|
|
Policy and Planning Committee
18 June 2026
|
Part
A Reports
Delivering the Citywide Climate Resilience Framework
Department: Climate and City Growth
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1 The
purpose of this report is to progress Council’s agreed approach to
managing climate risks by ensuring decisions about infrastructure, services and
investment are informed by consistent, up-to-date climate risk information. In
January 2025, Council endorsed a Citywide Climate Resilience Framework and
approved funding through the 2025–34 9‑Year
Plan to design and establish that framework.
2 This
report updates Council on progress towards building the framework, seeks
adoption of a Climate Adaptation Policy, and introduces a dynamic Citywide
Climate Risk Assessment platform that will support risk‑informed decision‑making. Existing work is captured in a Resilience
Roadmap, which acts as an interim plan, while also setting out the climate
adaptation and resilience work programme through to June 2027.
3 Together,
the framework, policy and risk assessment provide a single, coordinated
approach for how Council understands climate risk and makes decisions. In
simple terms, the Climate Adaptation Policy sets the direction, the Climate
Resilience Framework is the system, and the Citywide Climate Risk Assessment
provides the evidence that makes both operational.
4 The
proposed Climate Adaptation Policy is a key implementation mechanism of the
framework. It replaces the outdated 2011 Climate Change Predictions Policy and
establishes climate adaptation and resilience as core strategic considerations
across Council decision‑making.
The Policy clarifies expectations around the use of up‑to‑date
climate projections, scenario‑based
planning and climate risk assessment, supporting consistency, coordination and
prudent long‑term
investment. Without the Policy, climate risks are less likely to be
consistently considered in the 2027–37 Long-Term Plan.
5 The
Resilience Roadmap provides a snapshot of Council’s current commitment to
climate adaptation and resilience, and key milestones in the delivery of the
Citywide Climate Resilience Framework and Climate Adaptation Plan by June 2027.
6 This
report also introduces the Citywide Climate Risk Assessment, currently
underway. The risk assessment will provide a shared, organisation‑wide evidence base to
understand how climate change impacts Dunedin’s people, places, assets
and services, now and over time. It will strengthen prioritisation within
existing budgets, support defensible advice to Council, improve alignment with
LTP and asset management cycles, and reduce long-term costs and avoid
unnecessary or ill-timed capital expenditure.
7 This
report does not commit Council to specific projects or new spending. It helps ensure
that when investment decisions are made, they are better targeted and more
cost-effective.
RECOMMENDATIONS
That the Committee:
a) Repeals the Climate
Change Predictions Policy (2011)
b) Adopts the proposed
Climate Adaptation Policy
c) Notes the Citywide
Climate Resilience Framework
d) Notes the Resilience
Roadmap as the interim Citywide Climate Adaptation Plan
e) Notes the delivery of
the framework includes evaluation and development of a dynamic Citywide Climate
Risk Assessment platform to support risk-informed decision-making
BACKGROUND
Council direction to date
8 Council
has progressively advanced its approach to climate adaptation and resilience in
response to growing demand from stakeholders and increasing climate‑related risks facing
Dunedin. In May 2023, Council resolved to add development of a Climate
Adaptation Plan to its forward work programme, recognising the growing scale,
complexity and cost implications of climate change and natural hazards for
Dunedin’s communities and Council assets.
9 Subsequent
reports to Council and the Strategy, Planning and Engagement Committee during
2023 and 2024 explored options for developing a citywide approach to climate
adaptation. This work highlighted the need for a consistent approach, so
climate risks are not addressed in an ad hoc way.
10 In January
2025, Council endorsed a Citywide Climate Resilience Framework and approved
funding through the 2025–34 9‑Year
Plan to design and establish that framework. Council also noted that
implementation would occur in stages, including preparation of an interim
adaptation plan, followed by development of a full Citywide Climate Adaptation
Plan aligned with statutory planning and budgeting cycles.
Purpose of the Citywide Climate Resilience Framework
11 The
Citywide Climate Resilience Framework provides a consistent way for Council to
identify and manage climate risks across its assets, services and planning. It
supports clearer, more consistent advice and decision-making.
12 A key
principle of the framework is that climate resilience and adaptation are
ongoing, cyclical processes. The framework therefore supports periodic updates
to climate hazard information and risk assessments, enabling adaptation
planning to evolve as new evidence emerges, council engages with communities
affected by climate risks, or statutory requirements change.
Interim Citywide Climate Adaptation Plan (Resilience
Roadmap)
13 The
Resilience Roadmap is Council’s interim adaptation plan. It summarises
current work and sets out the next phase through to June 2027. It does not
commit to specific projects or funding decisions beyond those previously
approved by Council.
Climate Adaptation Policy
14 Council’s
existing climate adaptation-related policy requires updating to reflect current
climate science, best‑practice
guidance, and Council’s agreed approach to climate resilience. The
Climate Change Predictions Policy that Council adopted in 2006 and updated in
2011 no longer reflects the way climate information is generated, interpreted
or applied in contemporary planning and investment decisions.
15 The
proposed Climate Adaptation Policy sets clear expectations that climate risks
are considered early and consistently in Council decisions. A key focus of the
policy is cost reduction.
Citywide Climate Risk Assessment
16 The
Citywide Climate Risk Assessment provides a shared evidence base showing how
climate hazards affect Council assets, services and communities. It supports
prioritisation and improves the consistency of advice to Council.
DISCUSSION
The Citywide Climate Resilience Framework and Resilience
Roadmap
17 The
Citywide Climate Resilience Framework ensures climate risks are considered
early and consistently alongside infrastructure, service and financial
decisions.
18 The
framework operates through existing Council systems and processes. It embeds
climate adaptation and resilience into options analysis, business cases and
Council reporting by clarifying how climate hazard information, risk assessment
and adaptation planning inform advice to decision‑makers.
It works within existing planning and asset management processes (rather than
introducing new ones). This improves efficiency, consistency and transparency
across council, reducing ad hoc decision-making and helping avoid unnecessary
costs.
19 The
Resilience Roadmap sets out the current work programme and sequencing through
to June 2027. It focuses on building capability and improving understanding of
risks before decisions on specific projects or investments are made. The
Roadmap is not a final or statutory adaptation plan. It does not commit Council
to specific adaptation actions or investment decisions.
20 The first
tranche of work focuses on establishing the framework, building organisational
capability, and strengthening Council’s understanding and management of
climate risks across its assets, infrastructure, services and functions. This
sequencing enables council to build a robust foundation before considering
specific adaptation actions. It supports more prudent long‑term financial
management and reduces the risk of investing in the wrong place, at the wrong
time or at the wrong scale.
Scope and future transition to community‑facing adaptation work
21 The scope
of work outlined in the Resilience Roadmap reflects Council’s earlier
decisions to prioritise establishment of an organisational foundation for
climate adaptation and resilience. This includes shared systems, processes,
policies and evidence that enable Council to manage climate risk consistently
and defensibly within its own responsibilities.
22 Once the
framework is established, Council will be better positioned to consider a
broader range of climate adaptation responses, including community‑facing work. This may
involve place‑based
or local adaptation planning and initiatives that support communities to
understand and respond to climate risks in ways that reflect local
circumstances and values. Recent annual plan submissions from Community Boards
indicated broad-based demand for this work.
23 This
sequencing is deliberate. Establishing the framework and risk evidence base
first reduces the potential for premature or maladaptive investment. It enables
future work to be scoped and scaled based on an informed understanding of risk,
benefit, timing and affordability, rather than in response to short‑term pressures or
isolated issues.
24 Any future
shift toward greater community‑facing
adaptation work would be subject to further Council direction and future
funding decisions, including through the next Long‑Term Plan. Council has not made decisions
at this stage about the scope, timing or resourcing of such work.
Climate Adaptation Policy
25 The Climate
Adaptation Policy provides clear direction for how climate risks are considered
in Council decisions. Adoption of the policy is the primary decision sought
from Council through this report. It replaces the Climate Change Predictions
Policy adopted in 2006 and updated in 2011, which no longer reflects
contemporary climate science, risk‑based
planning practice, or Council’s agreed approach to climate adaptation and
resilience.
Guiding Council’s
internal decisions and actions
26 The Policy
guides how Council considers climate adaptation and resilience across its own
functions, including planning, asset management, service delivery and
investment decision‑making.
It sets clear organisational expectations that climate‑related risks and uncertainties are
identified and considered early and consistently when developing advice to
Council. It seeks to ensure Council makes better, earlier and more
cost-effective decisions by using consistent climate risk across all planning
and investment.
27 By setting
these expectations at a policy level, the Policy reduces the risk of
inconsistent practice and supports more transparent, defensible advice. This
contributes to smarter long‑term
spending, helps avoid costly mistakes and reduces long-term costs.
Clarifying Council’s role in community‑facing adaptation and
resilience
28 The Climate
Adaptation Policy also articulates Council’s role in enabling and
supporting community climate adaptation and resilience. It recognises that many
climate risks extend beyond Council‑owned
assets and that effective adaptation requires collaboration with communities
and iwi, other public agencies, essential infrastructure providers and
stakeholders.
29 The Policy
signals that future work will involve partners, communities and other
stakeholders. Though it also notes that council does not carry all
responsibility for adaptation work or associated costs, which would need to be
spread across a range of stakeholders (including central government, local
government, private sector, asset owners and communities).
30 The Policy
does not commit council or communities to specific outcomes. It sets principles
and expectations to guide future engagement and planning should Council choose
to progress more place‑based
or community‑focused
adaptation work, subject to future direction and funding decisions.
Co‑benefits,
equity and a just transition
31 The Policy
recognises that well-designed adaptation can deliver co‑benefits, including environmental
improvement, enhanced wellbeing and avoided long-term costs. It supports
consideration of co‑benefits
alongside risk reduction and cost‑effectiveness
when evaluating options.
32 The Policy
also acknowledges fairness and equity in adaptation decision‑making. It recognises
that impacts and responses may affect communities differently and advice should
consider distributional effects, affordability and intergenerational impacts.
Rather than prescribing outcomes, the Policy provides a basis for identifying
and weighing these considerations as part of future advice to Council.
Relationship to the Climate Resilience Framework
33 Adoption of
the Climate Adaptation Policy provides clarity and consistency at a critical
point in establishment of the Climate Resilience Framework. The Policy sets
organisational direction and principles that guide how climate adaptation and
resilience are reflected in advice and decisions across Council.
34 As the
framework matures, the Policy ensures advice to Council is grounded in
contemporary climate science, consistent expectations and a shared
understanding of Council’s role. This supports more transparent,
defensible and risk‑informed
decision‑making
over time, while retaining flexibility for future Councils to determine the
scale and scope of adaptation responses.
Citywide Climate Risk Assessment
35 The
Citywide Climate Risk Assessment provides a shared, updatable evidence base
showing how climate hazards affect assets, services and communities. Rather
than commissioning a traditional, static report, Council is trialling a
software‑enabled IT
platform that integrates climate hazard information with Council asset, service
and spatial data.
36 The risk assessment
functions as a decision‑support
tool. It allows staff and decision‑makers
to explore how different hazards affect specific assets, services or locations
over time and to identify where risks may have material consequences that
warrant further consideration.
37 A IT‑based approach also
improves consistency and transparency by providing a shared evidence base
across Council. It reduces the risk of inconsistent assumptions and can be
updated as hazard data, asset information or priorities change, without
repeatedly commissioning new standalone studies.
38 This
supports better decisions about when and where to invest, saving time and helping
avoid unnecessary or premature spending.
39 The risk
assessment does not determine adaptation actions or commit Council to
expenditure. It strengthens the quality, consistency and defensibility of
advice brought to Council through existing planning, asset management and Long‑Term Plan processes.
Council intends to update the assessment periodically as information and
understanding evolve.
Integration, sequencing and prudent investment
40 Together,
the framework, policy and risk assessment help ensure climate risks are
consistently understood and considered in Council decisions. This supports
better timing and targeting of investment while maintaining flexibility for
future Councils.
OPTIONS
41 Three
options are presented for Councillor consideration, including repealing the
current policy and adopting the proposed policy; repealing the current policy
without adopting a replacement; or maintaining the status quo.
Option One – Repeal the 2011 Policy and adopt the
proposed Climate Adaptation Policy (Recommended)
42 The Climate
Change Predictions Policy (2011) relies on outdated climate information and no
longer reflects contemporary climate science, current planning practice, or
Council’s agreed approach to climate adaptation and resilience. Council
no longer applies it in decision‑making
and it does not support the organisation‑wide
framework Council has endorsed.
43 Adopting
the proposed Climate Adaptation Policy replaces outdated guidance with a clear,
contemporary policy that supports implementation of the Citywide Climate
Resilience Framework. The Policy helps give effect to previous Council
decisions. It sets consistent expectations for how climate risks and
uncertainties inform planning, asset management and investment decisions, while
retaining flexibility for future Councils to determine the scale and scope of
adaptation responses.
Advantages
· Replaces
outdated policy with contemporary, evidence‑based
guidance.
· Provides
clear direction for consistent decision-making.
· Supports
consistent, organisation‑wide
decision‑making
aligned with the Citywide Climate Resilience Framework.
· Improves
the consistency and reliability of advice.
· Helps
avoid unnecessary costs and poorly timed investment.
· Aligns
with national and regional expectations for proactive climate risk management.
· Ensures
climate adaptation and resilience considerations are embedded ahead of
preparation of the 2027–37 Long‑Term
Plan (LTP).
· Enables
consistent incorporation of climate risk, uncertainty and adaptation responses
into LTP options analysis, prioritisation and affordability decisions.
Disadvantages
· Requires
organisational change and capability‑building,
including refinement of processes, development of guidance and staff training.
Option Two – Repeal the Climate Change Predictions
Policy (2011) but do not adopt the proposed Climate Adaptation Policy
44 Under this
option, Council would remove outdated policy guidance but would not replace it
with a contemporary policy framework to guide climate adaptation and resilience
decision‑making.
Advantages
· Removes
outdated policy material.
· Avoids
adoption and implementation of a new organisational policy at this time.
· Avoids
staff time and capacity-building required to integrate policy requirements into
systems, processes and guidance.
· Limits
short‑term
organisational change and resourcing demands.
Disadvantages
· Leaves
Council without a clear, organisation‑wide
policy framework for climate adaptation and resilience.
· Increases
the likelihood that climate considerations are applied inconsistently or ad hoc
during preparation of the 2027–37 LTP.
· Limits
Council’s ability to systematically integrate climate risk and
uncertainty into LTP options analysis and prioritisation.
· Increases
the risk of reactive decision‑making,
deferred responses or higher long‑term
costs.
· Undermines
effective implementation of the Citywide Climate Resilience Framework.
Option Three – Retain the status quo
45 Under this
option, Council would retain the Climate Change Predictions Policy (2011) and
not adopt the proposed Climate Adaptation Policy.
Advantages
· Avoids
any immediate policy change or organisational adjustment.
· Does
not require staff training, capability‑building
or changes to existing processes.
· Requires
no additional staff time to embed climate adaptation and resilience
considerations.
· Minimises
short‑term
operational and administrative effort.
Disadvantages
· Retains
outdated policy guidance that no longer reflects contemporary climate science
or planning practice.
· Does
not support the organisation‑wide
framework Council has endorsed.
· Increases
likelihood that climate adaptation and resilience will not be adequately
embedded in preparation of the 2027–37 LTP, due to the absence of clear
policy direction.
· Maintains
reliance on ad‑hoc
consideration of climate risks within individual projects or business cases.
· Continues
to expose Council to higher long‑term
financial risk through mis‑sized
investments, premature asset failure, or avoidable retrofit and response costs.
· Continues
to reduce Council’s ability to demonstrate that climate risks have been
systematically considered in statutory planning and investment decisions.
NEXT STEPS
46 The next
phase of work focuses on ensuring climate risks are consistently considered in
Council decisions, progressing development of the Citywide Climate Risk
Assessment, and preparing a draft Citywide Climate Adaptation Plan for Council
consideration by 30 June 2027. The Climate Adaptation and Resilience Team is
coordinating delivery with cross-Council participation, governance and
oversight.
Embedding climate adaptation and resilience across Council
systems and processes
47 Council
staff will continue to embed climate adaptation and resilience considerations
into existing Council systems and processes, consistent with the Citywide
Climate Resilience Framework and Climate Adaptation Policy. This includes
integrating climate risk considerations into options analysis, business cases,
asset management planning, and reporting processes to support consistent, risk‑informed advice to
decision‑makers.
48 This work
will align with preparation of the 2027–37 Long‑Term Plan, ensuring climate risk,
uncertainty and adaptation considerations are incorporated early and
systematically into planning, prioritisation and investment decisions.
Citywide Climate Risk Assessment milestones
49 Development
of the Citywide Climate Risk Assessment will continue using an IT‑based approach. Key
milestones include:
· September
2026. Initial report identifying priority climate risks across Council
assets and services. The preliminary report will be presented to Council.
· January
2027. Delivery of a final Citywide Climate Risk Assessment report,
incorporating refined hazard, asset and service data, to support integration
with Long‑Term Plan
decision‑making and
adaptation planning. The final report will be presented to Council.
50 Outputs
from the risk assessment will inform both internal decision‑making and preparation
of the Citywide Climate Adaptation Plan.
Development of the Citywide Climate Adaptation Plan
51 Building on
the established framework and risk evidence base, staff will progress
preparation of a Citywide Climate Adaptation Plan in line with the staged
approach set out in the Resilience Roadmap. Key steps include:
· February
2027. Councillor workshop to consider a substantially developed draft
Citywide Climate Adaptation Plan and seek direction on adaptation priorities,
sequencing and implementation considerations.
· March–April
2027. Targeted internal and stakeholder engagement to test adaptation
priorities, sequencing and implementation considerations.
· By
30 June 2027. Delivery of a draft Citywide Climate Adaptation Plan for
Council consideration, including confirmation of the appropriate statutory and
consultative process for its adoption, consistent with legislative requirements
in force at the time.
52 The plan
will set out proposed responses and priorities based on identified risks. Any
subsequent decisions on adoption, implementation or resourcing of adaptation
actions will be subject to further Council consideration.
Engagement with Te Pae Māori
53 At its
April 2026 meeting, Te Pae Māori identified climate as one of its priority
areas of focus.
54 Staff
intend to present the Citywide Climate Resilience Framework, Climate Adaptation
Policy and Citywide Climate Risk Assessment to Te Pae Māori at an upcoming
meeting. This will support early information‑sharing
and discussion on Council’s approach to climate adaptation and
resilience. It will also inform ongoing work on development of the Citywide
Climate Risk Assessment and the Citywide Climate Adaptation Plan.
Reporting and governance
55 Progress on
delivery of the framework, risk assessment and adaptation plan will be reported
to Council through established planning, performance and Long‑Term Plan processes. The
Resilience Roadmap will continue to provide visibility of sequencing and dependencies,
supporting transparent governance and informed decision‑making as the programme progresses.
Signatories
|
Author:
|
Brandy Saxton - Senior Advisor - Climate Adaptation and
Resilience, South Dunedin Future
|
|
Authoriser:
|
Jonathan Rowe - Programme Manager, South Dunedin Future
Scott MacLean - General Manager, City Services
|
Attachments
|
|
Title
|
Page
|
|
⇩a
|
Resilience Roadmap
|
31
|
|
⇩b
|
Climate Adaptation
Policy (proposed)
|
39
|
|
⇩c
|
Climate Change Predictions
Policy (2011)
|
49
|
|
SUMMARY OF CONSIDERATIONS
|
|
Fit with purpose of Local Government
The decisions sought in this report enable
democratic local decision‑making and action by, and on behalf of, communities by providing a
clear policy and governance framework for Council to consider climate
adaptation and resilience in its planning and investment decisions.
Adoption of the Climate Adaptation Policy
supports better long-term decisions to protect communities, infrastructure
and services.
|
|
Fit with strategic framework
|
|
Contributes
|
Detracts
|
Not applicable
|
|
Social Wellbeing Strategy
|
✔
|
☐
|
☐
|
|
Economic Development Strategy
|
✔
|
☐
|
☐
|
|
Environment Strategy
|
✔
|
☐
|
☐
|
|
Arts and Culture Strategy
|
☐
|
☐
|
✔
|
|
3 Waters Strategy
|
✔
|
☐
|
☐
|
|
Future Development Strategy
|
✔
|
☐
|
☐
|
|
Integrated Transport Strategy
|
✔
|
☐
|
☐
|
|
Parks and Recreation Strategy
|
✔
|
☐
|
☐
|
|
Other strategic projects/policies/plans
|
✔
|
☐
|
☐
|
The Climate Adaptation Policy supports implementation of
the Citywide Climate Resilience Framework and contributes to Council’s
strategic priorities by embedding consideration of climate risk and
resilience across planning, asset management and investment processes. It
complements existing strategies by strengthening risk‑based decision‑making and aligning climate adaptation
with Council’s integrated planning and budgeting frameworks.
A detailed assessment of alignment with Council
strategies, plans and policies is provided in Appendix 1 of the Climate
Adaptation Policy, which outlines how the Policy contributes to relevant
components of the Council’s strategic framework. No strategic
detractions or contradictions have been identified.
|
|
Māori Impact Statement
The Climate Adaptation Policy and associated framework
provide an enabling foundation for future engagement with Māori on
climate adaptation and resilience matters.
At its April 2026 meeting, Te Pae Māori identified
climate as one of its priority areas of focus. Staff intend to present the
Citywide Climate Resilience Framework, Climate Adaptation Policy and Citywide
Climate Risk Assessment to Te Pae Māori for information‑sharing and
discussion, to inform ongoing development of the Citywide Climate Risk
Assessment and the Citywide Climate Adaptation Plan.
The Policy recognises that effective adaptation requires
collaboration with communities and iwi. It supports future engagement on
climate risks and adaptation pathways. No immediate adverse impacts for
Māori have been identified as a result of adopting the Policy.
|
|
Sustainability
The Climate Adaptation Policy supports long‑term sustainability by
strengthening Council’s ability to understand and manage climate‑related risks over
time. It promotes more resilient social, environmental and economic outcomes
by embedding climate adaptation and resilience considerations into long‑term planning,
investment and service delivery decisions.
|
|
LTP/Annual Plan / Financial Strategy /Infrastructure
Strategy
Adoption of the Climate Adaptation Policy supports
preparation of the 2027–37 Long‑Term
Plan by providing a clear policy framework to guide integration of climate
risk, uncertainty and adaptation considerations into options analysis,
prioritisation and investment decision‑making.
The Policy does not itself change levels of service or
performance measures. Any future changes to levels of service, performance
measures or resourcing requirements will be considered through subsequent
Council decisions, including the Long‑Term
Plan process.
|
|
Financial considerations
Adoption of the Climate Adaptation Policy has no direct
additional financial cost. Establishment and initial delivery of the Citywide
Climate Resilience Framework, including development of the interim Resilience
Roadmap and progression of the Citywide Climate Risk Assessment, is funded
through existing budgets approved by Council in the 2025–34 9‑Year Plan. Any future
costs will be considered through the Long-Term Plan process.
|
|
Significance
This decision is considered low in terms of the
Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy.
The decision adopts a policy framework to guide how
climate adaptation and resilience are considered within Council decision‑making. It does not
approve specific adaptation actions, projects, levels of service, regulatory
changes, or expenditure, and does not involve changes to ownership or control
of strategic assets.
The decision is consistent with Council’s existing
strategies and previously endorsed direction, has no immediate financial
implications, and does not materially affect Council’s capacity or
capability. While climate change is an issue of broad importance, the adoption
of the Climate Adaptation Policy itself is a policy decision that does not
commit Council to specific projects or spending.
Given the low significance of the decision, formal public
consultation is not required at this stage. Engagement will be undertaken in
future phases of work where required, including during development and
adoption of the Citywide Climate Adaptation Plan, in accordance with
legislative requirements and the Council’s Significance and Engagement
Policy.
|
|
Engagement – external
No formal external community engagement has been
undertaken in relation to the adoption of the Climate Adaptation Policy, as
the decision establishes a policy framework rather than approving specific
adaptation actions or programmes.
External engagement will be undertaken as part of future
stages of work, including development and consultation on the Citywide
Climate Adaptation Plan, in line with legislative requirements and Council
direction.
|
|
Engagement - internal
Robust internal engagement has informed development of the
Climate Adaptation Policy and the broader establishment of the Citywide
Climate Resilience Framework.
A draft of the Climate Adaptation Policy was circulated to
the Climate Resilience Framework Wider Project Group (WPG) for review and
feedback. The WPG includes representatives from across Council and is
contributing to the design and establishment of the framework. Feedback
received through this group informed substantive revisions to the Policy,
strengthening its clarity, applicability and alignment with Council functions
and processes.
The Policy was also considered and endorsed by the
Executive Leadership Team (ELT), confirming organisational support and
alignment with Council’s strategic direction and operational
priorities.
In parallel, a cross‑Council
technical working group has been established to support development of the
Citywide Climate Risk Assessment. This group brings together technical
expertise from across Council to ensure consistency of assumptions, data and application
across services and asset areas.
No internal views contrary to the recommendations have
been identified.
|
|
Risks: Legal / Health and Safety etc.
There are no immediate legal or health and safety risks
associated with adopting the Climate Adaptation Policy.
Key risks relate to the potential for inconsistent or
reactive decision‑making
if climate adaptation considerations are not embedded in Council processes.
Adoption of the Policy mitigates this risk by providing clear organisational
expectations and aligning climate adaptation with existing planning and
governance frameworks.
Future risks associated with specific adaptation actions
will be assessed and managed through subsequent reports and decision‑making processes.
|
|
Conflict of Interest
No conflicts of interest have been identified.
|
|
Community Boards
There are no immediate implications for Community Boards
arising from adoption of the Climate Adaptation Policy. Community Boards may
be engaged in future stages of work, including development of the Citywide
Climate Adaptation Plan, as appropriate.
|
|
|
Policy and Planning Committee
18 June 2026
|
Residents' Opinion Survey Quarterly Report
Department: Community Services
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1 The
Residents’ Opinion Survey (the ROS) is a monthly survey of residents
measuring residents’ use of and perspectives on a range of council
facilities, services, and infrastructure.
2 This
report presents the ROS quarterly results (the Quarterly Results) for Quarter Three
2025/2026 (January - March 2026), as detailed in Attachment A.
3 In
general, the survey indicates improving resident sentiment toward the Dunedin
City Council (DCC) in Quarter Three compared with the previous quarter.
4 Two
measures recorded statistically significant increases compared with the
previous quarter:
• Satisfaction
with the performance of the Mayor and Councillors increased from 23% to 32%.
• Overall
satisfaction with what the DCC provides, increased from 35% to 48%.
5 No
other statistically significant changes were recorded across the DCC’s
facilities, infrastructure, and service areas measured in the survey.
6 While
quarterly results should be interpreted with caution due to the smaller sample
size compared with annual reporting, the results suggest a positive shift in
perceptions of the Council while service satisfaction remains generally stable.
RECOMMENDATIONS
That the Committee:
a) Notes the
Residents’ Opinion Survey quarterly results for the period of January
– March 2026 (Quarter Three 2025/26).
BACKGROUND
7 The
ROS is the Council’s primary measure of resident satisfaction with
Council services, facilities, infrastructure, and organisational performance.
8 The
survey has been undertaken annually since 1994 and provides a long-standing
measure of community perceptions and satisfaction.
9 Following
a request from the Strategy, Planning and Engagement Committee in February
2023, quarterly reporting was introduced to provide more regular monitoring of
resident sentiment throughout the year.
10 The
questions in the annual ROS were refreshed in 2025 to better align with the
Levels of Service measures in the 9 Year Plan 2025–34 and with guidance
from the Office of the Auditor-General regarding non-financial performance
reporting.
11 The annual
ROS is based on a sample of randomly selected residents aged 18 years and over
from the general electoral roll, with a target sample size of 1,200 residents
each year.
12 The annual
results 2025/26 will be weighted to known population distributions based on the
2023 Census data for age, gender, ethnicity, and location. This is to reduce
sample bias and represent the demographics of Ōtepoti Dunedin.
13 Participation
in the ROS is voluntary and the response count to each question varies.
DISCUSSION
Quarter Three
Sample
14 A total of
358 residents participated in the survey during Quarter Three, compared with
328 respondents in Quarter Two.
15 Quarterly
results are statistically tested and have a margin of error of ±5.2% at
the 95% confidence level.
16 Due to the
smaller quarterly sample size, quarterly results are best viewed as indicators
of emerging trends.
17 Statistically
significant differences from the previous quarter are identified in Attachment
A with a red or green arrow.
18 As
mentioned previously, there are two statistically significant results in
Quarter Three.
19 Statistically
significant means that the result is highly unlikely to have happened purely by
chance, and that an observed result in the ROS data is likely "real".
Quarter Three
Results
20 Satisfaction
with the performance of the Mayor and Councillors increased significantly from
23% in Quarter Two to 32% in Quarter Three.
21 Overall
satisfaction with what the DCC provides increased significantly from 35% to
48%.
22 Satisfaction
across facilities, infrastructure, and service delivery areas remained largely
stable, with no statistically significant changes recorded during the quarter.
23 The highest
levels of satisfaction across facilities, infrastructure, and service delivery
areas continue to be recorded for:
· Parks,
reserves and open spaces (85%)
· Sports
and recreation facilities (79%)
· Creative
and cultural facilities (77%)
· Handling
enquiries (76%)
· Waste
management (71%)
24 The lower
levels of satisfaction continue to be recorded for:
· Roading-related
infrastructure (34%)
· Water-related
infrastructure (50%)
· Regulatory,
monitoring and enforcement services (57%)
· Communication
channels (59%)
· Planning
and urban design (60%)
25 While no
service area recorded a statistically significant decline,
infrastructure-related measures remain comparatively lower than other areas.
Key Observations
26 Quarter
Three results suggest an improvement in overall perceptions of the Council and
elected members and are similar to satisfaction levels recorded in early 2025.
27 Satisfaction
with facilities, infrastructure, and services remains generally stable,
indicating that the improvement in overall sentiment appears to be driven
primarily by perceptions of the Council, rather than related to changes in
individual service areas.
28 The survey
does not identify the reasons for changes in satisfaction levels.
OPTIONS
29 There are
no options as this report for noting only.
NEXT STEPS
30 Staff will continue
to work with EnlightenMe Research to provide Council with the annual ROS results
and report.
31 The annual
report will provide more detailed analysis of trends, demographic differences,
and factors influencing resident satisfaction.
Signatories
|
Author:
|
Gina Hu'akau - Community Partnerships Manager
|
|
Authoriser:
|
Nicola Morand – Manahautū – Kaiwhakahaere
Hapori me Rautaki / General Manager – Community and Strategy
|
Attachments
|
|
Title
|
Page
|
|
⇩a
|
Residents' Opinion
Survey Quarter Three results (January - March 2026)
|
69
|
|
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
|
✔
|
☐
|
☐
|
|
Future Development Strategy
|
✔
|
☐
|
☐
|
|
Integrated Transport Strategy
|
✔
|
☐
|
☐
|
|
Parks and Recreation Strategy
|
✔
|
☐
|
☐
|
|
Other strategic projects/policies/plans
|
✔
|
☐
|
☐
|
The ROS contributes to all aspects of the strategic
framework as it gauges residents’ opinions on the DCC services,
facilities, and infrastructure; overall performance; and perceptions of
Ōtepoti Dunedin.
|
|
Māori Impact Statement
The 2025/26 ROS does not qualify for Māori descent
electoral roll data under section 112 of the Electoral Act 1993. This data
would enable more accurate representation of Māori in the ROS through
targeted sampling. Where response rates are not proportional to the
Ōtepoti population for Māori the results are weighted to known
population distributions based on the 2023 Census data to reduce sample bias.
|
|
Sustainability
The ROS asks about residents’ perceptions of
Ōtepoti Dunedin as a sustainable city, and whether the DCC is a leader
in encouraging the development of a sustainable city.
|
|
Zero Carbon
The
ROS has no direct impact on the city-wide and DCC emissions, as greenhouse
gas emissions are likely to stay the same. In procuring and awarding the new
supplier, the DCC Procurement Emissions Standards Guidance was applied.
|
|
LTP/Annual Plan / Financial Strategy /Infrastructure
Strategy
One of the objectives of the ROS is to gauge the extent to
which Council is meeting its long term and annual plan objectives. The ROS
asks about residents’ satisfaction with the ‘value for
money’ of the services provided by the DCC.
|
|
Financial considerations
There are no financial considerations.
|
|
Significance
The significance of this report is low in terms of
Council’s Significance and Engagement policy, as it is for noting only.
|
|
Engagement – external
The ROS is a form of external engagement that allows the
DCC to create community-informed improvements.
|
|
Engagement - internal
Reporting of ROS results will be considered as part of
future work on non-financial reporting, levels of services, and
community-informed feedback.
|
|
Risks: Legal / Health and Safety etc.
No risks identified.
|
|
Conflict of Interest
No conflicts of interest identified.
|
|
Community Boards
The survey includes questions relating to the performance
of Community Boards, ROS result breakdowns are available at a community
level, which includes Community Board areas.
|
