506
⇩b	Vision 2040: a discussion paper	509

SUMMARY OF CONSIDERATIONS

Fit with purpose of Local Government

This submission is in alignment with the Strategic Framework, which promotes the social, economic and environmental well-being of communities in the present and for the future.

Fit with strategic framework

	Contributes	Detracts	Not applicable
Social Wellbeing Strategy	☒	☐	☐
Economic Development Strategy	☒	☐	☐
Environment Strategy	☒	☐	☐
Arts and Culture Strategy	☒	☐	☐
3 Waters Strategy	☒	☐	☐
Spatial Plan	☒	☐	☐
Integrated Transport Strategy	☒	☐	☐
Parks and Recreation Strategy	☒	☐	☐
Other strategic projects/policies/plans	☒	☐	☐
This submission is in alignment with the Tertiary Precinct Development Plan.

Māori Impact Statement

This submission encourages the University’s ambition to attract a more diverse student cohort which should have a positive impact on Māori.

Sustainability

This submission supports the University’s focus on sustainability.

LTP/Annual Plan / Financial Strategy /Infrastructure Strategy

There are no known impacts.

Financial considerations

There are no financial impacts.

Significance

This decision has been assessed under the Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy as being of low significance.

Engagement – external

There was no external engagement on this submission. However, the Mayor and CEO met with the University to discuss the vision document, at the University’s invitation.

Engagement - internal

Staff with involvement in the Tertiary Precinct Planning Group were consulted in the preparation of the draft.

Risks: Legal / Health and Safety etc.

There are no known risks.

Conflict of Interest

There are no known conflicts of interest.

Community Boards

There are no known impacts for Community Boards.