Notice of Meeting:

I hereby give notice that an ordinary meeting of the Dunedin City Council will be held on:

 

Date:                                                    Tuesday 25 May 2021

Time:                                                   10.00 am

Venue:                                                Council Chamber, Municipal Chambers, The Octagon, Dunedin

 

Sandy Graham

Chief Executive Officer

 

Council

PUBLIC AGENDA

 

MEMBERSHIP

 

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

 

 

Senior Officer                                               Sandy Graham, Chief Executive Officer

 

Governance Support Officer                  Lynne Adamson

 

 

 

Lynne Adamson

Governance Support Officer

 

 

Telephone: 03 477 4000

Lynne.Adamson@dcc.govt.nz

www.dunedin.govt.nz

 

 

Note: Reports and recommendations contained in this agenda are not to be considered as Council policy until adopted.

 

 


Council

25 May 2021

 

 

ITEM TABLE OF CONTENTS                                                                                                                                         PAGE

 

1             Opening                                                                                                                                                                       4

2             Public Forum                                                                                                                                                              4

3             Apologies                                                                                                                                                                    4

4             Confirmation of Agenda                                                                                                                                        4

5             Declaration of Interest                                                                                                                                           5

6             Confirmation of Minutes                                                                                                                                    19

6.1       Ordinary Council meeting - 13 April 2021                                                                                        19   

Minutes of Community Boards

7             Mosgiel-Taieri Community Board - 17 February 2021                                                                             20

8             Waikouaiti Coast Community Board - 24 March 2021                                                                             21

9             Strath Taieri Community Board - 25 March 2021                                                                                      22

10           Otago Peninsula Community Board - 25 March 2021                                                                              23

11           West Harbour Community Board - 17 March 2021                                                                                  24

Reports

12           Actions From Resolutions of Council Meetings                                                                                          25

13           Council Forward Work Programme                                                                                                                31

14           Covid-19 Support Fund Update                                                                                                                        45

15           Three Waters Reform Update                                                                                                                           50

16           Feedback on the Draft 2021/22 Statements of Intent - Dunedin City Holdings Limited

                Group Companies                                                                                                                                               247

17           Terms of Reference for the Review of the DCC Waikouaiti, Karitane and Hawksbury

                Village Water Response                                                                                                                                    254

18           Adoption of the Litter Compliance Policy 2020                                                                                       259

19           Regulatory Subcommittee Recommendation on Dangerous and Insanitary Buildings

                Policy Review                                                                                                                                                        273

20           Submission to Gambling Commission on Review of Charitable Trust Licence

                Conditions for Casinos                                                                                                                                       290

21           DCC Submission on Building Code Update 2021 Proposals                                                                 310

22           Financial Result - Period Ended 30 April 2021                                                                                          339               

Resolution to Exclude the Public                                                                                                                     349

 

 


Council

25 May 2021

 

1          Opening

Dr Lux Selvanesan from the Hindu community will open the meeting with a prayer.

2          Public Forum

At the close of the agenda no requests for public forum had been received.

3          Apologies

An apology has been received from Cr Chris Staynes.

 

That the Council:

 

Accepts the apology from Cr Chris Staynes.

4          Confirmation of agenda

Note: Any additions must be approved by resolution with an explanation as to why they cannot be delayed until a future meeting.


Council

25 May 2021

 

Declaration of Interest

 

  

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

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

 

2.         Elected members are reminded to update their register of interests as soon as practicable, including amending the register at this meeting if necessary.

 

3.         Staff members are reminded to update their register of interests as soon as practicable.

 

RECOMMENDATIONS

That the Council:

a)     Notes/Amends if necessary the Elected Members' Interest Register attached as Attachment A; and

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

c)     Notes the Executive Leadership Team’s Interest Register.

 

 

Attachments

 

Title

Page

a

Councillor Register of Interest

7

b

ELT Register of Interest

17

  



Council

25 May 2021

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Council

25 May 2021

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator

 


Council

25 May 2021

 

Confirmation of Minutes

Ordinary Council meeting - 13 April 2021

 

 

RECOMMENDATIONS

That the Council:

a)     Confirms the public part of the minutes of the Ordinary Council meeting held on 13 April 2021 as a correct record.

 

 

 

Attachments

 

Title

Page

a

Minutes of Ordinary Council meeting  held on 13 April 2021 (Under Separate Cover 1)

 

 

   


Council

25 May 2021

 

Minutes of Community Boards

Mosgiel-Taieri Community Board - 17 February 2021

 

 

gg

RECOMMENDATIONS

That the Council:

a)     Notes the minutes of the Mosgiel-Taieri Community Board meeting held on 17 February 2021

 

 

 

Attachments

 

Title

Page

a

Minutes of Mosgiel-Taieri Community Board held on 17 February 2021 (Under Separate Cover 1)

 

  


Council

25 May 2021

 

Waikouaiti Coast Community Board - 24 March 2021

 

 

gg

RECOMMENDATIONS

That the Council:

a)     Notes the minutes of the Waikouaiti Coast Community Board meeting held on 24 March 2021.

 

 

 

Attachments

 

Title

Page

a

Minutes of Waikouaiti Coast Community Board held on 24 March 2021 (Under Separate Cover 1)

 

  


Council

25 May 2021

 

Strath Taieri Community Board - 25 March 2021

 

 

gg

RECOMMENDATIONS

That the Council:

a)     Notes minutes of the Strath Taieri Community Board meeting held on 25 March 2021

 

 

 

Attachments

 

Title

Page

a

Minutes of Strath Taieri Community Board held on 25 March 2021 (Under Separate Cover 1)

 

  


Council

25 May 2021

 

Otago Peninsula Community Board - 25 March 2021

 

 

gg

RECOMMENDATIONS

That the Council:

a)     Notes minutes of the Otago Peninsula Community Board meeting held on 25 March 2021

 

 

Attachments

 

Title

Page

a

Minutes of Otago Peninsula Community Board held on 25 March 2021 (Under Separate Cover 1)

 

  


Council

25 May 2021

 

West Harbour Community Board - 17 March 2021

 

 

gg

RECOMMENDATIONS

That the Council:

a)     Notes of the minutes of the West Harbour Community Board meeting held on 17 March 2021

 

 

Attachments

 

Title

Page

a

Minutes of West Harbour Community Board held on 17 March 2021 (Under Separate Cover 1)

 

   


Council

25 May 2021

 

Reports

 

Actions From Resolutions of Council Meetings

Department: Civic

 

 

 

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1          The purpose of this report is to show progress on implementing resolutions made at Council meetings. 

2          As this report is an administrative report only, there are no options or Summary of Considerations.

 

RECOMMENDATIONS

That the Council:

 

Notes the Open and Completed Actions from resolutions of Council meetings shown in Attachment A.

 

discussion

3          This report also provides an update on resolutions that have been actioned and completed since the last Council meeting. 

NEXT STEPS

4          Updates will be provided at future Council meetings.

 

Signatories

Author:

Lynne Adamson - Governance Support Officer

Authoriser:

Clare Sullivan - Manager Governance

Attachments

 

Title

Page

a

Council Open and Completed Action List May 2021

27

  



Council

25 May 2021

 


 


 

PDF Creator



Council

25 May 2021

 

 

Council Forward Work Programme

Department: Corporate Policy

 

 

 

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1          The purpose of this report is to provide the updated forward work programme for the 2021-2022 year (Attachment A). 

2          As this is an administrative report only, there are no options or Summary of Considerations. 

RECOMMENDATIONS

That the Council:

Notes the updated Council forward work programme as shown in Attachment A.

 

DISCUSSION

3          The forward work programme is a regular agenda item which shows areas of activity, progress and expected timeframes for Council decision making across a range of areas of work. 

4          As an update report, the purple highlight shows changes to timeframes.  New items added to the schedule are highlighted in yellow. Items that have been completed or updated are shown as bold.  This report shows a 13 month rolling period from April 2021 to April 2022. 

5          The forward work programme now contains items from the action list where the action has resulted in a report to be presented back to Council.  Items have been closed on the action list and incorporated in the forward work programme.

NEXT STEPS

6          An updated report will be provided for the next Council meeting.

 

Signatories

Author:

Sharon Bodeker - Corporate Planner

Authoriser:

Sandy Graham - Chief Executive Officer

Attachments

 

Title

Page

a

Forward Work Programme - May 2021

33

  


Council

25 May 2021

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator



Council

25 May 2021

 

 

Covid-19 Support Fund Update

Department: Community and Planning

 

 

 

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1          On 27 May 2020 Council approved the establishment of a $950,000 COVID-19 Support Fund for the 2020/21 financial year. This report provides an update on expenditure to date, and forecasts year end expenditure.

2          Following presentation of a report on 30 June 2020, $435,000 was allocated to social well-being, economic, arts and sports initiatives.

3          Of the $435,000 approved on 30 June 2020, $206,165.20 (47%) has been spent to date, with $306,190.20 (70%) forecast to be spent by 30 June 2021 and $128,809.80 (30%) unspent.

 RECOMMENDATIONS

That the Council:

a)     Notes the update on expenditure from the COVID-19 Support Fund.

 

BACKGROUND

4          During the Annual Plan Deliberations Council approved $950,000 in the 2020-21 operational budget to support a response to the COVID-19 pandemic, anticipating there could be significant social and economic impacts on city residents and the business sector.

5          A report from Community and Planning and Corporate Policy was provided to Council at its 30 June 2020 meeting, with a proposed allocation of $435,000 for social well-being, arts and sports initiatives to be supported through the COVID-19 Support Fund. It also proposed that a review be undertaken to consider options for the most appropriate use of the balance of the Fund. 

6          At the 30 June 2020 Council meeting, the following resolution was passed:

Moved (Cr Chris Staynes/Cr Marie Laufiso):

That the Council:

a)        Approves the allocation of up to $435,000 of the COVID-19 support fund as follows:

·        $100,000 Increase to Community Grants

·       $75,000 to Reconnecting Ōtepoti Events

·        $60,000 to the Maori Innovation and Development Fund

·        $50,000 Increase to Consumer Electricity Fund

·        $50,000 to the Sports Fund

·        $35,000 Increase to Dunedin Dream Brokerage

·        $30,000 to the Pasifika Innovation and Development Fund

·        $25,000 Increase to Boosted Fund

·        $10,000 Increase to Neighbourhood Matching Grants

 

b)        Notes that an update on the uptake from the fund would be provided to Council in September 2020.

Motion carried (CNL/2020/061) with Cr Vandervis recording his vote against

7          On 10 November 2020 Enterprise Dunedin provided a report requesting $160,000 of the COVID-19 Support Fund be allocated for three projects to support economic, and social well-being identified by the Grow Dunedin Partnership.  Council agreed more information was required prior to the allocations being awarded.

DISCUSSION

Allocated and Spent Funds

8          Increase to the Consumer Electricity Fund ($50,000) – Budget has been provided to the Budget Advisory Service Dunedin to support low income families / people experiencing fuel poverty as a result of loss of work / work hours due to COVID-19.  A final payment will be made in June 2021, with a report expected from the service by the end of July 2021.

9          Sports Fund ($50,000) - A total of $50,000 was allocated to the sports fund, administered by Sport Otago.  Of the $50,000, half was allocated to Sport Otago’s “Sporting Chance” fund and the remaining half allocated across sporting organisations.

10        To date, a total of $14,300 of the $25,000 allocated to the Sporting Chance fund has been spent on supporting 125 young people with the costs of participating in sports post the COVID-19 lockdown.  This included funding support for sports fees and equipment.

11        Of the remaining $25,000 allocated to support sporting organisations, $16,500 has been spent supporting 14 sporting organisations and codes.  Funding support assisted with COVID-19 compliance including, provision of signage and equipment sanitation measures and support for volunteer training that would normally be funded through revenue.  This offset the loss of revenue attributed to the COVID-19 lockdown.

12        Sport Otago have confirmed that the funds will have been fully allocated by 30 June 2021.

13        Pāsifika Innovation and Development Fund ($30,000) – A partnership between the DCC and Otago Community Trust (with each partner providing $30,000). A funding panel of five Pāsifika representatives from the DCC, Otago Community Trust and community allocated the full funds to 10 Pāsifika groups / projects in December 2020.  Initiatives funded included mental health programmes, youth projects, projects celebrating Pāsifika through music and recording of stories. More than 1,000 people are expected to benefit from the projects funded. Of the 10 applicants, only three had applied to the Council previously for funding, although all would have been eligible for other DCC grant funding. 

14        Increase to Dunedin Dream Brokerage ($35,000) - The full $35,000 has been invoiced and paid for Dunedin Dream Brokerage with the broker contracted and three projects complete.  The fourth project is due for completion at the end of May, and reporting is due late May/ early June 2021.

15        Increase to Boosted fund ($25,000) – The Boosted Ambassador has been contracted to assist in delivering a programme of professional development for creatives who are responding to Covid-19 conditions.  This project began with a survey asking for feedback on key learning areas, and a series of 5-6 workshops will be delivered and the Ara Toi team will document this resource by the end of June 2021.

Allocated and Underspent Funds

16        Four budgets remain underspent – the COVID-19 Community Fund ($81,415 allocated from $100,000), Neighbourhood Matching (underspent), Ōtepoti Reconnecting Events (underspent), Hapori Maori Innovation and Development Fund ($15,045.20 allocated from $60,000).

17        COVID-19 Community Grants – Social sector, place based and not for profit community groups were able to apply for up to $5,000 if they met one or more of the criteria as a result of COVID-19; increase in demand for services / support, increase in complexity of services / support, or a decline in income. In July 2020 it was decided to have two funding rounds of equal value be administered as staff expected there to be continued need for this fund through the financial year. However, fewer applications were received in May 2021.

18        A total of $50,000 was allocated to 19 social service, community and place-based groups in November 2020.  Requests totalled $89,777.  A total of $31,451 was allocated to eight groups in May. Applicants to the Fund collectively support more than 20,000 residents.

19        Reconnecting Ōtepoti Events ($75,000) – This initiative was primarily proposed to support place-based communities to engage and reconnect with residents following the national lockdown. There was no uptake from community groups for this funding.

20        Hapori Māori Innovation and Development Fund ($60,000) – The Fund was promoted in partnership with Otago Community Trust which also contributed $60,000.  The first round of grant applications opened in October 2020, attracting five applications, with three approved at a total of $15,045.  Promotion was to local Māori providers and mana whenua through social media and email, a hui was held to discuss the fund criteria and ideas, a stand provided at the Te Pūtahitanga Symposium in April and follow up meetings held with interested groups. The second application round has been extended to 21 May 2021. A funding panel of Māori representatives from the DCC, Otago Community Trust and mana whenua will decide allocations on 22 June 2021.

21        Increase to Neighbourhood Matching Grants ($10,000) – Neighbourhood Matching Grants are $500 or less and support neighbourhoods to connect via a range of activities / events.  Funding is provided direct to suppliers, allowing informal groups to apply. There was no uptake from community groups for this funding.

22        No formal assessment has been undertaken as to why budgets were undersubscribed.  However, staff believe key reasons were:

·    Lack of resourcing – many groups and organisations were overwhelmed managing additional demand on services, changes to income and staff shortages and did not have capacity to apply for funding. Despite the DCC’s funding criteria being broadened to support groups, some did not have the ability, time or resource to apply for funds.

·    Shifting COVID-19 alert levels – although staff spoke with four place-based groups regarding the Ōtepoti Connecting Events funding, they were uncertain about entering into an initiative when COVID-19 Alert levels had changed through the year with little notice. Groups were also concerned about volunteer / staff capacity, although funding offered could have supported that resourcing.

·    Government funding availability – Central government introduced a range of additional funding and grants for community, sports, events and arts organisations. As the DCC’s first round of COVID-19 Community Grants was opened prior to significant grant funding being made available by central government to community groups, demand for that round was high.  This demand was much lower in the second round, after central government funding was released.

OPTIONS

23        There are no options, as the report is for noting only.

NEXT STEPS

24        A further report on usage of the Consumer Electricity Fund, Dunedin Dream Brokerage and the Sports Fund will be provided in July.

 

Signatories

Author:

Joy Lanini - Manager Community Development and Events

Authoriser:

John Christie - Manager Enterprise Dunedin

Robert West - Acting General Manager City Services

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

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.

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

This decision promotes the 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

 

Funds allocated by the Council have supported a range of social well-being initiatives that assisted both individuals and groups to be more economically and socially sustainable during the 2020-21 financial year. 

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

There are no known implications

Financial considerations

There are no financial implications

Significance

This decision is considered low in terms of the Council’s significant and Engagement Policy

Engagement – external

There has been no external engagement.

Engagement - internal

DCC staff from Events and community Development, Economic Development, Ara Toi, and Parks and Recreation have had input into the writing of this report.

Risks: Legal / Health and Safety etc.

There are no known legal or health and safety risks identified.

Conflict of Interest

There are no known conflicts of interest.

Community Boards

There are no known impacts for Community Boards.

 


Council

25 May 2021

 

 

Three Waters Reform Update

Department: 3 Waters

 

 

 

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1          This report updates the Council on Government three waters regulatory and service delivery reforms. It also provides an update on work commissioned by the Otago-Southland Three Waters Office.

RECOMMENDATIONS

That the Council:

a)     Notes the Three Waters Reform Update.

 

 

BACKGROUND

2          The Government has initiated changes to three waters regulatory and service delivery arrangements to address challenges highlighted by the Government Inquiry into Havelock North Drinking Water and the Three Waters Review.

3          In 2020, the DCC and nine other councils from across Otago and Southland (including the two regional councils) established the Otago-Southland Three Waters Office to support collective participation by the councils in the Government’s Three Waters Reform Programme.

DISCUSSION

Three waters regulatory reform update

4          The Water Services Bill, if passed, would replace Part 2A (Drinking Water) of the Health Act 1956 and implement system-wide reforms to the regulation of drinking water and source water. Taumata Arowai (the new water services regulator) would oversee the reformed regulatory system.

5          The Water Services Bill is currently with Parliament’s Health Committee for consideration. Submissions closed on 2 March 2021 with nearly 1000 submissions received. The Health Committee’s report on the Bill was originally due in June 2021 but has been delayed until August due to the high volume of submissions received. The Government intends for the Bill to be passed in the second half of 2021.

6          Taumata Arowai is now officially established as a Crown entity and board members have been appointed. The Ministry of Health remains New Zealand’s drinking water regulator until the Water Services Bill passes through Parliament and comes into effect. Taumata Arowai’s website – www.taumataarowai.govt.nz – provides more information about the new regulatory body.  

7          The Department of Internal Affairs and Taumata Arowai have published exposure drafts of new drinking water standards and operational compliance rules for drinking water supplies. If adopted, these would replace the current Drinking-water Standards for New Zealand 2005 (Revised 2018). Public consultation on the draft standards and rules is expected to occur in mid-2021.

8          The Ministry for the Environment intends to amend the National Environmental Standard for Sources of Human Drinking Water 2007 to align it with the Water Services Bill. Public consultation on the proposed amendments is expected to occur in about July/August 2021.

Three waters service delivery reform update

Local government and iwi/hapū engagement

9          Thirteen regional hui have been held around the country since January 2021, called by the National Iwi Chairs Forum's Iwi Leaders Group in readiness for discussions with the government over Three Waters Reform.  Among the many concerns for Māori is how Government proposals to establish ‘super entities’ as part of the Three Waters Reform will take power away from local government just at a time when Māori are anticipating being able to have more effective partnership and decision making arrangements with Councils.

10        More recent debates around Three Waters Reform has seen a Co-Governance model with iwi as a possible way forward in sharing governance responsibilities.  This is a standpoint that is strongly supported by Ngāi Tahu, whose position is that co-governance arrangements would be a safeguard against future privatisation of water assets. Ngāi Tahu have explicitly expressed that they do not want to own the asset. Ngāi Tahu has publicly stated that they would like to see an entity that provides local solutions and ensures communities have equitable access to safe and resilient three-waters services.

11        In March 2021, staff attended a Three Waters Reform Programme engagement workshop for local government and iwi/hapū. The workshop, led by the Department of Internal Affairs, provided updates on work related to the Government’s proposal to transfer delivery of three waters services from councils to new, public multi-regional water entities. Attendees at the workshop included staff and elected members from territorial authorities across Otago and Southland. The workshop was part of a series of engagements held across the country throughout March.

12        The slide pack from the March workshop is attached to this report as Attachment A. The Department of Internal Affairs circulated a summary report on the March engagement workshops in May 2021. The summary is attached as Attachment B. 

13        A memorandum from the Otago-Southland Three Waters Office to Otago and Southland elected members summarises concerns raised about the reform process at the March workshops. The memorandum is attached to this report as Attachment C.

Summary of key service delivery reform decisions and developments expected in 2021

14        Cabinet is expected to make decisions on the core design features of a reformed three waters service delivery system in mid-2021. These decisions will cover matters such as the number and boundaries of new water services entities and the new entities’ governance and ownership arrangements.

15        Following Cabinet decisions, the Department of Internal Affairs will provide councils with information to support discussions about the reforms with communities. The information is expected to cover the core system design features, financial impacts, terms of asset/liability transfers and data analysis based on council responses to the Request for Information completed in early-2021. In addition to local discussions, the Government intends to lead a nationwide public information and education campaign to build community support for the reforms.

16        The Government intends to introduce a Water Services Entities Bill to Parliament in about September 2021. This legislation would establish the new water services entities. The Government has stated that all councils will be included in one of the new water services entities by default but will have the option to decide not to participate in the next phase of the service delivery reform programme. Council decisions on continued participation are likely to be required in late-2021, following the introduction of the Water Services Entities Bill. This ‘opt out’ decision will only relate to service delivery reforms: councils that choose to ‘opt out’ and continue providing three waters services themselves will still be required to comply with new regulatory requirements. 

17        Changes to the Local Government Act 2002 (LGA) will be required to enable councils to make the decision about continued participation. At present, the LGA obliges councils to maintain water services and prohibits them from divesting ownership of these services, or from selling, transferring, or losing control of the infrastructure needed to provide water services.

18        The Government intends to introduce a Local Government (Three Waters Reform) Amendment Bill to remove these restrictions and enable councils to make decisions about transferring ownership of water services assets to new entities. The proposed legislation would also set out a consultation process tailored to enable councils to engage with communities and iwi/Māori about the reform proposals and make decisions. Introduction of the Local Government Amendment (Three Waters Reform) Amendment Bill to Parliament is expected to occur by the middle of 2021.

The long-term plan for transition and the position of stormwater in the reforms

19        Ultimately, the Government is targeting June 2024 as the ‘go live’ date for the new water entities. The Government is working on the assumption that council long-term plans for the 2024-2034 period will no longer include water services. 

20        The Government has been clear that it intends for council drinking water and wastewater infrastructure and service delivery functions to transfer to the new water services entities. Work on the position of stormwater in the reforms is still in progress. The Government has previously highlighted the complexities of stormwater management, including the interconnections between stormwater management and other council activities such as land use planning and provision of transport infrastructure. At this stage, Ministers have agreed to further explore the transfer of stormwater infrastructure and services to new water services entities and the Department of Internal Affairs has established a technical working group to develop a transition plan for the future management of stormwater systems.

Otago-Southland Three Waters Office update

21        In late-2020, the Otago-Southland Three Waters Office commissioned management consultancy Morrison Low to assess council three waters infrastructure and services across Otago and Southland. The purpose of the assessment is to inform discussions within the two regions about options and future decisions relating to the Government’s reform programme.

22        Morrison Low has completed a ‘Regional Situation Analysis’, which focuses on challenges and opportunities at a regional scale. In March 2021, Morrison Low provided a draft ‘Cross-regional current state assessment’ (Attachment C). The draft assessment presents findings at the individual territorial authority level.

23        The draft assessment highlights future issues and opportunities councils in the Otago and Southland regions can expect to face in delivering three waters services. These include issues relating to affordability, borrowing capacity, large capital works programmes, the need to invest to meet increasing regulatory standards and monitoring, and resource constraints.

24        Among other things, the draft assessment estimates that the cost of three waters infrastructure renewals needed in Dunedin over the next ten years could be more than double the amount the DCC has budgeted for all three waters capital spending over the same period. The capital investment challenges are even greater for the two regions’ smaller councils. The draft assessment also highlights a projected need for councils to increase operating budgets in response to larger, more complex asset bases and higher levels of regulation and monitoring. The draft assessment provides early analysis of the impacts of increased capital investment programmes and operating costs on council debt and costs to customers.

OPTIONS

25        There are no options associated with this update report.

NEXT STEPS

26        Mayors, councillors, chief executives and senior staff of the Otago and Southland councils have been invited to attend a Three Waters Reform workshop with Department of Internal Affairs staff on 28 May 2021.

27        Staff will provide further updates to the Council following the release of Cabinet decisions on the core design features of a reformed three waters service delivery system, expected mid-2021.

28        Staff will inform the Council as opportunities for the DCC to submit on three waters reform-related matters arise. Public consultations on the following are expected in the coming months:

a)         the Local Government Amendment (Three Waters Reform) Bill;

b)        draft drinking water standards and operational compliance rules;

c)         amendments to the National Environmental Standard for Sources of Human Drinking Water; and

d)        the Water Services Entities Bill.

29        A final version of the ‘Cross-regional current state assessment’ will be provided to the Council when it is available, and staff will continue to provide updates on the work of the Otago-Southland Three Waters Office.

 

Signatories

Author:

Scott Campbell - Policy Analyst

Authoriser:

Jeanette Wikaira - Kaiwhakamāherehere

Tom Dyer - Group Manager 3 Waters

Simon Drew - General Manager Infrastructure & Development

Attachments

 

Title

Page

a

Three Waters Reform Programme - March 2021 Local Government and Iwi/hapū engagement

57

b

Three Waters Reform Programme - March 2021 engagement summary

145

c

Memorandum: DIA Workshop and Otago Southland Three Waters Outputs (Otago-Southland Three Waters Office, 26 March 2021)

159

d

DRAFT Cross-regional current state assessment (Morrison Low, March 2021)

161

 

SUMMARY OF CONSIDERATIONS

 

Fit with purpose of Local Government

This update report is designed to support future 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

 

This update report has been prepared with reference to Dunedin’s strategic framework above.

Māori Impact Statement

Ngāi Tahu has been in discussions with the Crown on the possibility of designing one of the new three-waters delivery entities that are being established under the Government's reform programme to replace the 67 local councils currently delivering three-waters services. Ōtākou Rūnaka and Kāti Huirapa ki Puketeraki Rūnaka are both heavily involved in these discussions at a much broader Te Rūnanga o Ngāi Tahu level. It will be critical to engage with mana whenua as the Three Waters Reform Programme develops.

 

Sustainability

The Government’s Three Waters Reform Programme aims to enhance the economic and environmental sustainability of three waters infrastructure and services across New Zealand.

LTP/Annual Plan / Financial Strategy /Infrastructure Strategy

This update report has no direct implications for these plans and strategies. However, this report notes that the Government is working on the assumption that council long-term plans for the period 2024-2034 will no longer include water services (subject to individual council decisions on continued participation in the three waters service delivery reforms). 

Financial considerations

There are no financial implications directly associated with this update report.

Significance

A decision to note this update report is considered low in terms of the Council’s significance and engagement policy.

Engagement – external

DCC staff attended a Three Waters Reform Programme engagement workshop for local government and iwi/hapū in March 2021. The workshop was led by the Department of Internal Affairs and attended by staff and elected members from territorial authorities across Otago and Southland.

 

DCC staff regularly engage with staff of the other Otago and Southland territorial and the Otago-Southland Three Waters Office on matters relating to three waters reforms.

Engagement - internal

This update report was prepared by the 3 Waters Group. There was no specific internal engagement on the preparation of this update report.

Risks: Legal / Health and Safety etc.

There are no known risks associated with this update report.

Conflict of Interest

There are no known conflicts of interest.

Community Boards

Community Boards are likely to be interested in three waters reform updates and staff will consider how to update the Community Boards in future.

 

 


Council

25 May 2021

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Council

25 May 2021

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Council

25 May 2021

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Council

25 May 2021

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Council

25 May 2021

 

 

Feedback on the Draft 2021/22 Statements of Intent - Dunedin City Holdings Limited Group Companies

Department: Executive Leadership Team

 

 

 

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1          This report provides a summary of elected member feedback on the draft 2021/22 Statements of Intent (SoIs) for Dunedin City Holdings Group companies.

2          A draft response to the directors of Dunedin City Holdings Limited on requested amendments to the draft SoIs is provided in the attachment.

1        RECOMMENDATIONS

That the Council:

a)     Approves the Statement of Intent feedback response (attachment A), with any amendments.

 

BACKGOUND

3          The draft 2021/22 Statements of Intent (SoIs) for Dunedin City Holdings Group companies were presented to Council at the meeting of the Finance and Council Controlled Organisations Committee held 8 March 2021.

4          The meeting resolved:

“Moved (Cr Jim O'Malley/Cr Mike Lord):

That the Committee:

Notes the draft 2021/22 Statements of Intent of Dunedin City Holdings Group companies.

Motion carried (FCCO/2021/013)”

5          Elected Members were asked to provide email feedback on the draft SoIs to the Acting General Manager Finance by 31 March 2021.  This deadline was subsequently extended to the 5 May 2021 to allow members more time to review the SoIs. 


 

DISCUSSION

6          Below is a summary of elected member feedback.

Company

Feedback

Comment

Overall

Include the DCC Strategic Framework in all the SoIs

See feedback response to DCHL para 7

 

Carbon Neutral – have targets in place

See feedback response to DCHL para 7

 

Waste Minimisation Targets

See feedback response to DCHL para 7

 

Sponsorship Policy

The Council will provide group companies with its Naming Rights and Sponsorship policy once approved by Council for consideration for in the 2022/23 SoIs.

 

Compliant with RMA measures

This is not considered a performance measure but rather a routine compliance matter.  It is expected that all companies comply with relevant legislation.

Aurora Energy

Update KPIs etc now the CCP has been finalised

The final SoI presented in June will have updated financial forecasts and KPIs where impacted by the CPP

 

Sponsorship

See comment above 

 

Promote uptake of EVs

Aurora Energy will include the following measure: Identify opportunities to transition the pool fleet to EVs where possible and set transition targets.

 

SAIDI/SAIFI Measures

These are always linked to the current Commerce Commission limits.  They will be updated to reflect the impact of the CPP.

 

Streamline process for connections

Since submission of the draft SoI, this measure has been completed.  In its place the final SoI will include a new performance measure(s) based on the requirements of the CPP.


City Forests

Change in annual harvest volumes

This change is to provide greater flexibility in the current volatile market environment.  The long-term sustainable yield remains unchanged.

 

Sponsorship

See comment above.

DIAL

Bird Strike Measure

Will be reinstated in the final SoI

 

Diversion of waste

See feedback response to DCHL para 7

 

Return on shareholder capital

This will be included in the final SoI

DSPL

Asset Management Plan review

A date will be included in the final SoI

DMVL

Visitor marginal direct spend target

No change in target from previous year

 

ROS Satisfaction

New Measure to be included in final SoI: Achieve 85% ratepayer satisfaction with Forsyth Barr Stadium in the Dunedin City Council’s Residents’ Opinion survey, noting that the ROS measures may be subject to change as part of a review of levels of service.

 

Achieve 90% retention rate for member renewals

This target was lowered to 75% to reflect the post-Covid19 environment.

 

Waste Minimisation

See feedback response to DCHL para 7

 

Reduce the use of single use plastics

DVML don’t use single use plastics.  Drinking vessels are compostable, however there is currently no commercial outlet to on-process these. DVML are currently looking at alternatives and a timeframe will be included as part of the updated SoI.

 

7          Feedback to the DCHL Group will include the following:

Group Company Objectives – request companies include in their 2021/22 statements of intent under objectives “As a DCC Group company [Company Name] aims to contribute to the DCC’s strategic framework and achievement of city objectives”.

Carbon Neutrality – request companies establish an emissions reduction strategy and associated targets for inclusion in the 2022/23 statements of intent.

Waste Minimisation – request companies establish a waste reduction/diversion strategy and associated targets for inclusion in the 2022/23 statements of intent.

Sponsorship Policy – the Council is in the process of developing a Naming Rights and Sponsorship policy.  Once approved by Council, this will be shared with Group companies for consideration in their 2022/23 statements of intent.

OPTIONS

8          Not applicable.

NEXT STEPS

9          If Council approves the response on the draft 2021/22 Statements of Intents for Dunedin City Holdings group companies, it will be sent to DCHL.

10        If Council does not approve the response, no further action is required.

11        Final SOIs will be presented to Council in June 2021 for consideration.

 

Signatories

Author:

Gavin Logie - Acting General Manager Finance

Authoriser:

Sandy Graham - Chief Executive Officer

Attachments

 

Title

Page

a

Response letter on the draft 2021/22 SoI for DCHL

252

 

SUMMARY OF CONSIDERATIONS

Fit with purpose of Local Government

This report relates to providing local infrastructure, public services and regulatory functions for the community.

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

 

Group company SOIs take Council’s Strategic Framework, and the themes of Council’s Letter of Expectation to DCHL into account.

Māori Impact Statement

There are no known impacts for tangata whenua.

Sustainability

Some measures in the SoIs relate to sustainability outcomes.

LTP/Annual Plan / Financial Strategy /Infrastructure Strategy

The financial forecasts within the DCHL SoI shows annual levels of interest ($5.9m) and dividend ($Nil) payable to DCC that are consistent with the DCC 10 year plan.

Financial considerations

Refer “LTP/Annual Plan/Financial Strategy/Infrastructure Strategy” section above.  Also note that final projections (including group debt) will be updated prior to finalisation of the SoIs.

Significance

This matter is considered low in terms of Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy.

Engagement – external

There has been no external engagement outside of DCHL Group.

Engagement - internal

This report includes elected member feedback on the draft SOIs.

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 implications for Community Boards.

 


Council

25 May 2021

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Council

25 May 2021

 

 

Terms of Reference for the Review of the DCC Waikouaiti, Karitane and Hawksbury Village Water Response

Department: Executive Leadership Team

 

 

 

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1          This report details the Terms of Reference (TOR) for the internal review of the DCC response to the lead levels detected in the water supply to Karitane, Waikouaiti and Hawksbury Village.

RECOMMENDATIONS

That the Council:

a)     Approves, with or without amendment, the Terms of Reference for the review of the DCC Waikouaiti, Karitane and Hawksbury Village water response.

 

BACKGROUND

2          A do not drink notice was issued for the Waikouaiti, Karitane and Hawksbury Village area on Tuesday, 2 February 2021 due to elevated lead readings in testing samples.  The Mayor indicated at the first public meeting on 5 February 2021 that while the initial focus would be on the health and well-being of the community and resolving the issue, an independent review would be undertaken at the appropriate time.

3          Subsequently, the Minister of Health (MOH) initiated a review of the public health response which was completed on 16 April 2021.

DISCUSSION

4          Since the MOH review was completed, work has continued to identify the source of the lead contamination. The outcome of that work will be known over coming weeks.

5          Alongside that work, staff from DCC and Public Health South have been working on a plan to restore the water supply to the affected communities.  The plan is for this to occur around the end of June but that will require all parties to be confident that the restoration of the supply does not present any risks for the communities.

6          Once the water supply is restored, it is proposed that the internal review commence.

7          The review will consider the incident from the beginning, when the decision was made to test the water for asset management purposes, to the end, and include both the response aspects and the restoration of supply.

8          The TOR are attached for consideration.

NEXT STEPS

9          An independent reviewer (or reviewers) will be appointed to conduct the review as per the TOR.  That appointment will be subject to a further report to Council in either June or July depending on when the water supply is restarted. The review will then begin, and the outcome will be reported back publicly to Council once it has been completed.

 

Signatories

Author:

Sandy Graham - Chief Executive Officer

Authoriser:

Sandy Graham - Chief Executive Officer

Attachments

 

Title

Page

a

Proposed Terms of Reference for the review of the DCC Waikouaiti, Karitane and Hawksbury Village Water Response

258

 

SUMMARY OF CONSIDERATIONS

 

Fit with purpose of Local Government

This decision promotes the social 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

 

 

Māori Impact Statement

Mana whenua were affected by the disruption and the review will potentially cover areas that are of interest to them.

Sustainability

The provision of safe drinking water in a sustainable way underpins the need for a review.

LTP/Annual Plan / Financial Strategy /Infrastructure Strategy

There are no implications.

Financial considerations

The cost of the review will be met from 3 Waters budgets.

Significance

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

Engagement – external

There has been no external engagement about the content of the Terms of Reference.

Engagement – internal

There has been engagement between Council departments.

Risks: Legal / Health and Safety etc.

There are no identified risks with this decision.

Conflict of Interest

There is no known conflicts of interest.

Community Boards

The Waikouaiti Coast Community Board will be involved in the review.

 

 


Council

25 May 2021

 

PDF Creator


Council

25 May 2021

 

 

Adoption of the Litter Compliance Policy 2020

Department: Waste and Environmental Solutions

 

 

 

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1          The purpose of this report is to recommend Council adopt the updated Litter Compliance Policy 2020.

RECOMMENDATIONS

That the Council:

a)     Approves the proposed Litter Compliance Policy 2020.

b)     Revokes the Litter Compliance Policy 2018.

 

 

BACKGROUND

2          The Litter Compliance Policy 2018 (LCP) was adopted by Council on 1 May 2018 following a 14-day public notification period.

3          In response to Council’s commitment to The Sophia Charter, the Litter Compliance Policy was revised and updated to provide for a greater range of infringement provisions set out in the Litter Act 1979 (The Act).

4          The Litter Act provides that a Council may adopt infringement provisions for breaches of the Act only after it has given at least 14-days’ notice of its intention to do so.

5          On 16 November 2020 the Infrastructure Services Committee approved the updated Litter Compliance Policy 2020 (Attachment A) for a 14-day public notification period.

6          The Litter Compliance Policy 2020 was publicly notified from 24 March to 6 April 2021.

DISCUSSION

7          The key changes proposed in the updated Litter Compliance Policy were to clearly enable Litter Control Officers to issue infringement notices for the following offences:

a)         Failing to comply with a notice requiring an occupier of private land to clear litter (Litter Act 1979, Section 10);

b)        Deposit of litter in a public place or on private land (Litter Act 1979, Section 15); and

c)         Willful breaking of bottles or glass (Litter Act 1979, Section 16).

8          DCC Litter Control Officers will assess the appropriate enforcement action which could range from education to an infringement notice being issued. The DCC will still have the ability to pursue a serious offence to prosecution in the District Court.

9          The updated Litter Compliance Policy was publicly notified via the Dunedin City Council website, social media and the Otago Daily Times.

10        A total of 20 items of feedback were received. There were 19 submissions via the on-line feedback form (summarised in Attachment B), plus 1 written submission from Spokes Dunedin (Attachment C). All submissions supported the updated Litter Compliance Policy.

OPTIONS Option One – Recommended Option

11        Council approves the Litter Compliance Policy 2020, including litter offences and infringement fees, for adoption.

Advantages

·        The amended policy will allow Council to respond appropriately to littering or illegal dumping incidents, including hazardous litter, and the prevention of rubbish stockpiling.

·        The amended policy supports Council’s commitment to the Sophia Charter.

Disadvantages

·        None identified

Option Two – Status Quo

12        Council does not approve the Litter Compliance Policy 2020, including litter offences and infringement fees, for adoption.

Advantages

·        None identified

Disadvantages

·        The existing policy will remain in force limiting Council ability to respond with appropriate enforcement action to littering or illegal dumping incidents, including hazardous litter, and the prevention of rubbish stockpiling.

·        Does not support Council’s commitment to The Sophia Charter.

NEXT STEPS

13        If the Council approves the recommended option, duly authorised staff will administer litter compliance in accordance with updated Litter Compliance Policy 2020.

 

Signatories

Author:

Chris Henderson - Group Manager Waste and Environmental Solutions

Authoriser:

Simon Drew - General Manager Infrastructure & Development

Attachments

 

Title

Page

a

Litter Compliance Policy 2020

264

b

Summary of feedback received

269

c

Submission from Spokes Dunedin

271

 

SUMMARY OF CONSIDERATIONS

 

Fit with purpose of Local Government

This decision promotes the social 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

 

The objective of the Litter Compliance Policy is to keep Dunedin’s communities and environment free from litter and illegal dumping, ensuring Dunedin remains one of the world’s great small cities.

 

Māori Impact Statement

This Policy supports the principle of Kaitiakitaka in partnership with Kāi Tahu in their inherited role as kaitiaki.

 

Sustainability

The Proposed Litter Compliance Policy will enable appropriate enforcement action to be taken for breaches of the Litter Act 1979 in respect of littering and illegal dumping events. The Policy aims to protect people and the environment from harm.

 

LTP/Annual Plan / Financial Strategy /Infrastructure Strategy

There are no LTP/Annual Plan / Financial Strategy /Infrastructure Strategy implications.

 

Financial considerations

There are no financial considerations.

 

Significance

This decision is considered low in terms of the Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy.

 

Engagement – external

The amended Litter Compliance Policy was publicly notified for consultation through the 14-day public notice period.

 

Engagement - internal

Internal engagement has occurred with the Waste and Environmental Solutions, In-House Legal Services and Environmental Health teams.

 

Risks: Legal / Health and Safety etc.

There are no identified risks.

 

Conflict of Interest

No conflicts of interest have been identified.

 

Community Boards

Community Boards were notified of the 14-day public notice period.

There are no implications for Community Boards.

 

 

 


Council

25 May 2021

 

 

1                Litter Compliance policy

Approved by:

Infrastructure Services Committee

Sponsor:

General Manager Infrastructure and Networks

Department responsible:

Waste and Environmental Solutions

Date approved:

25 May 2021

Reviewed:

 

Next review date:

1 July 2024

DOC ID:

 

INTRODUCTION

This policy provides guidance to warranted Litter Control Officers on issuing infringement notices under the Litter Act 1979 (the Litter Act or Act). It defines what is meant by litter and provides a graduated level of litter for infringement purposes, provides a fee schedule for infringements and outlines the rights of the Council in litter removal. This Litter Compliance Policy (LCP) replaces any preceding Litter Policy.

Purpose

The key strategic outcome for this policy is to ensure Dunedin’s people and environment remain protected from harm by minimising the negative effects of littering and illegal dumping/fly tipping.

Scope

The Litter Act is the primary legislation for litter control in New Zealand and provides provisions for Territorial Authorities to deal with litter issues. Littering includes, amongst other things, the dropping of litter, litter escaping from a vehicle or trailer, and illegal dumping.

 

The LCP outlines the the requirement of the legislation, defines how the Council interprets sections of the Litter Act, the infringement process, and procedure on issuing notices to clear litter.

 

The LCP will apply in public places within the Dunedin City Council’s (DCC’s) control and on private land with the consent of the occupier. 

 

This LCP addresses litter offences and infringement only. Some waste related issues of non-compliance that are not be covered by this policy e.g. contamination of recycling bins, which is being managed via a kerbside mixed recycling bin inspection programme.


 

Statutory Framework

The Litter Act provides for the issuing of infringement notices up to a maximum of $400 for any offence as specified under Section 13(4) of the Act.

In accordance with sections 13 and 14 of the Act, the DCC has adopted infringements in respect of the following offences:

 

·    Deposit of Litter in a public place or on private land (section 15)

 

·    Wilful breaking of bottles or glass (section 16)

 

·    Failure to comply with a Notice (section 10)

 

The Act also enables the DCC to issue notices to occupiers of private land to clear litter (section 10)

Definitions

For the purposes of this policy litter is defined under two categories:

 

Litter: - which has the same definition as the Litter Act, and,

Hazardous Litter – which is litter of such a nature as is likely to endanger any person or cause physical injury, disease or infection to any person. This includes bottles whether it is broken or not, glass, articles containing glass, sharp or jagged material, or any substance of a toxic or poisonous nature (in accordance with S15(2) of the Act).

Words not defined in this Policy shall have the same definition as the Litter Act.

CONTENT

2                 

1.         Infringement notices

 

1.1.     Officers authorised to issue infringements

3                 

1.1.1.   Only a Litter Control Officer, warranted under section 5 of the Litter Act is authorised to issue infringement notices within Dunedin City.

 

1.2.     When to issue infringement notices

4                 

1.2.1.   Litter Control Officers are to use their professional judgement and discretion in deciding whether to issue an infringement notice.

 

1.2.2.   Factors influencing the choice of enforcement response used by the DCC may include the type and nature of infringement, the impact and significance of harm on the environment and/or wider community, and the frequency of incident.

 

1.2.3.   Measures such as education, warnings and infringement notices, and prosecutions may be used by the DCC in respect of breaches of the Act.

 

1.2.4.   Infringement notices can be issued if a littering offence has been observed by a Litter Control Officer, or if a Litter Control Officer has investigated and has reasonable cause to believe an individual is responsible for the offence and has not rectified the matter.

a)      

1.2.5.   An infringement notice can be issued if a notice to clear litter has not been compiled with, either by time or compliance.

b)      

1.2.6.   An infringement notice can be issued if litter deposited is likely to endanger any person or cause physical injury, disease or infection.

c)       

1.2.7.   An infringement notice can be issued for the wilful breaking of glass.

d)      

1.2.8.   Every person has the right to seek a review of their infringement notice in writing; this is to be addressed to the Manager of Waste and Environmental Solutions. The Manager will review the infringement and will decide if the infringement stands or is waived.

e)      

1.2.9.   As per the Summary Proceedings Act 1957 any non-payment of an infringement which has not been waived, will be sent to the District Court for enforcement.

f)       

1.2.10.      Every person has the right to defend the infringement at the District Court.

g)      

2.         Litter Offences:

 

5                The following shall also be deemed to be a litter offence at section 15 of the Act.  

 

2.1.        Depositing of litter waste:

6                 

2.1.1.   Depositing household or commercial waste in public litter bins or public place recycling bins.

 

2.1.2.   The DCC may assess the medium or large-scale deposit of waste as illegal dumping (also known as fly tipping) where the intent to deposit litter unlawfully is established.

 

2.1.3.   Deposited garden waste will be treated as a medium or large-scale litter offence as this type of waste may spread noxious weeds or create a fire risk.

 

2.1.4.   Litter that has not been properly prepared for transportation and is spilt from a moving vehicle.

 

2.2.                  Failure to comply with municipal rubbish collection requirements:

7                 

2.2.1.   Use of rubbish bags other than the DCC’s official black plastic rubbish bags.

 

2.2.2.   Rubbish bags put out for collection before 3.00 pm or after 6.00 pm in the Central Business District.

 

2.2.3.   Any cardboard put out for collection in the Central Business District which:

2.2.3.1.       Is not flattened, tied, taped or otherwise secured to avoid spillage; or

2.2.3.2.       Exceeds 1 meter in length in any direction; or

2.2.3.3.       Is not placed at a designated cardboard collection point; or

2.2.3.4.       Is left in any other condition unsuitable for collection.

 

2.3.                  Private land with litter

2.3.1.                        A Litter Control Officer may serve any occupier of any private land or any land         vested in or controlled by the Crown or any local authority, a written notice     requiring the occupier to:

2.3.1.1.       Clear away, or remove litter from the premises; or

2.3.1.2.       To clean up; or

2.3.1.3.       To screen, cover or otherwise obscure the litter from view.

2.3.2.                        The written notice will specify a timeframe for action.

2.3.3.                        Action taken by the occupier must be completed to the satisfaction of the Officer issuing the notice.

2.3.4.                        An Officer is able to extend the time specified on a notice, if the occupier has            reasonably been prevented from completing the work within the time specified.

2.3.5.               Objection process for a notice to clear litter (occupier of private land):

2.3.5.1.       People receiving a notice under subsection 10 (1) of the Act, may object                                 to the            requirement of the notice in writing within 14 days after receipt                        on the grounds that those requirements are unreasonable.

2.3.5.2.       Objections are to be made in writing to the DCC, and a formal hearing                                     will be scheduled, and an objector is entitled to be present and heard.

2.3.5.3.       The Council after hearing an objection will issue a decision that upholds,                    changes, or cancels the notice and will provide the objector with a                               written notice of its decision.

 

3.         Types of enforcement response

 

3.1.       Education & Warnings

3.1.1.                        Educational material will be supplied in the case of a minor first offence.

3.1.2.                        Warnings may be issued at the discretion of a Litter Control Officer or Litter              Warden.

          

3.2.     Infringement

3.2.1.                        The DCC may issue an infringement notice with the appropriate fee as specified      in            Table 1.

3.2.2.                        An infringement notice may be issued if a notice to clear, issued under section 10 of the Act, is not compiled with.

3.2.3.                        The DCC may recover the costs of clean-up and any associated remedial work          from the offender in addition to any infringement fees payable.

3.2.4.                        Infringement notices may not be issued when an offender cleans up the litter          when requested to do so by a Litter Control Officer on the first request.

3.2.5.                        Where an offence fits more than one descriptor in Table 1, the higher             infringement penalty will apply.

3.2.6.                        Where repeat offending for the same offence occurs within a 12-month period,      the            higher infringement penalty will apply.

 

Prosecution

3.2.7.                        The DCC reserves the right to prosecute offenders in respect of any breaches of      the             Litter Act 1979 and may do so in combination with enforcement under any other applicable legislation.

 

Table 1: Schedule of Littering Offences and Infringement Fees

h)         

i)         LITTERING OFFENCES AND INFRINGEMENT FEES

j)          

k)        Infringement

l)         First Offence

m)      Second or Subsequent Offence

n)        Household rubbish deposited in public litter bins or public space recycling bins will be treated as litter.

o)         $100

p)        $400

q)        A single item of litter, or less than 1 litre, left in a public space, or on private land without the occupier’s consent

r)         $100

s)         $400

t)         Litter, of more than 1 litre and less than or equal to 40 litres*

u)        $150

v)         $400

w)       Litter, or more than 40 litres and less than 240 litres**

x)         $250

y)         $400

z)        Litter, of more than 240 litres, left in a public space, or on private land without the occupier’s consent***

aa)      $400

bb)      $400

cc)      Dangerous litter or offensive litter left in a public place, or on private land, without the occupier’s consent

dd)      $400

ee)      $400

8            

9                         * Single item or small scale litter offence i.e. less than the volume of blue glass recycling     bin

**  Medium scale litter offence i.e. less than the volume of a yellow-lidded kerbside mixed recycling bin

***           Large scale litter offence, in these cases the Litter Control Officer will make a judgement as to whether to apply a fine or pursue a prosecution through the courts.

 

 

Relevant Legislation:

Litter Act 1979

Summary Proceedings Act 1957

Associated Documents:

Litter Infringement Notice

 


Council

25 May 2021

 

Litter Compliance Policy – Summary of E-mail feedback received

Submission No.

In support (Yes/No)

Comments

811298

Yes

More needs to be done as the street waste is really bad.

811299

Yes

We manage alot of properties in North Dunedin and have the constant issue of piles of rubbish at properties. Being either from tenants/occupiers, neighbours and surrounding, especially in 'student complexes'. The onous is currently on the landlord/property manager and keep having to remove rubbish at the landlord cost is an ongoing cycle.

811307

Yes

The cost of picking up after them seems like it could be used better elsewhere.

811308

Yes

Dunedin North eg Campus area is disgusting in parts. Black rubbish bags are too expensive as are dump fees.

811315

Yes

Litter on public footpaths, streets, and on private property is a HUGE problem in Dunedin. More enforcement, and higher penalties must happen

811388

Yes

Disgusted at amt of broken glass, squashed cans, bin rubbish on pavements and in gutters/road in north end of George St and student area

811584

Yes

Nth dunedin is a disgrace, something needs to be done.

811852

Yes

Littering is a blight on NZ generally. We live in an amazing part of the world and need to protect it and keep it clean and litter free.

812154

Yes

North Dunedin needs work.

812281

Yes

Yes, upper Cargill St is a mixed section of student rentals and regular residential. Sick and tired of broken glass littering the street and student neighbours creating pest attracting waste and a messy street.

812372

Yes

Distress & safety concerns for myself & others in North Dunedin due to large amounts of rubbish & broken glass.

812421

Yes

The risks associated with the types of litter compliance breaches have dangerous implications to the public and the city, and some of these are driven by a perceived cost avoidance. Therefore, the publicised stick of additional cost is something I support

812598

Yes

Glass on footpaths and cycleways is dangerous and cuases expensive punctures. Certain properties and groups cause constant issues with extreme littering and glass shards that the dcc needs stronger tools to deal with. Education does not seem to work. Litter and broken glass on the streets contribute to the unsafe and run-down appearance of the tertiary district. Applying the policy to private land where litter is kept will hopefully prevent persons from using their property as an unofficial dump. I hope this legislation will also apply to stockpiling old vehicles on private property.

812661

Yes

I use the streets in North Dunedin frequently both on foot and cycling. The broken glass has worsened and is dangerous and unnecessary. I often pick up bottles left in the roadside to avoid them being shattered. There needs to be consequences.

812675

Yes

Sick and tired of intentionally broken glass bottles. Dumping of rubbish all over North Dunedin. Frontage of houses/rentals are an absolute disgrace. I feel embarrassed for the tourists and anyone visiting or passing through Dunedin. Something has to be done. Nowhere else in New Zealand is like this! It is a disgrace.

812728

Yes

I am concerned by the amount of broken glass along the length of Park Street. A $400 fine for hazardous littering seems appropriate.

812775

Yes

I am disappointed by the amount of litter that I see in the parts of Dunedin that I am familiar with, particularly some parts of the central city, the section of Queens Drive along which I regularly ride a bike and much of the student quarter in North Dunedin. I have been pushing for action on this for many years and have felt frustrated that so little has improved over that interval. I support any move that has even the slightest hope of dealing with the litter problem (and am reasonably certain that the current proposal will have as little effect as anything that has gone before). Personally, I'd be supportive of stronger actions, including punitive ones that, even if threatened, would be severe enough to make compliance likely.

812857

Yes

it goes part way to helping people, but where is the education system that teaches business what products to use and people about what impact littering has on the environment?

813288

Yes

Too much broken glass on the roads

 


Council

25 May 2021

 

 

 

3 April 2021

 

Purposively smashed glass is a massive issue throughout Ōtepoti Dunedin and one that has been publicly broached on numerous occasions.[1] Yet, no real action has been taken to address it, despite the fact that broken glass is not simply a nuisance, but of serious concern in a number of ways. Firstly, it is a health hazard: there is a very real danger of pedestrians and cyclists falling and hurting themselves on the shards, as well as animals wounding their feet. In 2017, pre-school children from the Otago University Childcare Association even wrote letters to the flats along and around Castle Street in which they asked students occupying them to stop smashing glass on the streets because they were afraid of tripping and being injured.[2] Members of the public have also reported to Spokes Dunedin of having to cycle into the road to avoid riding over glass. Cyclists already have to be aware of other road users and pedestrians: smashed glass in cycleways and on the road thereby becomes an additional hazard, not simply an inconvenience.

 

Secondly, it makes certain areas of the city hostile. For instance, cyclists have described bypassing certain areas to avoid getting a puncture. One member of the public described to Spokes Dunedin how they know of children and parents who will refrain from walking down certain streets all together because they feel uncomfortable. Even tourists have commented on the state of certain areas of the city.[3] We also know of cases in which glass bottles have been used as weapons and purposefully thrown at people. Such areas should not exist in Ōtepoti Dunedin. Purposefully smashing glass is clearly not just an anti-social behaviour, but leads to inhospitable neighbourhoods, which impacts all members of a community.

 

Thirdly, one of the reasons given by members of the public as to why they dislike riding their bicycle or even chose not to cycle in Ōtepoti Dunedin is the amount of smashed glass on the roads and in the cycleways. Cycling infrastructure has been put in place throughout the city, but, once strewn with glass shards, it is no longer fit for purpose. If the DCC is keen to present cycling as a real option, this issue clearly needs to be properly addressed.

 

However, it is not simply a case of cleaning up more regularly and throughout the city, as opposed to certain areas: there needs to be real consequences for committing this act in the first place, as has happened in the case of couch burning. Couch burning was once considered part of the “student culture”: now that the university has introduced harsher punishments, there has been a massive decline in this activity.[4]

Purposefully smashing glass is akin to couch burning: it is a dangerous, anti-social behaviour. Yet, it is accepted as part of the student culture in Ōtepoti Dunedin, even though it is deemed an offence under the Litter Act 1979, section 16. One of the main issues appears to be that very little action is taken against the perpetrators: despite its blatant occurrence throughout the city, from 24 March 2018 to 24 March 2021, only one arrest was recorded under the Litter Act for wilfully breaking glass in a public place according to the Police Data Base. Over the same period, a number of people are recorded as being charged with wilful damage, some of whom may have been responsible for breaking glass in a public place; however, there is only the one arrest under the Litter Act. And, according to the proctor’s Annual Code of Conduct Reference Group Report, only 24 people were caught for purposefully breaking glass in 2020.

 

The reasoning given by both the University of Otago’s proctor and Community Law Otago was that there are simply too many people purposefully smashing glass for it to be taken seriously by either the university or the police. Which leaves us in a Catch 22 situation: too many people are committing this offence for it to be properly addressed, and so too many people continue to commit it.

 

The excuse that this offence is too prevalent is unacceptable, and essentially condones this form of anti-social behaviour. This review of the Litter Compliance Policy is an opportunity to ensure that purposefully smashing glass is no longer condoned, but taken as a serious offence with real consequences. As the DCC states, “The purpose of the Litter Compliance Policy is to ensure Dunedin’s people and environment remain protected from harm by minimising the negative effects of littering and illegal dumping/fly tipping.” Smashed glass through the streets of Ōtepoti Dunedin clearly has negative effects not just for cyclists, but the city as a whole, and it is high time that this issue was given the attention it deserves.

 

Yours sincerely,

 

 

Shape

Description automatically generated with medium confidence

Katharine Cresswell Riol – Chairperson, Spokes Dunedin

 

A picture containing sky, outdoor

Description automatically generated

Dr. Devonia Kruimer – Secretary, Spokes Dunedin

 

photo.JPG

Jon Dean – Treasurer, Spokes Dunedin

 


Council

25 May 2021

 

 

Regulatory Subcommittee Recommendation on Dangerous and Insanitary Buildings Policy Review

Department: Civic

 

 

 

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1          This report presents the recommendations of the Regulatory Subcommittee (the Subcommittee) on the review of the Dangerous and Insanitary Buildings Policy (the Policy). This follows consideration of one submission received.

2          The Subcommittee recommends amending the existing Policy as proposed with an additional amendment for clarification.

3          See Attachment A for the proposed Policy and Attachment B for tracked changes to the existing Policy.

RECOMMENDATIONS

That the Council:

a)     Notes that the Regulatory Subcommittee has considered the submission on the Dangerous and Insanitary Buildings Policy review.

b)     Approves the amended Dangerous, Insanitary and Affected Buildings Policy, as shown in Attachment A.

 

BACKGROUND

Legislation

4          Section 131 of the Building Act 2004 (the Act) requires territorial authorities to adopt a policy on dangerous and insanitary buildings within its district. The policy must state:

·        The approach that Dunedin City Council will take in performing its functions under the Act

·        Its priorities in performing these functions and

·        How the policy will apply to heritage buildings.

5          Policies must be reviewed within five years of the policy being adopted and then at intervals of not more than five years. A policy does not cease to have effect because it is due for review or being reviewed.

6          The special consultative procedure must be used if the policy is amended or replaced.

7          The Building Amendment Act 2013 also requires that policies on dangerous and insanitary buildings take into account affected buildings. An affected building is one that is adjacent, adjoining or nearby a dangerous building or dangerous dam.

Policy history

8          In 2018, the Council reviewed the Policy. Inadvertently, affected buildings were not included as part of that review.

DISCUSSION

Policy review

9          The Policy is being reviewed early with a view to include ‘affected’ buildings, as required by the Act. An affected building is one that is adjacent, adjoining or nearby a dangerous building or dangerous dam. Minor clarification of wording was also proposed in relation to Council responsibilities for dangerous, insanitary and affected buildings.

Community engagement

10        The special consultative procedure was used for the policy review, as required by the Act. Formal consultation took place from 25 January - 26 February 2021.

11        Consultation included information on the Dunedin City Council website and in the Otago Daily Times noticeboard.

Results of consultation

10        One submission was received which did not agree with the proposed Dangerous, Insanitary and Affected Buildings Policy. The submitter did not wish to be heard.

General support

11        The submission form asked: Overall, do you agree with the proposed Dangerous, Insanitary and Affected Buildings Policy? and Why/Why not?  The one submitter did not agree and would like to see firmer action on the cleaning up of dangerous and insanitary sites.

General comments

12        The submission form asked: Do you have any other comments about the proposed Dangerous, Insanitary and Affected Buildings Policy? The submitter suggested including timeframes for action, and that demolition by neglect should be dealt with in a timely manner.

Staff comments

13        The issues of demolition by neglect or cleaning up of sites are issues outside the scope of this Policy and the Act. The Council provides other avenues to discourage demolition by neglect e.g. heritage grants. Depending on the circumstances, other legislation or policies may be more appropriate to manage these issues e.g. the Health Act.

14        Case law has been clear that the definition of what is ‘dangerous’ and/or ‘insanitary’ has a high threshold. For example, a simple tarpaulin may stop a building with a leaking roof being classed as insanitary and on private land, with no other building affected, a danger can be mitigated through a barrier fence.

Subcommittee deliberations

12        The Subcommittee met on 8 April 2021 to consider the submission and deliberate on the Policy review.

13        The Subcommittee notes the scope of the Policy and the Act and agrees with proposed changes with an additional wording amendment. In section 1.3 of the proposed policy, it is recommended to replace the words ‘may agree’ with ‘will seek’ in relation to meeting with owners to discuss proposals to address an issue with a dangerous, insanitary or affected building. This clarifies the intention of the Council to meet and discuss proposals where possible.

14        The issue of demolition by neglect was discussed and it is acknowledged that addressing this is outside the scope of this Policy and the provisions of the Act.

Subcommittee recommendations

15        The Subcommittee passed the following resolutions:

Moved (Cr Lee Vandervis/Cr Andrew Whiley):

That the Subcommittee:

 

Amends the wording in the first two sentences of Section 1.3 of the proposed Dangerous, Insanitary and Affected Buildings Policy as follows in bold:

Before exercising these powers, the Council will seek to meet with owners to discuss proposals to address the issue.  The Council will also seek to meet with owners to discuss proposals to comply with a notice following issue of a formal notice.

Motion carried (RSCCC/2021/001)

Moved (Cr Lee Vandervis/Cr Andrew Whiley):

That the Subcommittee:  

a)     Recommends that Council adopts the proposed Dangerous, Insanitary and Affected Buildings Policy as amended.

Motion carried (RSCCC/2021/002)

 

16        See Attachment C for minutes of the Subcommittee deliberations.

OPTIONS

17        Options are to accept the Subcommittee recommendations or to refer the Policy back to the Subcommittee for further consideration.

Option One – Accept recommendations of the Subcommittee (Recommended Option)

18        This option is to approve the amended Policy, as described.

Advantages

·        Meets requirements of the Act

·        Clarifies requirements of the Policy.

Disadvantages

·        No identified disadvantages

Option Two – Refer the Policy back to the Subcommittee for consideration

19        If the Council does not accept the recommendations of the Subcommittee, this option is for the matter to be referred back to the Subcommittee for further consideration.

Advantages

·        The Subcommittee has further opportunity to consider changes to the Policy.

Disadvantages

·        Does not meet requirements of the Act

·        Opportunity to clarify requirements may be lost.

NEXT STEPS

20        If the Council accepts the Subcommittee recommendations, the amended Policy will be sent to the Chief Executive of the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment, as required by the Act. The Dunedin City Council website and internal systems will also be updated to reflect the amended Policy.

 

Signatories

Authoriser:

Andrew Whiley - Chairperson, Regulatory Subcommittee

Attachments

 

Title

Page

 

a

Proposed Dangerous, Insanitary and Affected Buildings Policy

279

 

b

Tracked changes to existing Dangerous and Insanitary Buildings Policy

283

 

c

Minutes of Deliberations on Dangerous and Insanitary Buildings Policy Review

287

 

 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, 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

 

This Policy review contributes to the priorities of healthy and safe people within the Social Wellbeing Strategy; and liveable city within the Spatial Plan.

Māori Impact Statement

There are no specific impacts for tangata whenua.

Sustainability

There are no specific implications for sustainability.

LTP/Annual Plan / Financial Strategy /Infrastructure Strategy

There are no implications for these documents.

Financial considerations

There are no financial implications.

Significance

This decision is considered low in terms of the Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy.

Engagement – external

The special consultative procedure was used to review this Policy.

Engagement - internal

There has been internal engagement with Governance and Customer and Regulatory Services staff.

Risks: Legal / Health and Safety etc.

If the Council does not include affected buildings within this policy, the Council will be in breach of the Act.

Conflict of Interest

There is no known conflict of interest.

Community Boards

There are no specific implications for Community Boards.

 

 


Council

25 May 2021

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Council

25 May 2021

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Council

25 May 2021

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Council

25 May 2021

 

 

Submission to Gambling Commission on Review of Charitable Trust Licence Conditions for Casinos

Department: Customer and Regulatory Services

 

 

 

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1          This report seeks approval of a Dunedin City Council (DCC) submission (Attachment A) to the Gambling Commission (the Commission) on its review of the charitable trust licence conditions attached to the venue licences for six casinos, one of which is in Dunedin.

RECOMMENDATIONS

That the Council:

a)     Approves the DCC submission, with any amendments, to the Gambling Commission on its review of the charitable trust licence conditions attached to the venue licences for casinos.

 

BACKGROUND

2          The Commission is seeking feedback on its review of the charitable trust licence conditions for the Auckland, Hamilton, Christchurch, Dunedin, Queenstown and Wharf Casinos.

3          The Commission considers it timely to review all licences as a group rather than leaving it to separate consideration on the renewal of conditions for each licence and is seeking feedback specifically on whether charitable trust conditions ought to be amended to align better with the purposes of the Gambling Act (the Act).

4          In the review, the commission will consider whether the licence conditions require amendment and, if so, it will propose specific amendments for further consultation.

5          Submissions are open to all parties and local authorities in each of the six casino areas have been invited to submit on the review.

6          Submissions close on Friday 11 June 2021.

Casino regulation

7          The charitable trust licence conditions relate to the level of funding that each casino agrees to provide to charitable trusts as part of the conditions for their licence. Conditions were imposed under the Casino Control Act 1990, when the venue licences were first issued by the Commission’s predecessor body.

8          The Commission suggests that the source of charitable trust provision appears to be related to securing competitive advantage over other applicants rather than any statutory requirement that money from gambling benefit the community. Original conditions captured commitments made in successful applications and were unique to each venue.

9          Conditions across the six venues vary markedly and the Commission suggests they may not align well with the purpose of the Gambling Act which differs materially from that of the Casino Control Act. Conditions have remained largely unamended since they were first imposed when the original venue licence was granted.

10        For example, Dunedin Casino agrees to pay no less than $52,000 per year to an ‘independent’ charitable trust that includes funding treatment of problem gambling, as well as 1% of gaming machine turnover (with a maximum of $110,000) a year for community and sports funding in the community. Auckland casino agrees to pay not less than 0.7% of the Casino Win (all forms of gambling), never to be less than $500,000. Without knowing the turnover for each casino, it is difficult to know the extent to which casinos meet or exceed their charitable trust licence conditions. See Table 1 for the licence conditions relating to charitable trust payments for each casino.

Table 1: Casino licence conditions relating to charitable trust payments

Casino

Licence conditions – payments to charitable trusts

Auckland casino

Not less than 0.7% of Casino Win never to be less than $500,000 per annum.

Hamilton casino

Not less than 1.5% of revenue from the operation of the casino (GST exclusive) before gaming tax, per annum.

Christchurch casino

Not less than 2.5% of net profit after tax from onsite businesses of the casino or $250,000 per annum, whichever is the greater.

Dunedin casino

Not less than $52,000 per year to charitable trust that includes funding treatment for problem gambling.

Also, 1% of the turnover of casino gambling machines (GST exclusive) with a maximum of $110,000 per annum for community and sports funding.

Queenstown casino

Not less than 2.5% of net profit from casino operations per annum or $100,000 per annum, whichever is the greater.

Wharf casino

First year – 20% of net profit after deducting tax and 15% of $3 million

Subsequent years – additional 1% of net profit, after deductions, until 30% is reached

Thereafter – 30% of net profit, after deductions.

 

11        Funding priorities of the charitable trusts are also variable. For example, the objectives of the Dunedin Casino Charitable Trust are to assist in the ‘relief of poverty, the advancement of education, the advancement of religion, the advancement of sports for the benefit of the community or any other charitable purpose deemed beneficial to the community by the Trustees’. SkyCity Hamilton Community Trust looks to fund organisations that assist with basic needs such as food, shelter, care, support and mental health and wellbeing. SkyCity Queenstown Casino Community Trust funding assists with arts, culture and entertainment including recognition and understanding of different cultures. It also supports educational programmes or research for life skills, treatment or counselling as well as programmes for the financial security of families.

12        The charitable trusts that receive casino funding were established by the casino licence holders. The deeds of trust allow the licence holders to exercise control over significant aspects of the trusts. One of the questions in the review is whether licence conditions should require contributions be made to new trusts that are fully independent from the licence holders.

13        See Attachment B for background information on this review provided by the Commission.

Gambling Act 2003

14        Part of the review is whether the casino licence conditions should align better with the purpose of the Act.

15        The Gambling Act 2003 legislates on gambling including gambling venues and electronic gambling machines (EGMs). The purpose of the Act is to:

·        control the growth of gambling

·        prevent and minimise harm from gambling, including problem gambling

·        authorise some gambling and prohibit the rest

·        facilitate responsible gambling

·        ensure the integrity and fairness of games

·        limit opportunities for crime or dishonesty associated with gambling and the conduct of gambling

·        ensure that money from gambling benefits the community and to

·        facilitate community involvement in decisions about the provision of gambling.

Role of territorial authorities

16        All territorial authorities are required by the Act to have a Gambling and TAB Venue Policy stating whether they would allow new non-casino gambling venues to be established within their districts and, if so, where they may be situated.

17        The DCC policy has been recently reviewed by the Council and has a sinking lid approach to the number of class 4 (non-casino gambling or ‘pokie’ machine) gambling venues and EGMs in Dunedin. The policy does not cover casinos and territorial authorities have no jurisdiction over casinos.

18        However, a number of submissions made during the review of the Gambling and TAB Venue Policy were concerned about gambling related harm in the community and the Council decided to retain its sinking lid approach in response to these concerns.

DISCUSSION

19        The draft DCC submission is supportive of the review by the Commission on charitable trust licence conditions for casinos.

20        The review asks whether licence conditions should be amended to align better with the purpose of the Act. The draft submission supports a review that will bring better alignment of casino charitable trust licence conditions with the purposes of the Act.

21        The review also asks whether consistency in the licence conditions across all six licences is desirable and the draft submission supports this, thus bringing greater consistency to the level of community funding provided.

22        On the review question around independence of charitable trusts, the DCC submits that licence conditions should require contribution to trusts that are fully independent from the licence holders. This is in place of current trusts that allow licence holders to exercise control over significant aspects of the trusts.

23        The review asks in some detail about whether percentage based contributions and minimum annual contributions should be retained and, if so, at what level. It is difficult to propose a specific percentage without greater understanding of the financial details of casinos. However, the DCC submits that a consistent percentage be applied across all casinos. This approach would bring greater consistency to the level of community funding and would also align better with requirements for the proceeds of other gambling forms. For example, Gambling Regulations (set under the Act) require class 4 (non-casino gambling or ‘pokie’ machine) gambling venues to return a minimum of 40 percent of GST exclusive gross proceeds to communities.

24        In making this submission, the DCC notes its recent review of its Gambling and TAB Venue Policy. Key themes from submitters were concern at gambling related harm in the community and also the reliance of community organisations on the proceeds from gambling.

25        As part of the Gambling and TAB Venue Policy review, the Council resolved to lobby central government, through Local Government New Zealand, for a more sustainable model of funding for community organisations to replace the reliance on gambling proceeds. While this is the Council’s preference, in the meantime the Council supports a more consistent and transparent approach to proceeds from gambling at casinos, as set out in the submission.

26        Greater consistency and alignment with the purposes of the Act also aligns well with the priority of healthy and safe people set out in the DCC Social Wellbeing Strategy.

OPTIONS

Option One – Recommended Option – Approve the DCC submission, with any amendments

 

27        Approve the DCC submission, with any amendments, to the Commission on the review of charitable trust conditions for casinos.

Advantages

·        Aligns with Council’s approach to minimise gambling related harm in the community and to uphold purposes of the Act through its sinking lid approach to the number of gambling venues and EGMs

·        Aligns with DCC Social Wellbeing Strategy priority of healthy and safe people

·        May lead to better alignment of casino control with the purposes of the Gambling Act

·        May lead to greater consistency of funding for charitable trust from gambling proceeds

Disadvantages

·        There are no identified disadvantages for this option.

Option Two – Do not submit

28        Do not submit to the Commission on the review of charitable trust conditions for casinos.

Advantages

·        There are no identified advantages for this option.

Disadvantages

·        Missed opportunity to show support for greater consistency of funding and alignment of casino control with the purposes of the Act and with the DCC Social Wellbeing Strategy priority of healthy and safe people.

NEXT STEPS

29        If the Council approves the DCC submission, with any amendments, it will be sent to the Commission by 11 June 2021.

 

Signatories

Author:

Kevin Mechen - Secretary, District Licensing Committee

Authoriser:

Simon Pickford - General Manager Community Services

Attachments

 

Title

Page

a

DCC submission to Gambling Commission

298

b

Gambling Commission information and letter to stakeholders

300

 

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 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 contributes to the healthy and safe priority of the Social Wellbeing Strategy.

Māori Impact Statement

Tangata whenua and Pacifica are disproportionately represented in gambling harm statistics.

Sustainability

There are no specific implications for sustainability.

LTP/Annual Plan / Financial Strategy /Infrastructure Strategy

There are no implications for these documents.

Financial considerations

There are no financial implications.

Significance

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

Engagement – external

There are been no external engagement.

Engagement - internal

There has been no internal engagement.

Risks: Legal / Health and Safety etc.

There are no identified risks.

Conflict of Interest

There is no known conflict of interest.

Community Boards

There are no specific implications for Community Boards.

 

 


Council

25 May 2021

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Council

25 May 2021

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Council

25 May 2021

 

 

DCC Submission on Building Code Update 2021 Proposals

Department: Property

 

 

 

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1          This report seeks approval of the draft Dunedin City Council (DCC) submission (Attachment A and B) to the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment on the Building Code update 2021 (link here and here).

 

RECOMMENDATIONS

That the Council:

a)     Approves the draft Dunedin City Council submission, with any amendments, to the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment on Building Code update 2021.

 

 

 

 

BACKGROUND

 

1          The Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment (MBIE) is consulting on changes that support higher-density housing and ensuring buildings are more energy efficient as part of the Building Code update programme.

2          The DCC has previously submitted on Building for Climate Change proposals (29 September 2020) and He Pou a Rangi - Climate Change Commission’s 2021 Draft Advice for Consultation (9 March 2021), which included improving the energy efficiency of buildings, alongside decarbonising the energy used for heating, hot water and cooking. 

DISCUSSION

3          The draft submission generally supports the proposals but has not responded to every proposal in the consultation document as some proposals are not applicable to the DCC.

4          The DCC supports the Government’s aim to make buildings warmer, drier, healthier and more energy efficient. Warmer, drier homes will bring health benefits for our residents, especially for the young, the elderly and those with respiratory illness. 

5          The DCC notes that the insulation materials required may be affected by current building materials shortages. The DCC also anticipates building consent authority officers will require additional training if the proposed changes are implemented, and encourages the Government to deliver appropriate and timely training.

OPTIONS

Option One (Recommended Option) – Approve the submission, with any amendments

6          Approve the DCC submission, with any amendments, to MBIE on Building Code update 2021.

Advantages

·    Enables the DCC to continue to support central government initiatives to make buildings warmer, drier, healthier and more energy efficient. 

Disadvantages

·    There are no identified disadvantages for this option.

Option Two – Do not approve the submission

7          Do not approve the DCC submission to MBIE on Building Code update 2021.

Advantages

·    There are no identified advantages for this option.

Disadvantages

·    Missed opportunity for the DCC to support central government initiatives to make buildings warmer, drier, healthier and more energy efficient.

NEXT STEPS

8          If Council approves the draft submission it will be sent to MBIE for consideration by 28 May 2021.

Signatories

Author:

David Bainbridge-Zafar - Group Manager Property Services

Authoriser:

Robert West - Acting General Manager City Services

Attachments

 

Title

Page

a

Consultation response - letter

314

b

Consultation response - form

316

 

SUMMARY OF CONSIDERATIONS

 

Fit with purpose of Local Government

This decision promotes the social 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

Māori Impact Statement

There are no known specific impacts for tangata whenua resulting from a decision to approve the DCC submission.

Sustainability

The submission supports DCC’s sustainability efforts.

LTP/Annual Plan / Financial Strategy /Infrastructure Strategy

There are no known impacts for current levels of service and/or performance measures resulting from a decision to approve the DCC submission.

Financial considerations

There are no known financial implications resulting from a decision to approve the DCC submission.

Significance

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

Engagement – external

There was no external engagement on this submission.

Engagement - internal

Property Services and Building Services drafted this response with support from Corporate Policy.

Risks: Legal / Health and Safety etc.

There are no identified risks.

Conflict of Interest

There is no conflict of interest.

Community Boards

There are no implications for Community Boards.

 

 


Council

25 May 2021

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Council

25 May 2021

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Council

25 May 2021

 

 

Financial Result - Period Ended 30 April 2021

Department: Executive Leadership Team

 

 

 

 

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1          This report provides the financial results for the ten months ended 30 April 2021 and the financial position as at that date.

2          As this is an administrative report only, there are no options or Summary of Considerations.

RECOMMENDATIONS

That Council:

a)     Notes the Financial Performance for the ten months 30 April 2021 and the Financial Position as at that date.

 

BACKGROUND

3          This report provides the financial statements for the ten months ended 30 April 2021.  It includes reports on: financial performance, financial position, cashflows and capital expenditure.  The operating result is also shown by group, including analysis by revenue and expenditure type.

DISCUSSION

4          The year to date favourable revenue variance included increased activity at the Green Island Landfill, and unbudgeted government project funding for Economic Development, Three Waters, Property and Parks.

5          These favourable revenue variances were partially offset by lower grants funding in transport due to a lower level of subsidised capital expenditure.  Parking revenue was also tracking below budget due to the temporary closure of the St Andrew & Dowling street carparks while on-site works were completed.

6          Overall expenditure was in line with budget.  Favourable variances included:

·    favourable interest expenditure due to the lower level of borrowing and a favourable floating interest rate,

·    delayed timing of some grant expenditure including allocation and disbursement from the Covid19 fund,

·    favourable personnel costs reflecting vacancies across the organisation,

·    timing/savings of greenspace maintenance costs in Parks resulting in part from better management of the related contracts.

7          These favourable variances were offset by:

·    higher ETS and variable contract costs at the Green Island Landfill as a result of increased activity,

·    development/scoping costs in Transport related to the major projects programme.  Roading maintenance was also running ahead of budget due to the timing of expenditure,

·    expenditure related to the government project funding discussed above,

·    unbudgeted costs associated with the second-generation district plan,

·    expenditure related to resource consents due to the high number of applications received.

8          The operating result for the Waipori Fund was favourable year to date with positive movements across all equity markets.  Fair value adjustments in the current month were positive following the market decline in March. 

9          Capital expenditure was $1.901 million ahead of budget for the month reflecting a number of projects now in delivery – Three Waters in particular.  The current forecast has full year expenditure between $95.0m and $100.0m.

 

NEXT STEPS

10        Financial Result Reports continue be presented to future meetings of either the Finance and Council Controlled Organisation Committee or Council.

 

 

 


 

Signatories

Authoriser:

Gavin Logie - Acting General Manager Finance

Attachments

 

Title

Page

a

Summary Financial Information

343

b

Statement of Financial Performance

344

c

Statement of Financial Position

345

d

Statement of Cashflows

346

e

Capital Expenditure Summary

347

f

Summary of Operating Variances

348

  


Council

25 May 2021

 

PDF Creator


Council

25 May 2021

 

PDF Creator


Council

25 May 2021

 

PDF Creator


Council

25 May 2021

 

PDF Creator


Council

25 May 2021

 

PDF Creator


Council

25 May 2021

 

PDF Creator              


Council

25 May 2021

 

Resolution to Exclude the Public

 

 

That the Council excludes the public from the following part of the proceedings of this meeting (pursuant to the provisions of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987) 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  Confirmation of  the Confidential Minutes of Ordinary Council meeting - 13 April 2021 - Public Excluded

S6(a)

The making available of the information would be likely to prejudice the maintenance of the law, including the prevention, investigation, and detection of offences and the right to a fair trial.

 

S7(2)(a)

The withholding of the information is necessary to protect the privacy of natural persons, including that of a deceased person.

 

S7(2)(b)(i)

The withholding of the information is necessary to protect information where the making available of the information would disclose a trade secret.

 

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).

 

.

 

C2  Confidential Council Actions from Resolutions at Council Meetings

S6(a)

The making available of the information would be likely to prejudice the maintenance of the law, including the prevention, investigation, and detection of offences and the right to a fair trial.

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 6.

 

C3  Confidential Council Forward Work Programme

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.

 

C4  Contract Matter: Waste

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.



[1] For example, https://www.odt.co.nz/news/dunedin/broken-glass-spurs-cleanup; https://www.odt.co.nz/news/dunedin/broken-glass-empties-daily-event; https://www.odt.co.nz/news/south-today/rubbish-broken-glass-castle-st; https://www.odt.co.nz/news/dunedin/smashed-glass-growing-hazard-say-cyclists

[2] https://www.odt.co.nz/news/dunedin/pre-schoolers-ask-street-without-glass

[3] https://www.odt.co.nz/news/dunedin/cyclists-visitors-complain-about-broken-glass

[4] https://www.odt.co.nz/news/dunedin/heat-out-couch-burning