NZ Local Government 1706

ZIP, NADA, NOTHING Auckland Council’s ambitious journey to deliver zero waste p20

NOT GREEN ENOUGH Local government under fire p26

PICK THE TICK FPP or STV: Time to choose p30

NZ LOCAL GOVERNMENT MAGAZINE

SUPPORT LOCAL SUPPLIERS

VOL 54 • JUNE 2017 • $8.95

Or just go for the best deal? p34

things you need to know about the Resource Legislation Amendment Act & iwi participation p14

The Future of Road Safety Award Winning Australian Design Made tough for Australian & New Zealand roads DEALER ENQUIRIES WELCOME

ShoulderMaster is Australia’s first universal skid steer paver attachment designed specifically for the purposes of rehabilitating and widening the • Skid steer asphalt paving attachment shoulders of roads.

• Fits most skid steer or compact track loaders

The ShoulderMaster is an award winning attachment • Heated, with widths from that has beenadjustable recognisedscreed by the Australian Government as an innovative road .3m to 1.5m & camber controlsafety fromsolution =/-5º to assist in the reduction of fatalities and serious injuries on Australian roads.

· ABA100 Winner for New Product Innovation in the Australian Business Awards 2016 ·•Special Commendation for Innovation, Institute Remote control and video monitored for of Public Works Engineering Australasia, CIVENEX, 2015 operator safety · Queensland Government Encouragement Award, •Australian Lays asphalt gravel Roador Safety Awards 2015 ·•Finalist, Product Innovation Award Speed and efficiency means big2015, R.O.I.Earthmover and Civil Contractor Awards · Finalist, Good Design Award 2016

www.shouldermaster.com.au

www.shouldermaster.com.au

IN THIS ISSUE NZ LOCAL GOVERNMENT MAGAZINE

IN THIS ISSUE P18 REGULARS

4 Editor’s Letter 6 In Brief 12 Products & Services 13 Events 47 LGNZ

COLUMNISTS

P26

43 Elizabeth Hughes: Local Government 101 44 Frana Divich: On Legal Issues 45 Peter Silcock: From Civil Contractors New Zealand 46 Lawrence Yule: From LGNZ

REPORTS

P30

14 15 THINGS YOU NEED TO KNOW The Resource Legislation Amendment Act and iwi participation 18 P LAN MAKING PROCESSES Planners get new tools under the Resource Legislation Amendment Act 20 Z IP, NADA, NOTHING Auckland Council is engaging communities on an ambitious journey to deliver zero waste 24 D IVERSITY AT THE TOP New senior appointments and recent research highlight the number of women in the sector’s workforce

P20

26 N OT GREEN ENOUGH Geoffrey Palmer highlights serious deficiencies in the performance of local government in relation to the environment 29 N ATURAL ALLIES Using triple helix partnerships to combat natural hazards 30 P ICK THE TICK First past the post (FPP) or single transferable vote (STV)? Ma-ori wards or constituencies? It’s time to choose 32 TRICKLING THROUGH OUR HANDS? The potential savings in rainwater and greywater 34 P ROCUREMENT PRACTICES Should councils support local suppliers or just go for the best deal?

41 T ECHNICAL BRIEFINGS Technical Publication 108 (TP108): Where to from here? By Graham Levy, Beca 42 TECHNICAL BRIEFINGS Climate change effects on aquatic ecology and the future for stormwater management.

By Paul Battersby & Emily Jones, Opus International Consultants

SPECIAL FEATURES 36 Innovations in GIS and spatial technology 39 Innovations in training

ON THE COVER. 15 things you need to know about the Resource Legislation Amendment Act and iwi participation. See page 14.

JUNE 2017 LOCAL GOVERNMENT MAGAZINE

l

3

EDITOR’S LETTER NZ LOCAL GOVERNMENT MAGAZINE

PUBLISHER Contrafed Publishing Co. Ltd, Suite 2.1, 93 Dominion Rd, Mount Eden, Auckland 1024 PO Box 112 357, Penrose, Auckland 1642 Phone: 09 636 5715, Fax: 09 636 5716 www.localgovernmentmag.co.nz EDITOR Ruth Le Pla Mobile: 021 266 3978 ruth@localgovernmentmag.co.nz

On the move Is it just my imagination or have there been more job switches and resignations at the upper levels of management in the past few months? And could I correlate that to the fact that the new raft of mayors, chairs and councillors are now almost six months into their terms of office?

They will soon have ticked off a series of firsts. As LGNZ notes on page 49 of this issue, they will have done their first annual plan consultations and triennial agreements. By the end of this month they will have struck their first set of rates and officers will be well underway with the draft long-term plans for next year.

So, six months in to their current threeyear terms, the people charged with the governance arm of local authorities are finding their feet.

Some senior managers are moving to new roles just because the opportunity to do so is there. But, without naming names, we know some others are finding it hard to continue operating within the new culture rolling out under the guidance of a new set of governors.

That’s business. That’s life. Importantly, that’s local government – the messy beast that is democracy and all the chopping and changing that comes with it. Ironically, the nearest parallel may be the entrepreneurial

business sector where new start ups continually challenge and disrupt the status quo, and change is the life blood of innovation.

I wish we could view local government through such rose-tinted lenses. But I don’t think we can. Not yet, anyway.

Both LGNZ and SOLGM have put some serious effort into helping the new raft of mayors, chairs and councillors settle in and get up to speed. They are to be congratulated for this.

It’s hard to tell what mechanisms can best help resolve inter-personal issues that may arise between individuals working in the governance and management arms of local authorities. The obvious answer, that talking though issues and concerns is the way to go, sounds both fatuous and yet inherently true.

Clearly in some cases it’s just not enough.

At the risk of sounding fatuous myself, I would suggest that a firmer focus on what councils are actually there to achieve may add perspective and diminish the territorial behaviour that some are demonstrating.

Maybe the old-fashioned idea of serving the public, rather than self-interest, isn’t so bad after all.

Ruth Le Pla, editor, ruth@localgovernmentmag.co.nz

SALES CONSULTANT Charles Fairbairn DDI: 09 636 5724 Mobile: 021 411 890 charles@contrafed.co.nz CONTRIBUTORS Paul Battersby, Gavin Beattie, Lee Bint, Caroline Boot, Frana Davich, Stephen Franks, Elizabeth Hughes, Emily Jones, Lucy de Latour, Graham Levy, Pam McMillan, Patricia Moore, Geoffrey Palmer, John Pfahlert, Peter Silcock, Lawrence Yule ADMINISTRATION/SUBSCRIPTIONS admin@contrafed.co.nz DDI: 09 636 5715 PRODUCTION Design: Jonathan Whittaker studio@contrafed.co.nz Printing: PMP MAXUM CONTRIBUTIONS WELCOME Please contact the editor before sending them in. Articles in Local Government Magazine are copyright and may not be reproduced in whole or in part without the permission of the publisher.

DISCLAIMER Local Government Magazine is an independent publication owned and produced by Contrafed Publishing.

The views expressed in the magazine are not necessarily those of any of its shareholding organisations. www.facebook.com/nzlgmagazine/

www.linkedin.com/nzlocalgovernmentmag @nzlgmagazine

ISSN 0028-8403

4 l www.localgovernmentmag.co.nz

GET THE FULL TREATMENT

Mangere Waste Water Treatment Plant Biological Nutrient Removal (BNR) Upgrade

Achieve best for project outcomes and delivery certainty on your waste water treatment plant with McConnell Dowell on the team.

We have a strong track record in safely delivering complex, large-scale infrastructure projects – most recently Watercare’s Mangere Biological Nutrient Removal Upgrade in Auckland.

Our collaborative approach involves our client, designer and construction partners and we bring established relationships with an integrated, selfperforming team that can deliver all civil, structural, mechanical and electrical works, within an environment of risk management, health and safety and environmental best-practice.

Talk to us about giving your project the full McConnell Dowell treatment. www.mcconnelldowell.com BUILDING CIVIL ELECTRICAL FABRICATION MAINTENANCE MARINE MECHANICAL PIPELINES RAIL TUNNELLING

IN BRIEF

Drinking water inquiry faults councils

A Havelock North gastro report finds multiple failures and provides first steps towards better water management LGNZ CE Malcolm Alexander says the recently-released Report of the Havelock North Drinking Water Inquiry: Stage 1 provides further guidance on the lines of responsibility to meet drinking water standards and how to respond if problems do arise.

The report was the first of two investigating the outbreak of gastroenteritis in Havelock North in August last year when an estimated 5500 people became ill with campylobacteriosis.

Around 45 people were hospitalised. It is possible that the outbreak contributed to three deaths, and an unknown number of residents continue to suffer health complications.

The outbreak was traced to contamination of the drinking water supplied by two bores in Brookvale Road, on the outskirts of Havelock North, raising serious questions about the safety and security of New Zealand’s drinking water.

6 l www.localgovernmentmag.co.nz

A second report, addressing systemic issues and lessons to be learned, is due to be reported back to Attorney-General Christopher Finlayson by December 8 this year.

Malcolm Alexander says the first report “shows the need for all territorial authorities, regional councils and Ministry of Health drinking water assessors to be increasingly vigilant in the ways we manage and protect our drinking water”.

The inquiry found that several of the parties with responsibility for the water supply regime for Havelock North – in particular Hastings District Council, drinking water assessors and Hawke’s Bay Regional Council – failed to adhere to the high levels of care and diligence necessary to protect public health and to avoid outbreaks of serious illness.

The report cited significant gaps in readiness, such as the district council’s lack of an emergency response plan, draft boil water notices, and up-to-date contact lists for vulnerable individuals, schools and childcare centres.

Hastings District Council mayor Lawrence Yule has said he accepts the report’s findings as balanced and fair.

However, Hawke’s Bay Regional Council chair Rex Graham reportedly disputed that his council had failed to protect public health.

While it does refer to the recommendations made following the interim measures hearing in December last year, the Stage 1 report does not contain any new recommendations.

The second stage of the inquiry will focus on lessons which can be learned and on potential improvements for the future. Those improvements could include changes to relevant legislation, and new operating practices and procedures to promote the safety of drinking water and prevent the recurrence of similar incidents.

This second stage will also draw substantially on the experiences emerging from the inquiry’s consideration of the interim safety of the drinking water and, in particular, the work of the Joint Working Group.

The first part of the inquiry noted there had been an outbreak of campylobacteriosis in Havelock North back in July 1998. The subsequent Clark Report, produced that same year, raised doubts about the confined status of the Te Mata aquifer from which the bores in Brookdale Road drew water.

“The district council, as the water supplier, did not take the 1998 outbreak seriously enough and implement enduring, systemic changes,” says the recent inquiry report. “Memory of the earlier outbreak simply faded.”

Photo courtesy of CubaDupa, Hanna Meates.

Putting a lid on it: Bins in disguise at CubaDupa

Photo courtesy of CubaDupa, Serene Awesome.

CubaDupa festival organisers continued their commitment to minimising waste at their annual street festival in Wellington earlier this year, building on efforts from 2016. As well as installing recycling stations staffed by Sustainability Trust’s “Waste Warriors” at the event, permanent bins were covered up in creative CupaDupa style.

With an audience of 100,000, and limited control measures to prevent waste coming onto the site, managing and minimising waste is a challenge for CubaDupa. Adding to the complexity is the council stipulation delegating responsibility of all waste management to festival organisers during the event.

WelTec waste minimisation researchers Joany Grima and Leanne Nicholas were pleased to see permanent bins converted to exhibition plinths at CubaDupa, where artworks created from recycled materials were on display.

“Permanent street bins can undermine the effectiveness of waste minimisation measures applied at festivals – street festivals in particular,” says Joany.

“Using bins as small stages for artworks is something we have advocated for as part of our research into waste minimisation practices at festivals in New Zealand. It’s great to see this being implemented by CubaDupa – an example of research and practice working together to send positive waste minimisation messages.”

The research conducted by Joany and Leanne has found councils offer limited or no guidance to festival organisers about waste minimisation.

Co-governance forum for Gisborne Gisborne District Council and Turanga (Gisborne) iwi are setting up a cogovernance forum. Known as the Local Leadership Body (LLB), the forum is being set up as a result of Treaty of Waitangi Settlement legislation.

It recognises and provides for the traditional relationship of Ngai Tamanuhiri, Rongowhakaata and Te Aitanga a Māhaki with their ancestral lands, water, sites, wāhi tapu and other taonga.

The LLB will enable council and iwi to work together on significant issues and provide integrated, sustainable management of natural and physical resources within traditional rohe (areas).

The LLB will comprise six iwi representatives, two each from Ngai Tamanuhiri, Rongowhakaata and Te Aitanga a Māhaki along with mayor Meng Foon and five councillors – Andy Cranston, Meredith AkuhataBrown, Karen Fenn, Pat Seymour and Josh Wharehinga.

The region’s other iwi group Te Runanganui o Ngati Porou already has a working relationship with council through a joint management agreement for the Waiapu Catchment and for Waiapu Kōkā Hūhua, the Waiapu River restoration.

More entertainment than complaint If the new Gutsful documentary series showing on TVNZ 2 was meant to be a hard-hitting attack on local and central government, it’s pretty polite. New Plymouth District Council got little more than a gentle prod over freedom campers, inadequate signage and seeping sewage in the first of the show’s 10 weekly episodes.

Maybe there will be a bit more bite in subsequent episodes which will cover traffic problems, rubbish dumping and stupid council bylaws – not all laid at the feet of NPDC, of course.

AIRFIELD RISK MANAGEMENT...

SORTED

COMPLIANCE – COMPLAINTS – COST RECOVERY – RISK MANAGEMENT – INCIDENT MANAGEMENT

AIMM is an aircraft movement monitoring system, providing information and reports for managers of airfields and airports.

We do it ALL … no hassle for the Properties Manager ∆

Airfield/Airport experts to consult when you wish

∆

Health and Safety Checklist for small airfields

∆

Landing fees sent to your Council billing system

∆

Complete package at a very reasonable cost.

Contact Simon Lockie for a quote or to discuss your situation

ph: 09 972 2650 ext 7 @: simon @ aimm.aero www.aimm.aero

BETTER MOVEMENT REPORTING FOR BETTER AIRPORTS www.Aimm.aero info@Aimm.aero

JUNE 2017 LOCAL GOVERNMENT MAGAZINE

l

7

IN BRIEF

Tourism infrastructure boost The government has launched a Tourism Infrastructure Fund which will provide up to $25 million per annum for the next four years. The money is earmarked for the development of tourism-related infrastructure such as car parks, freedom camping facilities, and sewerage, water works and transport projects.

The new fund replaces the Regional Mid-sized Tourism Facilities Grant Fund. The first funding round opens in the second half of this year.

Signage, rest-stop facilities, i-Sites, and feasibility studies may be considered for funding on a case-by-case basis.

The Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment says the fund will not cover commercial – or semi-commercial – facilities, or infrastructure for which there is already a dedicated stream of central

government investment (such as cycle trails, and NZTA-funded land transport). Neither will it extend to infrastructure that is not directly linked to visitor volumes (such as stormwater systems).

While welcoming the fund, LGNZ president Lawrence Yule says the organisation will continue to advocate for a sustainable, long-term funding mechanism.

“Given the scale of the current issue and the growth forecasts we see the need for ongoing work in this area.”

He says the rapid growth in tourism of the past few years has put pressure on mixed-use infrastructure and highlighted the need for new infrastructure, especially in communities with a small ratepayer base and high visitor numbers.

ASBESTOS TESTING SEAL6193LG6

ASBESTOS CONTAMINATION TESTING At Hill Laboratories, we have developed asbestos contamination testing that is fast, effective and accurate. We offer the following asbestos analyses: Asbestos Identification in Bulk Materials, Asbestos Identification in Soils and Asbestos Fibre Counting. Hill Laboratories is 100% New Zealand owned and operated, with laboratories in both the North and South Islands.

Put us to the test!

FOR MORE INFO FREEPHONE

0508 HILL LAB (44 555 22)

www.hill-laboratories.com

8 l www.localgovernmentmag.co.nz

Work starts on Clutha’s Palmer Place pump station Clutha District Council has awarded the construction contract for the Palmer Place Stormwater Pump Station to Clearwater Civil for $235,309. Construction has started and is scheduled to be completed by mid-August.

Council decided at an annual plan meeting last year to install the pumping station at Palmer Place in Taieri Mouth to mitigate stormwater issues in the area.

The area has suffered from a number of flooding events over the years. The project will drain the surrounding groundwater to provide capacity for such events.

The pump station site is next to the existing drain at the head of the cul-de-sac. The water will be pumped to a dispersal field on top of the sand dunes to the east of Palmer Place.

Group manager service delivery Jules Witt says the improved pump station has been designed to cope with moderate flooding, but in extreme weather conditions there may still be some flooding.

However, the pump system will clear the water more quickly to avoid the prolonged ponding that has occurred in the past.

At $235,309, Clearwater Civil’s tender was the lowest of three. Tenders ranged up to $317,626.

BY THE NUMBERS 940 The number of play areas that Auckland Council owns or funds

$66 million The total value of Auckland Council’s playground equipment

$33 million Amount allocated in the Long-term Plan 2015-2025 for renewing these assets

A further $25 million Set aside to provide new play opportunities in areas of growth Source: Auckland Council’s Tākaro – Investing in Play Discussion Document.

School of Government’s paper now for professional development Victoria University is offering its 531 Local Government course, an optional paper for the Masters’ degree in Public Policy, for professional development as well as degree students in Auckland for the first time. The paper is aimed at people wanting to increase their knowledge of local government. It includes two one and a half day sessions in June and July. More details from Claudia.scott@vuw.ac.nz.

JUNE 2017 LOCAL GOVERNMENT MAGAZINE

l

9

IN BRIEF DATES FOR YOUR DIARY JUNE

SEPTEMBER

8 – 9 Future Workforce Forum.

Mac's Function Centre, Wellington bit.ly/SOLGM_WorkforceForum

4–5 NZRA’s Outdoors Forum.

TBA, Wellington bit.ly/NZRA_OutdoorsForum

14 LTP 101: An introduction to the 2018 LTP – Part 1 and 2.

SOLGM webinar bit.ly/SOLGM_2018LTP

13 – 15 Low Volume Roads Workshop.

Trinity Wharf, Tauranga bit.ly/REAAA_LowVolumeRoads

14 – 15 2017 CIO Summit.

SKYCITY Convention Centre, Auckland www.conferenz.co.nz/events/2017-cio-summit

17 – 19 ALGIM Spring Conference: Web & Digital and Customer Experience.

Dunedin Events Centre, Dunedin www.algim.org.nz/algim-events

19 – 20 Resource Management & Environmental Law Reform Conference.

Crowne Plaza, Auckland bit.ly/CONFERENZ_RMA_EnviroLaw 22 – 24 IPWEA NZ 2017 Conference.

Dunedin Centre, Dunedin bit.ly/IPWEA_NZConference 23 Representation Review Forum.

Mac's Function Centre, Wellington bit.ly/SOLGM_RepresentationReview 23 What Happened to Better Local Services Legislation?

SOLGM webinar bit.ly/SOLGM_LocalServicesLegislation JULY 4 – 5 Clever Buying Procurement Training for Local Government.

Christchurch bit.ly/Procurement_Training 6 Valuation of Infrastructure Assets.

Copthorne Oriental Bay, Wellington bit.ly/IPWEA_InfrastructureAssetsValuation 17 – 18 Governance Professionals and Committee Advisors Forum.

Waipuna Hotel, Auckland bit.ly/SOLGM_GovProf 23 – 25 LGNZ Conference and EXCELLENCE Awards.

SKYCITY Convention Centre, Auckland www.lgnz.co.nz 25 2017 Local Government New Zealand AGM. SKYCITY Convention Centre, Auckland www.lgnz.co.nz AUGUST 9 – 11 NZRA JAWS (Just Add Water) Conference.

Rydges, Christchurch bit.ly/NZRA_JAWS 14 – 15 Community Plan Forum.

Amora Hotel, Wellington bit.ly/SOLGM_CommunityPlanForum

17 – 22 Water New Zealand’s 59th Annual Conference and Expo.

Claudelands, Hamilton www.waternz.org.nz 28 – 29 2017 SOLGM Annual Summit.

TBA, Rotorua bit.ly/SOLGM_AnnualSummit OCTOBER 9 – 10 SOLGM’s Funding & Rating Forum.

Cliftons Wellington, Majestic Centre, Wellington bit.ly/SOLGM_FundingRatingForum 26 – 27 Infrastructure New Zealand: Building Nations Symposium – New Solutions for Infrastructure Challenges.

TSB Bank Arena, Wellington www.infrastructure.org.nz/buildingnations NOVEMBER 6 – 8 NZ Transport Agency & NZIHT 18th Annual Conference.

Trinity Wharf, Tauranga bit.ly/NZIHT_NZTA_Conference2017 6 – 9 WasteMINZ 29th Annual Conference.

Claudelands, Hamilton bit.ly/WasteMINZ_Conference2017 8 – 10 NZRA National Conference.

TBA, New Plymouth bit.ly/NZRA_NationalConference 13 – 14 Communication and Engagement Forum.

TBA, Queenstown bit.ly/SOLGM_CommunicationEngagement 13 – 15 ALGIM Annual Conference (includes infrastructure technical stream).

Rotorua Energy Events Centre, Rotorua www.algim.org.nz/algim-events DECEMBER 4 New Zealand China Mayoral Forum. LGNZ TBA, Wellington www.lgnz.co.nz

Would you like us to include your event in this calendar? Please email details to: ruth@localgovernmentmag.co.nz

10 l www.localgovernmentmag.co.nz

ON THE MOVE The tussle over who is deputy mayor of Horowhenua seems to have been resolved with Local Government Minister Anne Tolley reportedly confirming that mayor Michael Feyen can’t simply pick a deputy of his own choice – in this case Ross Campbell. So, for the record, the deputy mayor of Horowhenua is Wayne Bishop – he’s the guy selected by nine of the 10 councillors back in December last year.

Darren Ludlow resigns as deputy mayor of Invercargill City Council.

In his resignation letter he says that, after five years in the job, he wants to contribute more to other areas of his council work.

Among other roles, he chairs the finance and policy committee. He is reported saying that mayor Tim Shadbolt’s frequent travels mean the deputy mayor must dedicate more than usual time to the role.

The new deputy mayor was due to be announced as this magazine went to press.

Northland Regional Council appoints Malcolm Nicolson to a second five-year term as CE. His re-appointment officially begins at the start of October this year.

Malcolm Nicolson

Clare Hadley resigns as CE of Nelson City Council. She will stay on until late June to see through the adoption of the annual plan.

Former Finance Minister Sir Michael Cullen, Mary-Jane Daly and Kylie Clegg are appointed to the board of Auckland CCO Auckland Transport (AT). Well-known transport commentator Patrick Reynolds becomes a co-opted member of AT’s customer focus committee.

McConnell Dowell appoints Fraser Wyllie to lead its Kiwi and Pacific Islands operations and build on the foundations laid by his predecessor Roger McRae. Fraser is expected to start in the role in the first week of August. He has more than 30 years’ experience, most recently as executive general manager projects at Downer.

Outgoing MD Roger McRae has decided to step down after more than 16 years in the job and 30 years with McConnell Dowell.

Dunedin City Council is looking for a group chief financial officer. The new role combines the functions of CFO of council with those of CE of holdings company Dunedin City Holdings (DCHL).

The Construction Safety Council (CSC) appoints Roger McRae as its new chair of the governance board. He takes over from Registered Master Builders CE David Kelly. Roger is currently MD of McConnell Dowell’s New Zealand and Pacific business. Jon Harper-Slade is the new GM, CSC NZ and ConstructSafe.

Roger McRae

Former Napier MP Chris Tremain, ex-All Black Taine Jon Harper-Slade Randell and Moore Stephens Markhams MD Dan Druzianic become directors of the Hawke’s Bay Regional Investment Company. Chris will take over as chair when incumbent Sam Robinson steps down at the end of June.

Deputy mayor Sandra Hazlehurst, and councillors Simon Nixon and Bayden Barber have all confirmed they intend to stand for mayor of Hastings in the event of a by-election. Longstanding mayor Lawrence Yule reportedly said he will officially resign on August 28. Lawrence, who was selected as the national candidate for the Tukituki electorate in February this year, is also reported as indicating both he and councillor Adrienne Pierce will take unpaid leave from June 23. Adrienne has been selected as the national candidate for Palmerston North.

Lawrence did not to respond to a request for confirmation prior to this magazine’s deadline.

Warren Sharp joins Christchurch-based engineering consultancy Davis Ogilvie as technical director – contaminated land. He has worked on the Margaret Mahy Family Playground, the East and South Frame Public Realms, the Waterloo Business Park and the Bankside Remediation project. He also managed the contaminated land aspects of numerous sites as part of the Christchurch earthquake sequence rebuild.

Warren Sharp

Share with us your news of people on the move. Email: ruth@localgovernmentmag.co.nz

we see through the complex

LOCAL GOVERNMENT LAWYERS • • • •

Dispute resolution Judicial Review Enforcement LGOIMA request advice SEE HOW >

2016 New Zealand Law Awards Finalist Litigation and Dispute Resolution Specialist Law Firm of the Year

• LIM content advice • Regulatory advice under R.M.A, Building Act, Local Government Act

Call : 09 972 9422

JUNE 2017 LOCAL GOVERNMENT MAGAZINE

l

11

PRODUCTS & SERVICES Freedom camping: services for councils Hammond Robertson has launched a one-stop-resource for news, views and research on freedom camping. Director David Hammond says his is the only company in the country offer the full range of freedom camping support services to councils.

Services include: bylaw review and development; strategic (destination management) planning; training of enforcement officers; and review and development of regulatory systems.

The new website is www.freedomcampingsolutions.co.nz.

This is linked to a new Facebook page for interaction and on which David loads training videos: www.facebook.com/freedomcampingsolutions

New filler for geotechnical projects Mainmark Ground Engineering has introduced Terefil, a structural lightweight cementitious filler for geotechnical applications. It says the solution is a costeffective alternative to traditional void filling methods, such as aggregate or granular fills.

Christchurch construction and maintenance company City Care recently used Terefil as an emergency void-fill solution for an abandoned pipeline.

Mainmark says Terefil is ideal for time-sensitive or emergency situations. In addition to being suitable for abandoned inground pipes, it is also designed as a mass fill for large geological voids, sink holes, tanks, tunnels, mineshafts as well as other mass-fill requirements such as bridge approaches and landslip repairs.

Shrinkage is typically less than 0.1 to 0.3 percent with zero bleed and compressive strengths of 300kPa to 10MPa. It is also pumpable to distances of up to 4000 metres at rates ranging from tens to 100 cubic metres per hour.

Huawei releases public safety solutions Huawei has introduced C-C4ISR Collaborative Public Safety Solutions which it says will drive digital transformation of the global public safety industry. Together with public safety partners such as YITU, SenseTime, Zenith, iOmniscient and GSAFETY, Huawei also released the first all-cloud and matrix intelligence Video Cloud Solution and Crisis and Disaster Management Solution. The solutions are designed to address diverse safety threats and protect people in cities across the world.

The company, an international information and communications technology (ICT) solutions provider, announced the releases at its Global Safe City Summit 2017 in Dubai recently.

Huawei says that by using new ICT such as the Internet of Things (IoT), big data, mobile broadband, and Software-Defined Networking (SDN), as well as cloud-pipe-device synergy, the solution will help drive collaboration among government agencies as well as between government agencies and citizens.

Solar Power Catalogue YHI New Zealand has released its newly-revised Solar Power Product Catalogue. The brochure highlights an extensive range of solar products from brands including SolaX, Enphase, Suntellite, Renesola, Neuton Power, SMA, LG Chem and the recent addition of Trina Solar PV modules. bit.ly/SolarPowerCatalogue

12 l www.localgovernmentmag.co.nz

Colorsteel Dridex signals the age of paperless New Zealand Steel has just introduced Colorsteel Dridex which it describes as a simple alternative to old-school roofing underlay and netting, and much quicker to install than building paper.

Colorsteel Dridex is designed for the mild to moderate conditions encountered throughout most of the country. Colorsteel Dridex+ is for more severe marine environments.

Both systems meet ASNZS2728 and are highly resistant to corrosion.

The range has an anti-condensation fleece layer to absorb and store accumulating water, preventing it from travelling to roof structures or walls. The stored water evaporates away when the roof temperature rises.

Tell us about your products & services If you have recently launched a new product or service please email editor Ruth Le Pla for next steps on sharing your story with the people who make the buying decisions in local government. All articles published at the discretion of the editor. ruth@localgovernmentmag.co.nz

EVENTS AT THE WATER NEW ZEALAND 2017 STORMWATER CONFERENCE IN AUCKLAND.

1

2

3

4

1. Sam Burgess & Charles Sweeney (both from McMillen Jacobs Associates).

2. Oggie Kralj (Calibre Consulting) & Vijesh Chandra (GHD).

3. Graham Levy (Beca). Awarded the 2017 Water New Zealand Stormwater Group Paper of the Year.

4. Allan Leahy (MWH). Awarded 2017 Water New Zealand Stormwater Group Professional of the Year.

5. Benoit Midol (Downer) & Bronwyn Rhynd (CKL Surveys and conference chair).

6. Steve McIntosh & Ivo Van Dael (both from Stormwater360).

5

6

JUNE 2017 LOCAL GOVERNMENT MAGAZINE

l

13

LEGAL

things you need to know about the Resource Legislation Amendment Act & iwi participation

14 l www.localgovernmentmag.co.nz

The Mana Whakahono a Rohe (MWR) provisions are among the controversial law changes that delayed the Resource Legislation Amendment Bill. They give iwi rights to demand more say in planning, monitoring and possibly consenting under the Resource Management Act 1991. The MWR provisions are now in force. Franks Ogilvie’s Stephen Franks and Pam McMillan give a practical outline of what they could mean.

1

What is a Mana Whakahono a Rohe?

MWRs are agreements made between a local authority, and iwi or hapū in an area (called “participating authorities”) on how iwi or hapū will participate in resource management and decision-making under the RMA. A MWR can be between multiple local authorities and multiple iwi / hapū or there could be multiple MWRs within one local authority area.

An iwi authority can initiate a MWR with a local authority. A local authority can initiate a MWR with an iwi authority or with hapū.

Once initiated eventual “agreement” is compulsory (asking how that works is a fair question). Though MWRs with hapū could multiply the number of MWRs, confining the initiation of hapū agreements to a local authority mitigates this risk.

2

Are they new?

The statutory obligation to have MWR type arrangements is new and so are the stipulations for what they must contain.

Some local authorities have existing similar arrangements.

If iwi agree, a local authority may treat them as MWRs. The law doesn’t say whether an existing arrangement must be amended to add the new mandatory requirements.

Existing arrangements under other statutes are preserved and not limited.

3

How far can MWRs go to authorising partnership governance of RMA matters? Could a MWR provide for iwi reps to sit with councillors?

The MWR provisions go further than the Iwi Participation proposal in the Bill as introduced and what was proposed in the Next Steps for Freshwater reform. The Select Committee report explained that MWRs have a “broader scope that includes consenting and monitoring”. The drafting is permissive. Some scope issues may be resolved only with lawyer time (and litigation).

General rule of law principles may narrow the apparent scope, but joint committees are already permitted. MWRs can probably agree for the delegation of particular decision powers to such committees or to iwi participation authorities directly. MWRs may not authorise iwi reps to sit as members of governing bodies (s 41 Local Government Act 2002 is clear). But they could provide for iwi rep membership of council committees, and for attendance, and speaking and information rights at governing body meetings.

4

Do councils have to agree to MWRs? Yes, a local authority must agree a MWR within 18 months after an iwi asks for one. If agreement is not reached the parties must accept binding or non-binding dispute resolution, covering their own costs. If non-binding dispute resolution is unsuccessful the Minister of Local Government can appoint a Crown facilitator or direct the participating authorities to use a dispute resolution process (binding if the Minister directs).

5

What can a MWR be about?

The legislation does not specify MWRs. It describes them.

A MWR “must” include some things and “may” include others. A MWR must specify (s 58R(1)(i) – (iv)): • how an iwi authority may participate in the preparation or change of a policy statement or plan; • how the participating authorities will undertake consultation requirements; • how the participating authorities will work together to develop and agree on methods for monitoring; and • how the participating authorities will give effect to the requirements of any relevant iwi participation legislation.

A MWR may specify (s 58R(4)(a)-(c)): • how a local authority is to consult or notify an iwi authority on resource consent matters; • the circumstances in which an iwi authority may be given limited notification as an affected party; and • any arrangement relating to other functions, duties or powers under the RMA. The “may include” section is arguably exclusive, but the last paragraph above (s 58R(4)(c)) is an imprecise ‘catch all’ clause.

Remarkably there appears to be nothing to prevent the transfer of practical exercise of any power, function or duty under the RMA (but not the LGA) to an iwi authority or hapū. This includes any RMA function or power of regional councils (under s 30) and territorial authorities (under s 31). Theoretically, it could extend even to the power to set charges under s 36(1) of the RMA. A local authority must use its “best endeavours” to comply with a MWR when preparing a proposed policy statement or plan. The model in the drafters’ minds may have been a MWR that automatically has iwi authority joining a new collaborative planning process.

JUNE 2017 LOCAL GOVERNMENT MAGAZINE

l

15

LEGAL

6

What about resource consents?

A MWR may specify when and how a local authority is to notify iwi authorities or hapū about new resource consent applications or consult with them on applications. A MWR may also describe circumstances (eg, what constitutes an “adverse effect”) for when an iwi authority or hapū is given limited notification as an affected party.

There could be tension with s 36A of the RMA that says local authorities and applicants have no duty to consult with any person about an application. If s 36A is respected a MWR will not be able to impose indirect iwi consultation obligations on applicants.

7

Who pays for the new arrangements?

This isn’t clear. A so called “guiding principle” in s 58N is that participating authorities must use their best endeavours to collaborate including by the “coordination” of resources required to undertake the obligations and responsibilities under a MWR. MWR funding provisions will likely specify for iwi or hapū to be remunerated and / or reimbursed for their costs in carrying out MWR functions. Some guidance might be taken from the funding agreement between the Independent Maori Statutory Board (IMSB) and the Auckland Council. The first annual funding agreement emerged from settlement of a litigation threat on terms favourable to the IMSB. Auckland councillors justifiably complained about serious uncertainty in the law establishing their funding obligation. That uncertainty seems to have suited the government, because this new law is no clearer.

The new law changes provisions governing council charges for RMA processes (s 360E). They are still confined to meeting council costs, but if MWRs provide for councils to meet iwi costs (for example for new monitoring powers), many of those amounts will become council costs that may be recovered by council charges.

8

What about conflicts of interest or disputes?

A MWR must record, under s 58R, a process for identifying and managing conflicts of interest. It is not clear what that should mean in practice. Conflict of interest arrangements can extend from simple advice of a conflict (to enable others around the table to take it into account) with no other disqualification or consequence, up to complete disqualification from participation. The “weak form” conflict provision in the Hawke’s Bay Regional Planning Committee Act 2015 could be headed “Conflicts Disregarded”.

Strong form conflict provisions could frustrate the new law’s intention. For example, when a proposed plan or resource consent application directly affects iwi or hapū land they would reasonably expect the MWR to give them direct and sustained input. That may be contrary to normal probity protocols for local government, but the Treaty arguments for the MWR regime would support the restoration to iwi of more control of their own properties. A MWR must also record the process for resolving disputes under a MWR. These processes are not prescribed. A dispute cannot cause a local authority to suspend any process under the RMA (s 58R(3)), presumably to prevent the use of disputes as de facto veto mechanisms.

16 l www.localgovernmentmag.co.nz

9

Could councils be liable for losses caused by MWR processes? What financial oversight will there be?

The new law does not provide for MWR party oversight by the Auditor General, but judicial review will not be excluded. A council could be liable for wrongful conduct of iwi representatives exercising delegated powers if that should have been obvious to the council. Suitable wording in a MWR could mitigate but not eliminate such risks.

10

Could a council be liable for allowing too much iwi influence?

These provisions enter novel constitutional ground.

They contemplate delegation of coercive powers that are usually confined to persons who are clearly appointed and supervised and subject to disciplines and prescriptions designed to limit room for whim and abuse. RMA consent and monitoring powers are wielded by people for whom councils have clear responsibility / liability, even where those individuals benefit from limitations on personal liability.

The new provisions contain no express safeguards for citizens. The Select Committee requirement that agreements contain ‘conflict of interest’ provisions does not provide for Auditor General protections against corruption, for example. There are no qualification, supervision or training requirements for iwi participants.

The powers exercised nevertheless remain those of the council so a court may be able to extend the common law and LGA liabilities of local authorities and members (ss 43-47) to ensure that citizens do not lose the remedies they would have had, if the powers had not been delegated to persons outside the normal appointment and accountability regime. Councils, for example, will likely be found liable if they do not show adequate precaution against abuses of authority, or against decisions made without reasonable foundation.

11

Could a council be liable if iwi representatives abuse their privileges, for example misuse or leak confidential information under a MWR? Possibly, if it can be established that the council should have seen the risk and taken inadequate steps to guard against the loss. But this will come down to circumstances including whether the iwi authority is acting within a delegation from the council at the time or is ‘on a frolic of its own’.

12 13

Can the council change or cancel a MWR? Once agreed to, a MWR cannot be changed or terminated without the agreement of all parties (iwi authorities, hapū and local authorities).

Will it reduce the uncertainty about who councils must consult or engage with?

In practice the MWRs could work to reduce uncertainty. They are expected to result in identification of “participating authorities” (s 58R(1)(b)).

However, the existing RMA provisions giving special rights to iwi have been supplemented, not replaced by these changes. A council, for example, will still need to consult with “the tangata whenua of the area who may be so affected, through iwi authorities” during the preparation of a proposed policy statement or plan (clause 3(1)(d),

Schedule 1 RMA). The existence of an MWR does not eliminate the scope for contesting claims over the rohe affected and who is entitled to be involved.

There may be increased dispute where some iwi are without MWRs or where there are internal or inter-group disputes about authority and mandate or rohe.

The changes do not require iwi or whanau to be authorised by their members before initiating a MWR. This is a little surprising.

The Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Act 2011 has resulted in the Ministry of Justice developing procedures for iwi, hapū or whanau to send public notices to their members.

14

Can a council decide which side to agree with in a divided iwi?

The new law does not address this problem.

Section 58S on the “resolution of disputes that arise in the course of negotiating Mana Whakahono A Rohe” applies to disputes that arise among “participating authorities” (ie, the iwi authority or local authority) and not within them.

The prudent course for a council will probably be, as now, to try to deal with all factions without appearing to prejudge the outcome of internal wrangling until that becomes impractical. A council should ask the right questions about the scope of the rohe, and the authority of individuals claiming or purporting to represent iwi.

15

Can a council agree that iwi are experts

on their tikanga, so as not to get caught in the middle of arguments about things like whether a taniwha exists or must be respected?

Such an approach may appear to lower the risk of becoming embroiled in arguments which a council is not equipped to resolve.

The Auckland Council’s Unitary Plan has a policy that: “recognises Mana Whenua as specialists in the tikanga of their hapū or iwi and as being best placed to convey their relationship with their ancestral lands, water, sites, wāhi tapu and other taonga” (RPS B6.2.6.(e)).

However, we think courts will find that the council remains the decision maker on plans, policies and resource consent applications under the RMA. It will need adequate evidence and will not be entitled to accept untested claims.

The Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Act 2011 invites courts to refer to the Maori Appellate Court or pukenga for an opinion or advice on tikanga. MWR agreements could stipulate a process for investigating and deciding on such matters. LG • Stephen Franks is a principal at Franks Ogilvie. stephen.franks@franksogilvie.co.nz • Pam McMillan is a senior solicitor at Franks Ogilvie. pam.mcmillan@franksogilvie.co.nz

CAT® DIESEL GENERATOR SETS

EXTENDED SERVICE COVERAGE A FREE PLATINUM 4 YEAR EXTENDED SERVICE COVERAGE (ESC) IS YOURS WHEN YOU PURCHASE A CAT STANDBY GENERATOR* Now when you purchase a diesel generator set (excluding those models that meet the Tier 4 final emission standards) or a gas generator set (300kW and below) sold into standby applications, you’ll receive a FREE Platinum 4 Year ESC with no deductible.

Run the generator up to 500 hours/year? It still qualifies as a standby.

You may extend the ESC up to 10 years for an additional charge. Cat units are also eligible for the Platinum Plus Coverage.

*Conditions Apply

Gough Cat Power Systems | 16 Branston Street, Hornby, Christchurch, New Zealand | 0800 CAT POWER | GoughCat.co.nz/power-systems

JUNE 2017 LOCAL GOVERNMENT MAGAZINE

l

17

PLANNING

Plan making processes New tools in the toolbox Last month the new provisions in the Resource Legislation Amendment Act 2017 on iwi participation agreements were under the spotlight. This month, Lucy de Latour (pictured), from law firm Wynn Williams, discusses the new plan-making processes.

T

he recent passing of the Resource Legislation Amendment Act 2017 has seen the most significant changes to the procedures for plan making under the Resource Management Act 1991 since its inception.

Until now, there has only been one main process available to councils for making or changing planning documents. As of April 2017, councils have two new options: the collaborative planning process and the streamlined planning process.

Modifications to allow limited notification under the current Schedule 1 process have also been introduced.

The collaborative planning process Collaborative planning is not an entirely new concept, with a number of councils already forming collaborative groups to inform planning policy, particularly in relation to freshwater planning.

The new collaborative process goes further though, prescribing what range of people must be represented on

18 l www.localgovernmentmag.co.nz

the collaborative group and requiring the group to produce a report, including the matters on which the members have reached consensus.

One of the most interesting aspects of the collaborative process is the teeth given to the collaborative group’s consensus recommendations as the council must draft a proposed policy statement or plan which gives effect to the group’s consensus recommendations.

After notification and the calling for submissions, a review panel (essentially an independent hearings panel) must be constituted to hear submissions and make recommendations to the council.

The council has the opportunity to accept or reject the review panel’s recommendations in its decision. If a recommendation is rejected, an alternative must be provided.

Appeal rights (by way of rehearing) depend on whether the review panel’s recommendations have been rejected and whether or not the consensus recommendations have been adopted.

All other aspects of the decision can only be appealed to the Environment Court on a question of law. Interestingly, collaborative groups have a separate right of appeal.

The new process should help facilitate community buy-in to planning processes. This should be welcomed as community engagement in planning has suffered as the evidence to support planning decisions has become increasingly complex.

However, the multi-step nature of the process, in which councils also lose a degree of control, may see cautious uptake.

The streamlined planning process Under the streamlined planning process, the focus is on getting planning provisions in place quickly. Under this process, councils can request the responsible Minister to make a direction that a streamlined planning process be used.

The criteria for its use include that the proposed planning document will implement a national direction, is urgent as a matter of public policy, is required to meet a significant community need, deals with an unintended consequence of a planning document, or requires an expeditious process.

The Minister has a wide discretion in relation to what matters must be included in the direction, including the provision for public consultation. While the direction must include an opportunity for written submissions, there is no requirement for a hearing of submissions (although that may be included).

Once the process required by the direction has been followed, the Minister must make a decision on the planning document.

There is no right of appeal (either on the merits, or on questions of law) from the Minister’s decision.

The removal of a requirement to hear submissions, and of appeal rights, represents a significant departure from usual planmaking procedures. However, there are some similarities with the processes adopted for the preparation of some of the recovery plans in Christchurch following the earthquakes.

A range of planning processes might benefit from the streamlined

Performance

+

Rewards

=

process. Small, non-contentious plan changes, required in response to an unintended consequence of a plan provision, or where there is an urgent need for planning intervention, could be obvious candidates for Ministerial intervention.

The future for plan making?

The new processes should be welcomed by councils which now have options to tailor plan-making processes, reflecting that not all plans and plan changes are equal. However, councils will need to be mindful of the fact that the processes are not a panacea to legal challenge.

While the processes may result in fewer Environment Court appeals, the restriction on participation and appeal rights is likely to see an increase in challenges to decisions via judicial review.

It will also be interesting to see just how many councils are willing to let go of the drafting pen by using collaborative planning and streamlined planning processes, given the increasing importance being placed on the contents of regional policy statements and plans following the Supreme Court’s decision in EDS v NZ King Salmon [2014] NZSC 38.

In this case, the Supreme Court found that resort to an overall broad judgment applying the purpose and principles of the RMA, under Part 2, (rather than applying the higher order planning documents) should only occur if there was an allegation of invalidity, incomplete coverage or uncertainty in meaning of the higher order planning documents.

This decision has had a range of implications and has seen greater emphasis placed on the wording of planning documents in determining the content of planning documents and deciding whether applications for resource consent should be granted. LG • Lucy de Latour is a partner at law firm Wynn Williams.

Lucy.deLatour@wynnwilliams.co.nz

Success

Create Success

by Rewarding Performance At Strategic Pay we understand Local Government and your unique issues.

Talk to us about: Organisational Structure and Design Remuneration and Reward Performance Management

• • • www.strategicpay.co.nz | info@strategicpay.co.nz Auckland 09 303 4045 Hamilton 07 834 6580 Wellington 04 473 2313 Christchurch 03 353 0909 Dunedin 03 479 0637

StrategicPay JUNE 2017 LOCAL GOVERNMENT MAGAZINE

l

19

WASTE MANAGEMENT

Zip, nada, nothing Engaging Auckland communities to deliver zero waste Auckland Council is on an ambitious journey to reduce its waste to landfill through a programme of community-based engagement and delivery initiatives.

D

eep in the heart of any zero waste initiative lies an understanding that waste is everyone’s issue. Everybody contributes to its generation and everyone has the opportunity to make reductions. By employing waste champions, creating a network of community recycling centres and working with community-based organisations, Auckland Council is ensuring the greatest advocates for change are the people themselves.

Auckland’s waste plan aims to empower people to rethink waste as a resource and to take responsibility for an issue previously managed by councils out-of-sight and out-of-mind.

Since the adoption of its first Waste Management and Minimisation Plan (WMMP) in 2012 Auckland Council has been on a far-reaching programme to transform how the city manages its waste. Its aim is to deliver zero waste to landfill by 2040. This ambitious goal spans both household and commercial waste. For Auckland, getting its waste sorted will be essential if it is to achieve its aspiration of being the world’s most liveable city.

The initial focus is on household waste. The introduction of consistent reuse and recycling collections, together with a number of community-based initiatives, have already seen household waste tonnages fall by around 10 percent since 2012.

With food waste collections and user-pays refuse bins to be introduced across the region over the next few years it is anticipated that a further 20 percent reduction will be achieved by 2020.

Ian Stupple, council’s general manager of waste solutions, is leading the Auckland waste transformation programme. This includes devolving services from seven former councils to the current ‘super city’ and its 1.5 million residents.

Ian’s previous experience is in the public, private and community sectors in the UK including a role as director for street services at Croydon, London’s largest council. Ian has also owned an environmental consultancy which included the operation of a community enterprise.

He says the Auckland project is a “comprehensive programme of change” aiming to divert materials from the

20 l www.localgovernmentmag.co.nz

waste stream, and encourage reuse and recycling to become a regular part of Aucklanders’ lives.

He believes this must be the biggest change to waste services in the Southern Hemisphere since the Auckland amalgamation in 2010.

He adds that new services are being progressively rolled-out.

These include a network of community-led community recycling centres, a third bin for food waste and a new inorganic service that diverts useful material to community organisations.

Community-based A key factor to date in reducing household waste has been the council’s community-based approach to engaging and developing communities around the message of zero waste.

This has seen the introduction of some practical, on-the-ground measures while encouraging creativity to drive locally-inspired and -owned solutions.

Over 35 community-based waste champions have been recruited to partner with local community organisations, businesses and schools. Via this partnership model, diverse Auckland communities tailor their own engagement from within their networks.

This has enabled the community waste champions to develop programmes with reach and capacity far beyond that of council working alone. Ian says this is resulting in communities becoming more passionate about what happens with their waste. They are also becoming more connected and resilient.

A small team of council staff support the community by providing resources and ‘Waste 101’ sessions. Delivery is done locally by waste champions in one-on-one or group engagement sessions at churches, community events or schools. In-depth community engagement trials have demonstrated high rates of uptake and long-term retention of new practices by up to 80 percent.

Waste champions and communities are also widening their environmental focus as waste is seen as a gateway to wider environmental awareness and action. The Puhinui stream clean-up organised by waste champions in 2016, for example, set a record for the biggest clean-up yet. Some 1900 local

Zero Waste champion.

Waiuku Community Recycling Centre staff.

Community recycling staff.

Recycling in Waiuku The Waiuku Community Recycling Centre was the first site to be established as part of Auckland’s Resource Recovery Network. In November 2014 a local enterprise, Waiuku Zero Waste, opened its doors to the public after winning a five-year contract to operate the site which was previously underutilised as a waste transfer station.

The contract was let using a social procurement approach developed by the council’s waste team. The site has become a community destination and provides residents with a place to drop off a wide range of reusable and recyclable materials, as well as waste. It also has a shop, the Waiuku Junktion, where second-hand goods are sold, and a workshop where furniture is restored.

The centre is diverting over 70 percent of materials coming onto the site, a significant step towards achieving Auckland’s aspirational goal of zero waste to landfill by 2040.

Ten people have been employed – equivalent to 4.6 full-timeequivalent (FTE) positions – and all staff have received some form of training ranging from gaining a forklift licence to electrical testing certification.

Waiuku Zero Waste has returned a profit each year and is on track towards achieving financial sustainability over its five-year contract.

Additional grants and funding sources have been accessed as a result of the enterprise’s contract with the council.

JUNE 2017 LOCAL GOVERNMENT MAGAZINE

l

21

WASTE MANAGEMENT

Community recycling centre.

people worked to remove over nine tonnes of rubbish from a 10 kilometre stretch of stream. Since then communities and businesses have adopted sections of the stream and continue to maintain them.

The waste champions and education programmes are also building social capital in diverse ethnic and low socioeconomic communities. Self-reporting from communities has identified improved social outcomes such as increased interpersonal connection and neighbourhood pride.

There are individual benefits too. One participant who adopted a waste minimisation approach to saving money achieved her financial goal of saving a deposit for a house.

Auckland Council is also a key supporter of the national zero waste programme to support waste minimisation on marae. Para Kore Ki Tamaki Makaurau has a particular focus on reuse, recycling and food waste reduction. And waste champions are reporting improved personal health and wellbeing amongst those involved in the programme including reduced weight, smoking and depression.

Community Recycling Centres The council is also developing an Auckland-wide Resource Recovery Network based around the provision of 12 Community Recycling Centres over the next eight years.

This initiative aims to maximise economic development opportunities including job creation by diverting waste from landfill, and supporting local enterprise and innovation.

To date, four community recycling sites have been established.

Each is managed by local community enterprises on a minimum five-year contract. A further four trials are underway focusing on building community capacity. The centres provide the capacity for residents and businesses to separate, sort and

22 l www.localgovernmentmag.co.nz

recover resources. Each site also has a shop where it on-sells reusable or upcycled material.

Ian says the council has taken a strong leadership role to ensure the network achieves its full potential and seeks to establish selfsustainable businesses over the life of the contracts. As a result, a social procurement approach was taken when contracting with the current community enterprises. This not only maximises the diversion of reusable and recyclable materials from landfill, but also generates multiple environmental, social, cultural and economic benefits.

The contracts are set up as social enterprise partnership models, with open book accounting, profit sharing and robust monthly reporting. Council retains ownership of the sites and infrastructure, and ongoing technical support is provided to the community operators through the Community Recycling Network and council staff.

Council will continue to support community operators to develop training, succession planning, governance and mentoring. Council is also able to provide operators with access to preferential purchasing and service rates that council has access to, giving the operators the benefits of economies of scale.

Currently the recycling sites are exceeding the job creation estimates in the original strategy. The four relativelyundeveloped recycling centres in Waiuku, Helensville, Devonport and Waitakere are employing 48 staff in 26 full-time-equivalent roles.

The centres also create opportunities for volunteering with 27 regular volunteers currently working at the four sites. There are also a larger number of casual volunteers and Correction Department referrals. In total, 840 hours per month of volunteer time is being donated at the four sites – mostly by local people

taking up the opportunity to connect and be part of their communities.

The recycling centres are also offering a pathway into productive employment, with a quarter of the jobs filled by long-term unemployed.

The aim is that the recycling sites become zero waste hubs promoting waste minimisation and resource efficiency.

Community Recycling Centres also provide the ideal collection infrastructure for product stewardship schemes, which is an initiative the council supports through advocacy.

Product stewardship schemes and associated revenue would help support operational expenses with sites being used as collection depots for tyres, batteries, electronic waste and other items when schemes are introduced.

The sites will also stimulate economic growth in the recycling sector in Auckland by providing additional materials for recyclers, as well as collecting materials that are not currently recycled but around which new businesses can be formed.

Each site is currently diverting around 70 percent of its material: most of which would have previously gone to landfill.

It is estimated that over the next 10 years over 100,000 tonnes of reusable and recyclable material will be diverted from these community-based sites. This significant waste diversion will reduce carbon emissions from transport and methane emissions from landfills. It will also decrease leachate production in landfills.

Community Recycling Centres run by local enterprises also provide natural hubs for developing local resilience. Kaikoura’s Recycling Centre showed this, playing a key role in developing the connections that helped the community cope immediately after the earthquake, and later during the clean-up and recovery phase.

On a smaller scale, but closer to home, Auckland Council was able to help families displaced by flooding in west Auckland in March this year by working with the Waitakere Community Recycling Centre to provide access to second-hand goods. In the event of large-scale disaster Auckland may also need the capacity to handle large volumes of material from damaged buildings and debris.

Not to be sniffed at Auckland Council’s work was recognised with a top Award for Excellence at last year’s Waste Management Institute New Zealand (WasteMINZ) conference. It won the best communication, engagement or education initiative category for its inorganic collection service.

The award-winning project was led by Auckland Council, with collections by Waste Management NZ, and materials sorted and distributed to community groups by the Community Recycling Network.

Inorganic waste On top of this, back in September 2015 the council introduced a new region-wide inorganic (bulky / hard waste) collection service. This is offered annually across the region to all eligible households. Although many of the former councils in the Auckland area had previously provided a kerbside service there had been a number of concerns about illegal dumping, health and safety, and poor resource recovery as all material collected went to landfill.

The new service is booked online or by phone with collections taking place on property. To date, over 100,000 collections have been made with over 3000 tonnes of the material being reused or recycled.

Over 90 community groups and charities have access to the recovered material which is taken back to a central warehouse where it is distributed by the Community Recycling Network.

In addition over 20,000 items of electronic waste have been collected. With the previous collection method this hazardous waste would have all been sent to landfill. Instead these items are now dismantled by the Abilities Group, a local non-profit, incorporated society dedicated to enriching the lives of people with disabilities through meaningful work.

As Ian summarises, the council has taken a different approach to social procurement, engagement and communications. “And we’ve seen positive improvements in customer satisfaction, waste diversion and resource recovery, while creating a valuable resource to support community organisations, charities and a new wave of social enterprises.” LG

CCNZ REPRESENTS NEW ZEALAND’S CIVIL and GENERAL CONTRACTING INDUSTRY We provide a forum for Councils to connect with their local contractors around issues such as procurement, health and safety, forward work planning and sustainability.

For contact details for your local CCNZ Branch go to www.nzcontractors.co.nz or

Phone 0800 692 376

JUNE 2017 LOCAL GOVERNMENT MAGAZINE

l

23

MANAGEMENT

Diversity at the top Is the future workforce female?

More young women are taking up leadership roles in local government – a trend apparent in recent chief executive appointments and from survey results.

However, there’s still plenty of room for improvement.

W

Monique Davidson

Nedine Thatcher Swann

24 l www.localgovernmentmag.co.nz

hen earlier this year, Monique Davidson was appointed chief executive officer of Central Hawke’s Bay District Council she hadn’t even turned 30. Monique, the Horowhenua District Council’s customer and community services group manager, shifts to her new role on June 6 this year.

Horowhenua’s chief executive David Clapperton says he had always believed Monique would achieve her stated goal of becoming a CE by the time she was 35.

Now she’s five years ahead of target.

Monique is among a handful of young female senior executives within local government.

She says she had never considered local government as a career option. “But once involved I soon realised the career progression opportunities and the unique ability offered in the sector to make a real difference to local communities,” she says.

“Strong communities require strong and diverse leadership. Women should absolutely engage in opportunities that enable them to positively contribute to the future leadership of New Zealand.”

Monique was the 2012 recipient of the SOLGM and Leadership Development Centre’s Leadership in Practice (LiP) Programme scholarship. At the time she was one of the youngest participants ever to be awarded the scholarship.

Meanwhile, on March 13 this year, 40-year-old Nedine Thatcher Swann became chief executive of Gisborne District Council after serving as the council’s group manager planning and development.

“When I started my first job at the Gisborne District Council in 2009, I was

the first female on the executive team,” she says. “The council has now had two female chief executives, one of whom happens to also be Ngāti Porou – me.”

Like Monique, Nedine says she always knew she wanted to be a chief executive.

While she hadn’t initially focused on the public sector, she says she has found working in local government “one of the most fulfilling and diverse jobs I’ve experienced.

Working for your own community is the icing on the cake.”

Survey results These two recent examples reflect broader trends. Recently-released data from the Australasian LG Performance Excellence Program – which benchmarks seven areas of council performance – has revealed positive improvements in the area of workforce management from the 30 New Zealand councils and 105 Australian councils that participated in the FY16 survey.

New Zealand councils have a higher percentage of Gen Y employees (28 percent), compared to Western Australia (WA) (26 percent) and New South Wales (NSW) councils (22 percent).

However, although Gen Y employees enter the local government workforce, they often don’t stay. The median Gen Y turnover rate in New Zealand councils is 30 percent over the period surveyed.

This is an improvement on the 33 percent rate in FY15, but it’s almost double the overall FY16 New Zealand turnover rate of 16.9 percent.

In addition, the survey shows the turnover rate for both Gen X and Baby Boomers is much lower, at 12 percent each.

Women now comprise 58 percent of the overall workforce in New Zealand participating councils (up from 57 percent in FY15), compared to 49 percent in WA and 40 percent in NSW councils.

Women are better represented within the senior leadership levels in New Zealand councils, with a median of 33 percent female CEOs and directors, compared to a median of 20 percent in both NSW and WA councils. There is speculation that this is due to New Zealand councils being more proactive in bringing in women from nongovernment sectors.

SOLGM chief executive Karen Thomas says she welcomes diversity in the local government sector. “The survey results are in line with increased attendance by young women at our Leading Practice Forums and leadership development events. We encourage more young women to take steps towards leadership roles.”

As positive as the New Zealand statistics are, Karen adds that SOLGM is looking at ways to do more to encourage the best talent in the sector.

“At a practical level, we’ve profiled young people in local government in a video, banner and flyer and made these LGCareers resources available to councils to support their recruitment efforts.”

Councils around New Zealand are taking different approaches to recruiting diverse workforces. Stephen Davies, head of people & capability strategy and partnership at Auckland Council, says his council is developing an organisationwide diversity and inclusion framework called Inclusive Auckland.

“A key component of the framework is understanding how we can embed diversity and inclusion within our workforce,” he says.

“The council is one of the country’s biggest public sector employers so it is critical to reflect the city we serve. Our initiatives address a range of diverse groups including gender, ethnicity, age, disability and sexual orientation. We are also working on a number of specific initiatives to build a more diverse talent recruitment pipeline.”

The survey results reveal that New Zealand councils are more focused on the future, compared to NSW and WA councils. Fifty seven percent of the Kiwi councils that responded to the survey say they are targeting a pipeline of future leaders. This compares with around 45 percent of councils in NSW and WA. Although New Zealand is outperforming Australia in some workforce management areas, only two out of the 30 New Zealand participating councils (seven percent) have a succession planning programme in place, with NSW (13 percent) and WA (nine percent) councils in a similar position. This is despite 56 percent of CEOs and 34 percent of directors having the option to retire in 10 years.

Local government experts are warning that councils may face a shortage of skilled staff in the next decade as Baby Boomers retire and Gen Y choose other sectors.

LG Professionals NSW CEO Annalisa Haskell agrees. “This is going to have a huge impact,” she says. “If we don’t have the workforce, we can’t do the work.” LG

FUNDING FOR INFRASTRUCTURE

If you’re keen to take advantage of the Government’s recentlyannounced Infrastructure Funding to ensure your communities make the most of the tourism boom, we can help too.

The NZMCA’s Dump Station Subsidy has already helped fund the installation of more than 100 public dump stations around

the country and is accepting applications now. We can also assist with materials and technical advice.

For more information, contact: Belinda Gwilliam 09 298 5466 ext 713; belinda@nzmca.org.nz

New Zealand Motor Caravan Association | P 09 298 5466 | www.mhftowns.com | www.nzmca.org.nz JUNE 2017 LOCAL GOVERNMENT MAGAZINE

l

25

ENVIRONMENT

Not

green enough Local government, the Resource Management Act & the environment Geoffrey Palmer says the performance of local government in relation to the environment seems to be seriously deficient.

T

he Resource Management Act 1991 conferred on local government important responsibilities to protect New Zealand’s environment. The Act is all about imposing environmental bottom lines that keep economic development within the capacity of the environment to support it.

Regional councils, where they exist, have heavy responsibilities to maintain New Zealand’s clean and green image. Yet, in many respects they have failed.

The principles of sustainable management that drive the Resource Management Act can be, and have been, subverted by a number of factors: • weak central government leadership in providing the policy guidance the Act entrusts to it;

26 l www.localgovernmentmag.co.nz

•p olitical influences on regional councils that attempt to tip the scales against the environment and in favour of development; • government policies explicitly designed to encourage the intensification of agriculture by raising primary production export earnings and subsidising irrigation projects; • conflicts of interest within regional councils between obligations as environmental regulators compared with development activities undertaken by the council, the most egregious example being the Ruataniwha Dam project in the Hawkes Bay; • failure to enforce the law contained in plans and enforce consent conditions, thus going soft on polluters. Dr Marie Brown’s recently published research for the Environmental Defence Society (EDS) demonstrates the point.

The great advantage of the Environment Court in resource management matters flows from its judicial independence.

The court listens objectively to the evidence, usually based on science, and tests it against the requirements of the Act on sustainable management.

The court is free from political spin, bias and the influence of special interests.

Two recent decisions from the Environment Court demonstrate the value of its processes.

The first is a case the Wellington Fish & Game Council and Environmental Defence Society brought against the Manawatu-Wanganui Regional Council concerning the Regional One Plan. The issue here was water quality.

(Decision [2017] NZEnvC 37.)

The second was the 11th decision of the Environment Court, an appeal by Federated Farmers and others concerning the scope of intensive farming activities in the MacKenzie Basin. (Decision [2017] NZEnvC 53.)

Both decisions repay close study for anyone interested in knowing how the environment is faring under the stewardship of local government in New Zealand.

MANAWATU-WANGANUI In the Manawatu case the Environment Court issued seven farreaching declarations.

These declarations demonstrate the council had failed to adequately protect the water quality, was in breach of the Act and had even failed to properly follow its own promulgated plan.

The illegality of the council’s decision-making is quite stunning.

It had been assessing and granting consents in accordance with a council resolution since 2013 that was at odds with both the One Plan and the Act.

The court characterised the resolution in strong language: “… it is unlawful, invalid and in contravention of the RMA to have regard to factors such as those in subpara (iii) of the former Resolution.”

Forced to withdraw and revoke the resolution that could not be defended, the legality of consents granted on the strength of it will need now to be addressed.

Given the strength of the declarations that the court issued, the council will have to take urgent remedial steps to ensure that it acts within the law.

The defects of its administration are laid bare for all to see in the 81-page decision.

The council had: • failed to consider whether intensive farming activity provided a trajectory of nitrogen reduction that was achievable on the farm; • failed to ensure the council had a clear legal basis for its future decision-making; • failed to provide adequate explanatory material about consents and had failed to request all the relevant information; • failed to assess environmental effects adequately and particularly cumulative effects of non-compliance with cumulative nitrogen leaching values set out in the Plan’s own Table 14.2 and no consents had been declined under that rule; • reached a situation where it could not possibly be confident that water quality was being maintained or improved; • to examine all the values contained in the Plan and it had not done so;

LocalMaps for Local Government Making Web Mapping Smarter

The next generation of Web Mapping technology designed specifically to meet the needs of New Zealand Local Government. www.eagle.co.nz/localmaps localmaps@eagle.co.nz PARTNERING WITH

ISOVIST

JUNE 2017 LOCAL GOVERNMENT MAGAZINE

l

27

ENVIRONMENT

• t o consider the Objectives A1 and A2 of the National Policy Statement on freshwater, which it had not done; • to factor into its decision-making issues concerning drinking water that it had failed to do; • “a duty to give reasons for its decisions…” Without a reasoned decision the public and the council “cannot be sure that consents are being issued in a principled and lawful manner”; • administrative defects in the application form for a consent that fell short of the requirements contained in the relevant regulations; and • other deficiencies in its practice.

So complete was the council’s forensic defeat, even though Fonterra and Federated Farmers fought hard to defend it, that questions must be asked as to how such a parlous state of affairs could come to pass in an organ of New Zealand local government.

The council did not follow the Act. It did not follow its own promulgated rules.

Under what legal advice did the council proceed with its ill-fated resolution one may reasonably ask?

The rule of law cannot withstand conduct displayed by the council in this decision.

The question arises whether the whole saga since 2013 was the result of incompetence or deliberate political manoeuvring.

While I can think of no example where a case brought under the tort of misfeasance in public office has succeeded in New Zealand, on this evidence we must be approaching that point now.

MACKENZIE BASIN Federated Farmers was the prime mover in the MacKenzie Basin case as well.

That this was the 11th decision teaches something about litigation as a means of slowing things down.

Outstanding Natural Landscape was at stake here and many incursions into that had already occurred in the MacKenzie Basin.

Large areas with significant inherent values were being lost quickly and in the view of the court there was a strong case to stop freeholding land in the Basin to enable a review to take place.

The Court pointed out “… we judge that pastoral intensification is usually unsustainable in the MacKenzie Basin when sustainability is properly understood to include all components of the ONL’s [Outstanding Natural Landscape] character”.

WHAT DOES THIS TELL US? What inferences can fairly be drawn from this record?

First, the performance of local government in relation to the environment appears to be seriously deficient.

It may be reasonably concluded that local government has an obligation to lift its game to protect the environment.

It must not be pushed around by powerful economic interests whose activities pollute.

Robust systems that implement the law are required and they must be enforced.

Expensive trips to the Environment Court should not be necessary if local government does its job properly.

What is at stake here are the interests of future generations whose interests the Resource Management Act is explicitly designed to protect. LG • S ir Geoffrey Palmer QC, the architect of the Resource Management Act, provides legal advice to the NZ Fish and Game Council.

28 l www.localgovernmentmag.co.nz

Natural allies combat natural hazards

The idea of ‘triple helix’ collaboration between research institutions, businesses and the Danish equivalent of Kiwi council-controlled organisations (CCOs) generated debate at the recent Water New Zealand 2017 Stormwater Conference in Auckland.

T

he presence of a seven-member delegation from Denmark sparked talk of a three-way structure for collaboration at the recent Water New Zealand 2017 Stormwater Conference in Auckland. Like the triple helix idea itself, members of the delegation spanned local government, universities and business.

Members included: Lars Noergaard Holmegaard, CE of Lemvig Water and Wastewater Utility; Thomas Damgaard, head of department, nature and environment at Lemvig Municipality; and Steffen Damsgaard, a member of the board of Lemvig Water and Wastewater Utility, a member of Lemvig Municipality, and head of the Danish Secretariat for Rural Councils.

Lemvig Municipality, with a population of over 20,000, is on the west coast of the Jutland peninsula in west Denmark.

Lars is also head of the Climatorium working group – the first initiative in Denmark to institutionalise the triple helix way of working. For the first time, a physical building and institution – the Climatorium in Lemvig – is being set up to host and ensure collaboration between universities, private companies, CCOs and other relevant partners.

The triple helix concept ensures that research conducted by universities is applied in methods and products developed by the participants. As daily operators and end-users of the products, the CCOs are key players. They make sure that highlevel research and private innovation turn into usable methods and products.

Pictured: The coastal town of Lemvig on Denmark’s west coast is no stranger to the possible impacts of climate change.

Photo courtesy of Mads Krabbe and Hasløv & Kjærsgaard Architects.

The Climatorium is a platform for Climate Change Adaptation (CCA) innovation and knowledge sharing. It encourages collaboration in the pursuit of innovative solutions to improve natural hazard risk management.

The Climatorium is one of the 24 projects constituting the Coast to Coast Climate Challenge, an initiative in the central region of Denmark that has received a six-year funding package from the European Union.

While acknowledging the benefits of such funding, delegation members also note that the triple helix concept is a free tool that anyone can use.

The Danish delegation extended a broad invitation to organisations in New Zealand to consider future collaboration on climate change adaptation projects. They were also keen to promote Danish expertise in water and wastewater services.

While they were in New Zealand, members of the delegation also visited a number of public and private stakeholders involved in water and wastewater services as well as in other aspects of climate change adaption. Among them were Auckland Council, Auckland University, Watercare, Water New Zealand, and consultancy companies Opus, Beca and GHD. The Climatorium project, which has been underway for the past few years, was officially launched in early 2017 to address the need for research, debate and solutions to the effects of climate change and risks from natural hazards.

Delegation members told Local Government Magazine that, although situated on opposite sides of the planet, Denmark and New Zealand share many common features, interests and challenges when it comes to creating communities that are resilient to natural hazards and thereby less vulnerable to the impact of climate change. LG

JUNE 2017 LOCAL GOVERNMENT MAGAZINE

l

29

GOVERNANCE

Pick the

tick Councils need to start considering the representation arrangements that will apply at the next local authority elections in October 2019.

This involves 56 councils that have to review their arrangements as it is six years since their last rethink. Gavin Beattie, from the Local Government Commission, says this also provides other councils with the opportunity to consider the need for a further review this time around.

C

ouncils must make two important preliminary decisions in 2017. These are closely linked to other representation arrangement decisions: the choice of electoral system ie, first past the post (FPP) or single transferable vote (STV); and the option of Māori wards or constituencies.

What is the council trying to achieve?

Councils should begin the review process by considering carefully what they want to achieve with their overall representation arrangements. For example, are they seeking greater community participation in council affairs including at election time?

While issues such as voter turnout are complex in nature and subject to many factors, councils in such cases should seriously consider the different representation options with a view to helping encourage people to stand for, and vote at, local elections.

FPP or STV? FPP is seen by many as the tried and true electoral system at the local level and it requires no further description here. FPP was, of course, also the tried and true system for parliamentary elections until 1996 when the mixed member proportional (MMP) system was introduced.

30 l www.localgovernmentmag.co.nz

Now this system of proportional representation, providing significantly more diverse representation for the community, has become established for central government elections.

STV is also a way of achieving proportional representation without the contentious element of the ‘unelected’ list members. To achieve proportionality, STV does require either ‘at large’ elections or multimember wards / constituencies. However single-member wards / constituencies, including mayoral elections, still guarantee successful candidates secure a majority of valid votes cast under STV. An argument against STV is that it is too complicated. This was rebutted by respondents to a survey conducted for the Local Government Commission in 2007. Nearly 80 percent of respondents who had heard of STV and used it for just two District Health Board elections (in 2004 and 2007) found the system “easy to understand and use”. Admittedly the counting of STV votes is more complex and hence the need for computers to undertake this task.

The level of blank and informal votes is also used as an argument against the adoption of STV. In line with the above statistics, analysis shows that this is more a matter of voters having to swap between the two electoral systems on the same voting paper than the nature of STV itself.

This is demonstrated by recent Greater Wellington Regional

Council election results. After the council moved to STV for the 2013 and 2016 elections, the number of informal votes dropped significantly in the Wellington, Porirua-Tawa and Kapiti Coast constituencies being areas where the territorial authority also uses STV. On the other hand, there were increases in the number of informal votes in the other constituencies, where the territorial authority uses FPP, in both 2013 and 2016.

I return now to the benefits of STV. As a proportional representation system held in ‘at large’ elections or where there are fewer and larger wards, it can be used to help increase participation by particular groups in terms of both voting and encouraging candidates. This recognises that groups such as young people, for example, are likely to be spread across a city or district.

STV in an ‘at large’ election can operate as a type of ‘informal ward’ system with a successful candidate needing to gain a specific ‘quota’ of votes to be elected. In the case of, say, a 10-member council, successful candidates require just one eleventh of the total votes cast to be elected (one twelfth for an 11-member council and so on).

A candidate seeking to gain support of young voters could then focus their campaign in parts of the city or district where young people are concentrated equating to approximately one eleventh of the total population.

On the other hand, young electors will be more likely to vote if they recognise such a candidate specifically targeting their votes and with a reasonable chance of success.

–ori representation?

Separate Ma Bearing in mind statutory obligations, some councils may be considering the option of Māori wards or constituencies. This is often seen as a way of addressing poor representation of Māori around council tables. It does have the limitation, however, in only enabling those on the Māori electoral roll to vote in a Māori ward / constituency election.

According to the Electoral Commission website, this means that, as a result of the 2013 Māori electoral option, an average of only 55 percent of Māori would be entitled to vote in a particular Māori ward / constituency election.

Councils could consider the STV option as an alternative to achieve a desired objective of enhanced Māori representation. In the same way as for the example above in relation to young people, STV would allow a candidate seeking the support of Māori voters to campaign in areas where Māori are more concentrated again equating to approximately one eleventh of the total population (in the case of a 10-member council). With STV there is no restriction relating to voters being on the Māori roll.

The big picture Clearly decisions about the electoral system and Māori representation, and also those about ‘at large’ or ward systems and the size of wards / constituencies, are all linked. Councils need to keep in mind the big picture they are striving for when making each of these decisions starting with the electoral system decision by September 12 this year. LG

LEVEL 6 NZ DIPLOMA IN INFRASTRUCTURE ASSET MANAGEMENT THE NEW STANDARD OF EXCELLENCE FOR ASSET MANAGERS

TAKING ENQUIRIES NOW 0800 486 626 askus@connexis.org.nz www.connexis.org.nz

JUNE 2017 LOCAL GOVERNMENT MAGAZINE

l

31

3 WATERS

Trickling

through our hands?

Rainwater & greywater provide potential savings Local authorities are increasingly recognising the need to use water more efficiently, say John Pfahlert and Lee Bint. Yet a new report has identified that some of the barriers, and solutions, to more efficient water use lie within councils and water utilities themselves.

W

ater management is under increasing pressure as infrastructure ages, populations grow and climate change begins to impact. These pressures will be felt across the three waters – potable, waste and stormwater.

That’s why it makes sense for local authorities to look at new ways to encourage more efficient use of water – something that could be a win-win for both water providers and customers.

Increasingly, it’s becoming clear the big winners will be those that recognise and take up innovative solutions. Initiatives such as encouraging the development of buildings that harvest rainwater and recycle greywater will be just some of the futureproofing solutions needed.

An investigation by BRANZ has identified significant barriers to greywater and rainwater uptake and looked in detail at several commercial buildings that have adopted rainwater harvesting, as well as one that uses greywater. The investigation’s findings are published in a new report by Lee Bint and Roman Jaques, Drivers and barriers to rainwater and greywater uptake in New Zealand.

The research has three themes: drivers and barriers to uptake; the performance of systems in operation; and impacts on the water network.

Drivers and barriers The report found that cost, education and storage are perceived as the biggest barriers for rainwater while for greywater,

32 l www.localgovernmentmag.co.nz

recycling, education and cost are the biggest barriers.

Anecdotally it seems there needs to be a maximum payback period in New Zealand of three to five years for building managers and owners to approve systems in building design.

This is a very tight timeframe.

Outside of Auckland, the fixed wastewater charges within council rates do not provide any incentive for water efficiency or conservation.

The report found a lack of education, guidance and standards provided by local authorities and that this was creating a significant barrier to the update.

It also found some regulations are prohibitive and therefore create a barrier to installation and / or effective utilisation.

Another important reason for installing rainwater harvesting and / or greywater recycling systems was for resilience – to ensure that a building’s function was maintained during and after a natural disaster.

Perceptions around quality Perceptions around water quality were also identified as a barrier.

Health and waterborne disease were by far the biggest perceived issues. In the case of greywater quality, survey respondents had specific recurring issues with health, general quality, crosscontamination with potable water, cleanliness of the system and society’s perception of ‘dirtiness’.

These findings came through two surveys, one in 2014 and then

again in 2016, with 71 and 265 respondents respectively. Both surveys used targeted emails and social media as the primary recruitment channels, providing a range of occupations, experience and locations of respondents.

The first series of questions in 2014 attempted to understand the level of water awareness and perceived importance of treated, potable water – the most important being for drinking, cooking and food preparation.

However, just over half of the respondents thought that the use of rainwater was also acceptable for these purposes.

Conversely, the most important purposes for greywater recycling were for irrigation, garden watering and toilet flushing.

Systems in operation This part of the study investigated eight commercial buildings with a rainwater harvesting and / or greywater recycling system in operation. Despite ranging in building use, size and location, these buildings all used the rainwater and greywater for the flushing of toilets and urinals.

In response to the primary finding of drivers and barriers work, the water quality study found that there is likely to be very little potential human health risk surrounding the use of rainwater or greywater for toilet and urinal flushing. However, since only five buildings formed this part of the study, these findings cannot be treated as robust.

The total water use in the buildings ranged between 0.13 and 1.13 kilolitres of water used, per square metre of floor area, per year.

This is consistently lower than the average, indicating that the buildings were already designed with water efficiency in mind.

Much of the water sourced from the rainwater systems occurred between March and November – with lower supply during the drier, summer months. For these buildings, rainwater supplied between nine percent and 62 percent of total water demand or an average of 89 percent of the building’s nonpotable demand.

A more consistent year-round quantity was found from the greywater system. However, the system was not being used to its full potential, by only supplying one toilet block – four percent of the total water demand or 10 percent of the building’s non-potable demand.

BR O OI FI EL DS L AWYERS

When you need public sector expertise, Brookfields is the firm you want on your side.

www.brookfields.nz

Economic performance The economic feasibility is almost entirely dependent on volumetric wastewater tariffs. Despite having poor financial payback periods in their own regions (between 3.3 and 63.8year payback), applying Auckland-based tariffs to the case study buildings meant the systems became more financially feasible (between 1.6 and 20.9-year payback).

The charging mechanisms (volumetric wastewater tariffs) outside of Auckland are not providing the financial drivers for lower use of water or for users to become less reliant on the mains reticulated networks. Therefore, the situation of uptake, not only lands on the information provided within this research, from a buildings perspective, but also from the water service provider and a policy perspective.

Impacts on the water network The average proportion of total water use comprised of nonpotable, non-contact end-uses (toilets and urinals) was 23 percent. This indicates a potential saving of 23 percent of total water from the water network. This also equates to a financial saving for both the building owner and the water service provider.

Rainfall used for non-potable purposes is not required to be treated, thus saving the water service provider the energy and financial cost of treating the water. It also saves the building owner a portion of their volumetric water charge.

These non-potable uses were extrapolated for the building stock and projected to 2066 – across four regions (Canterbury, Auckland, Wellington and the Bay of Plenty). This enables an indication of the potential volumetric savings to the network in a range of uptake scenarios in 50 years’ time. Low uptake estimated 114,853–612,441 kilolitres per year savings, while a medium uptake saves 246,164–1.6 million kilolitres a year and 607,180–3.7 million kilolitres a year with a high uptake.

Of the four focus regions, the greatest volumetric savings were projected for the Canterbury region for all uptake scenarios. LG • John Pfahlert is chief executive of Water New Zealand. ceo@waternz.org.nz • Lee Bint is a sustainable building scientist at BRANZ. Lee.Bint@branz.co.nz

NAVIGATING YOUR SUCCESS CONTACTS: AUCKLAND Ph: 09 379 9350

WELLINGTON Ph: 04 499 9824

Melinda Dickey Andrew Green Linda O'Reilly John Young Matthew Allan

Andrew Cameron

JUNE 2017 LOCAL GOVERNMENT MAGAZINE

l

33

PROCUREMENT

Favouring local suppliers What’s your council’s policy?

Should councils support local suppliers or just go for the best deal? And where can they get guidance on this? Clever Buying’s Caroline Boot looks at our government’s position on ‘buy local’, runs her eye over some overseas models, and compares the approaches taken by different New Zealand councils.

34 l www.localgovernmentmag.co.nz

T

he recent outcry in Dunedin following the replacement of a local (and council-owned) landfill operations company with an out-of-town supplier re-opened a can of procurement worms.

Council was adamant that it would not favour local suppliers. It said it had just selected the best company for the job, through a fair tender process. Critics pointed to the wider impacts of that decision, with imminent job losses and loss of council revenue resulting in clear adverse economic and social effects from that decision.

There are two clear sides to this debate, and each has its merits. On the face of it, procurement decisions should be about getting the best value for ratepayer dollars, which we all know are under constant strain.

But the bigger picture reveals that there are wider community impacts that may, in some cases, outweigh the short-term advantages of a cheaper supplier from out of town.

How can councils deal with these conflicting interests, and where can they get guidance on this? The government’s Rules of Sourcing are a little ambiguous in their interpretation of this issue on a national level.

Rule 1 (of the government’s Five Principles of Procurement, which are supposed to be followed by all government organisations including local government) states that agencies should “treat all suppliers equally – we don’t discriminate”. It also requires organisations to “make balanced decisions – consider the social, environmental and economic effects of the deal”.

So, while organisations should treat an out-of-town (or international) supplier the same way as they treat a local (or New Zealand) supplier, they also should be thinking about the potential social and economic impacts if the contract is let to a company outside their area. Tricky.

OVERSEAS It’s an interesting debate on an international scale. While the impacts of free trade agreements worldwide are supposed to be binding and far-reaching, in practice, there are many anomalies.

Controversy has raged over the past few years in just about every trade zone, with the WTO rules and other macroeconomic trade agreements being tested against initiatives such as ‘Buy British’; the Australian Made Campaign, and of course, closer to home, the ‘Buy New Zealand Made’ initiative.

The Trump administration has clear objectives to protect US business through the ‘Buy American: Hire American’ mantra. In Fiji, it’s mandatory in some sectors to include a scored section in Requests for Tender that asks how suppliers will facilitate skills transfer to local personnel over the course of the contract.

So, there is huge precedent at an international level for protecting commerce within your home region.

LOCAL PRECEDENTS So why wouldn’t councils also aim to support their own regional economic zones by favouring local suppliers? And what precedents are out there for councils to use to stresstest their views on this?

In New Zealand, attitudes to this among councils are varied. Some councils, like Dunedin City Council, are adamant that they are not concerned about the origin of their suppliers. Others within New Zealand have clear policies to discount local suppliers’ prices and / or provide mechanisms that enable those involved within the local community to score higher in the non-price attributes.

Many smaller councils are feeling the squeeze at present with plentiful work available in the contracting sector, resulting in fewer suppliers bidding for projects and therefore less competition. For those councils, attracting new suppliers lessens the opportunity for monopolies to form,

Straight-talking Aussies In Australia, particularly in remote areas, it’s commonplace for councils to favour local suppliers – but the crux is that this is done in a transparent and well-justified manner.

Typically, a discount of anywhere between five to 20 percent is applied to prices from local suppliers to recognise the economic benefits that using a local supplier (or at least one that will support local employment) will bring.

helps maintain a healthy competitive market and ensures best value for money in the future.

Protecting and encouraging local industry is a key component of many councils’ economic policies, and is clearly stated in their strategic documentation. But councils can rightfully be criticised if they try to favour local suppliers in a manner that’s not transparent and built into the tender process.

BE VERY CLEAR So, what’s the right balance; and how can councils implement that through effective, yet fair procurement practices?

To attract new players into your region, but at the same time protect local industry, you’ll need to make it clear to tenderers that you value any support they can provide for local businesses and communities. You’ll also need to make it clear that this will be directly translated into the scoring of their tenders.

Provided there is clear linkage to council policy, there’s no reason why councils can’t include scored criteria that focus on areas that will provide obvious benefits on the contract for local involvement. For example: • What opportunities will your company provide for supporting local suppliers and subcontractors through this contract?

• How will your resourcing of this contract help to engage unemployed people in our communities?

• It will be mandatory for the successful supplier to set up an office / depot within five kilometres of the town centre (to meet required response times). Describe your proposed office location.

The most important thing to decide on is first, whether your council policies should or shouldn’t include reference to supporting local industry. Then, if you do decide this is part of your council’s policy, it’s essential this is done in a transparent and objective manner which is built into your procurement plan, the questions asked in your RFT, and your fact-based evaluation criteria. LG •C aroline Boot is a director of Clever Buying, which provides procurement training, NZQA procurement qualification assessments, and support for tender evaluators. caroline.boot@cleverbuying.com

>>

www.localgovernmentmag.co.nz For related articles go to our website. Search: Procurement

JUNE 2017 LOCAL GOVERNMENT MAGAZINE

l

35

SPECIAL FEATURE

IN NOVATIONS IN

Drone map: Sea View _ NVDI

GIS and

Spatial Technology Councils are employing spatial technologies to map infrastructure, track emergency response teams and tap into rain gauge data. They’re also using smart data for their bread and butter work keeping tabs on traffic, fly-tipping and graffiti.

Patricia Moore reports on the rise and rise of geographic data.

B

eing location intelligent is increasingly important for local bodies. And spatial technologies such as Geographic Information Systems (GIS) are helping make it happen. According to Jack Dangermond, founder and president of international GIS suppliers Esri, in an age when fast, easy access to information is taken for granted, users can expect a greater focus both on making data more accessible and on creating context to visualise this data.

In simple terms, GIS involves the use of computer-based tools to create geographic data, which can be managed, analysed and displayed in a layered set of maps. At the local government level, GIS is playing a key role in improving decision-making and service provision.

36 l www.localgovernmentmag.co.nz

ALGIM GIS committee member Lucas Mostyn says uptake is increasing as the technology becomes more available and affordable, and offers a wider range of functions.

“The move towards cloud-based GIS computing is making it possible for more people to use the technology than ever before.”

He gives examples including the use, by operations departments, of organised location-based ‘to-do’ lists across areas ranging from rubbish collections to fixing fly-tipping and cleaning graffiti.

He also cites GIS management of a city’s water supply by spatially visualising infrastructure pipe networks. And he points to live feeds from across the country on rain

Lucas Mostyn, ALGIM committee member

Anton Marais, GIS team leader, Waikato District Council

Jeremy Neilson, GM Recon

gauge data and traffic flow information. “This is useful for planning for emergencies or for building up a picture of an area for planning purposes.”

Over in Charlotte, North Carolina, the smooth running of the city is credited to using GIS for “everything from predictive crime analysis to recycling pick-up”. Closer to home, Greg Price, local government sector lead at Eagle Technology, says GIS Story Maps, combining maps with text, images and multimedia content, were used to support emergency response to recent flood events.

“In the Far North the district council has launched an innovative Story Map to help residents understand and contribute to a 10-year review of its District Plan,” he says.

“And in Tauranga the city council is using Story Maps to promote local facilities.”

The Waikato District Council is another making use of innovative spatial technologies across a number of areas.

Anton Marais, Waikato District Council GIS team leader, is researching computer simulation of real environments, focusing on simulating the demand for new households based on projected population growth in Hamilton City, and the Waikato and Waipa districts.

“Another innovation is the infrastructure we’re setting up to publish our 3D data, starting with our fastest-growing township, Pokeno,” he says. “Data captured from a UAV [unmanned aerial vehicle] using LiDAR [Light Detection and Ranging] will generate a photo-realistic model viewable as a 3D townscape.”

And, in a trial currently underway, the council has partnered with Recon, to capture data from a UAV, surveying post-works road rehabilitation sites.

Spatial technologies are allowing for faster outcomes.

Jeremy Neilson, GM at Recon, says field surveying areas of a few hundred hectares that may have taken days or weeks, are now better captured via UAV in a couple of hours and processed over a couple of days.

“Processing dense point clouds, a common output from UAV photogrammetry, used to cripple most desktops but is now generated and mapped from, with relative ease, through hardware and software improvements.”

Greg Price says the stunning array of new innovations and capabilities in GIS that could only be dreamed of a short

Greg Price, Eagle Technology, local government sector lead

Andrew Standley, Opus geospatial specialist

time ago, makes this an exciting time for those involved in GIS in local government.

“Web GIS in particular is leading the way in providing a framework that can easily integrate many types of real-time data with advanced analytics, visualisation and mapping that promote sharing, collaboration, and being connected, both within the organisation and with the outside world.”

Among the growing range of products available, Greg cites LocalMaps, “a web mapping solution designed for the needs of New Zealand local government”.

He also mentions Insights – which unleashes the ‘secrets’ within data; the Operations Dashboard that allows users to monitor, track and report on daily operations in real-time; and Drone2Map which turns a drone into an Enterprise GIS productivity tool.

At Opus, geospatial specialist Andrew Standley reports a trend towards an increased focus on collaborative working using ArcGIS Online 2D web maps and 3D scenes. He also notes a greater flexibility and provision of tools for project teams to manage basic GIS tasks.

“Another trend is growth in the use of mobile data capture applications such as ArcGIS Collector and ArcGIS Survey123 to gain efficiencies and cost savings, compared to the traditional method of recording information in the field.”

As more cities put ‘smart’ strategies in place, Andrew says GIS is well positioned to be a key component. “A leading example is Los Angeles which has placed the ArcGIS platform at the centre of their GeoHub system.”

This location-enabled infrastructure has woven together more than 500 datasets from over 40 different departments to allow users to access, visualise and analyse real-time data.

As expectations of council staff and the public grow, and resources become even more constrained, the growing use

>

COMING UP

In the July issue • Innovations in roading technology • Innovations in digital tools for customer engagement

JUNE 2017 LOCAL GOVERNMENT MAGAZINE

l

37

SPECIAL FEATURE

LocalMaps Property Viewer

Recycling Services Viewer

of GIS can only be good. Greg highlights three important areas where operations run more smoothly and result in more positive experiences: Delivery – eliminating data silos and managing data so that it’s timely, accurate and authoritative; Collaboration – that creates ways for staff, departments and external organisations to work together to eliminate duplication, improve communication and advance projects; and Analysis – that enables more informed decisions.

According to Anton Marais, the challenge for local authority spatial information departments is to change the way people use their services. He says people still ask his team for a map showing X or Y.

38 l www.localgovernmentmag.co.nz

“We need people to start asking, ‘what’s the relationship between X and Y and can you show us this on a map?’.”

He says while keeping up with the technology curve is exceedingly hard, the spatial industry needs to work much more collaboratively across the public and private sectors to remain on the development curve. “Time and resources need to be invested.” LG • Patricia Moore is a freelance writer. mch@xtra.co.nz

>>

www.localgovernmentmag.co.nz For related articles go to our website.

Search: Spatial technology or GIS

N I S N O I T A V O N N I

Training

A wide variety of different technologies are shepherding in a new era of training. Webinars, gamification, video, online forums and the use of flipped learning can all help council officers learn at their own pace and in their own way. Patricia Moore reports.

A

s organisations grapple with a shortage of skilled personnel, up-skilling and training staff has never been more important. It’s also becoming more complex. As Natalie Stevens, manager learning and development for the NZ Society of Local Government Managers (SOLGM), points out, “If, as predicted, most front-line jobs are replaced by automated call centres, with menial work handled by machines like driverless vehicles and drones, training will need to re-focus on a new set of needs.”

Indeed, the workplace is changing. Research company Forrester predicts that by 2021, robots will have eliminated six percent of all jobs in the US. Over in the UK, a recent report from PwC found that 30 percent of jobs in Britain were potentially under threat from breakthroughs in artificial intelligence (AI) – and not just at customer-service level.

Moreover, according to Deloitte, the next decade could see 39 percent of jobs in the legal sector automated along with up to 95 percent of those in accountancy.

But as AI and the robots advance, so do innovations in training, with technology playing a vital role.

Natalie says, “Training is trending to an integrated process of face-to-face delivery combined with a digital experience designed to enhance the learning process and deliver education in bite-sized chunks on a variety of devices, 24/7.”

She says digital transformation has significant spin-offs and impacts on workforce retention and recruitment.

But, she notes, “There’s a huge disparity between personal

Natalie Stevens, SOLGM

Tony McKenna, Skills NZ

digital sophistication, use and appetite, versus organisational readiness and digital investment in the local government sector, and generationally between Baby Boomers and Millennials.”

At Skills NZ, Tony McKenna, sector manager for local government, says organisations are looking to new technologies for the delivery of training and for measuring its effectiveness.

“We’re seeing a marked increase in the use of Learning Management Systems [LMS] – online environments for creating content, webinars using online video hosting platforms like Vimeo or YouTube, apps for evidence gathering on the go, gamification to motivate, enhance and reinforce learning, and video.”

Tony says these innovations have a number of advantages.

“Organisations can deliver more targeted learning to individuals, they can add variety and they can offer shorter, more manageable training options. Technology is enabling a completely new era in training.”

Capability Group director Drew McGuire says significant progress in the understanding of neuroscience, combined with advances in technology, has resulted in learning that’s “adaptive, continuous and directly linked to positively shifting performance in organisations”.

“The ROI of learning has been there all along,” he asserts, “we’ve just been designing our learning wrong.”

Drew points out that gamification, which has a solid neuroscience basis, is being used as a mechanism to engage learners and make the process fun.

Drew McGuire, Capability Group

Ralph Brown, Skillset

Janet Brothers, Life Care Consultants

JUNE 2017 LOCAL GOVERNMENT MAGAZINE

l

39

SPECIAL FEATURE

Learning to save lives While the focus of training in the workplace is invariably on developing the skills demanded by a business, Janet Brothers, MD at Life Care Consultants, believes investment in first aid training is every bit as important. “If all training worked all the time we wouldn’t need first aid. When it doesn’t work, first aid training can be the difference between a real tragedy and a minor disruption to business as usual.”

“Products like Axonify, which is redefining the LMS industry, are tailoring learning to individual needs and gamifying the learning experience.”

Drew also highlights the innovative adoption of design thinking in which methodologies used in the creative industries are applied to the learning and capability challenges that organisations face.

While he likes the idea of innovation, Ralph Brown, Skillset MD, says his company is wary of novelty for the sake of novelty.

“What really matters is whether the training is effective,” he says.

“Some innovations appeal to us. One of them is flipped learning where learners do much of the learning on their own and come along to a workshop to discuss the issues and develop their skills.”

Ralph says Skillset has always found a strong demand for workshops. “Councils want training to be led by a human but they don’t want a passive PowerPoint lecture. Learning with a trainer works, even for rote learning, because the psychology is vital. Skilled trainers inspire.”

That said, he sees sense in online forums and interactive webinars.

“A simple, user-friendly online refresher can be very valuable; technology-based innovations are great for spaced learning but

40 l www.localgovernmentmag.co.nz

Janet says while first aid remains one of the lower-priced training options, the real cost is in the downtime so it needs to meet a company’s objectives and not impact in an unrealistic manner on productivity. “This is significant in the local government sector due to there being no service to ratepayers while the resource is in a training session.”

as a complement to workshops, not a replacement for them.”

Natalie believes there’s a need for people working in local government to become more digitally savvy, and capable of working remotely. She highlights the need for people to invest in more reliable home computer systems and appropriate backup and security.

Tony also stresses the importance of understanding technology and how to use it.

“This requires IT staff to work more closely with learning and development staff, and HR staff to fully understand the potential of new technologies.

“Online learning also requires proper management of a learner’s time if they’re completing it outside office hours,” he says. “It’s a whole new way of thinking organisations must adapt to if they are to make effective changes.”

While the use of innovative training approaches and new technologies that move away from a whole organisation perspective to one of learning targeted to the individual, mean definite cost-savings, there can be considerable costs involved in setting up new systems, says Tony.

“But once in place, the ability to measure what learners are doing, and tailor that learning, is an invaluable asset.” LG • Patricia Moore is a freelance writer. mch@xtra.co.nz

TECHNICAL BRIEFINGS Graham Levy won the 2017 Water New Zealand Stormwater Group Paper of the Year award for these findings which he presented at the recent Water New Zealand Stormwater 2017 conference in Auckland.

TP108 – where to from here?

Graham Levy (Beca).

ABSTRACT

Technical Publication 108 (TP108) was published

by Auckland Regional Council (ARC) in 1999 and has been used as the primary flow estimation tool in the Auckland region since then. For the past 10 years there has been consideration by ARC and then Auckland Council (AC) of updating the guideline, but a new version is yet to be adopted.

Similarly, there have been moves within the stormwater industry, supported and promoted by Water New Zealand, to develop a national standard similar to Australian Rainfall and Runoff to establish consistent and reliable flow estimation methods across New Zealand.

In the absence of that guidance, many different flow estimation methods are in use, with variable reliability and suitability.

In the absence of national guidance, TP108 – or the NRCS (Natural Resources Conservation Service of the US Department of Agriculture) method on which it is based – has been adopted and adapted in part or in full for urban runoff estimation in other parts of New Zealand, and is widely used, but also in some respects misused.

This misuse arises in part from a lack of understanding of the basis on which TP108 was adapted to the Auckland Region, and sometimes a lack of robust (or in some cases any) validation of the method to local conditions in new areas.

In his full paper, Graham Levy sets out some underlying principles on which the application of the NRCS method to Auckland was based, and how it was adapted and validated to suit the particular requirements that ARC had defined.

The paper discusses some examples where the method has been used inappropriately, or in new areas, resulting in poor estimation of runoff characteristics. From there, it provides some guidance on factors that should be addressed, particularly in relation to validation, when transferring the method to other parts of New Zealand. There is also

commentary on appropriate contexts in which to use the method, and where other tools might be more appropriate.

CONCLUSIONS

TP108 or related methods based on NRCS are being used more widely, but are not necessarily reliable or validated for the particular context where they are being used.

The NRCS method is often misunderstood or misapplied, leading to reduced reliability. If the method is to be used in a new area, there should be a focus on validation to local conditions, including specific consideration of both volume and peak flow rate.

The NRCS method is not suited to all situations – other tools are better in some contexts.

In particular, it is not ideal for high-definition detailed urban models.

It is perhaps more complex than necessary for simple site-level runoff calculations where rational formula is simpler and potentially adequate.

Neither is it ideal for a continuous simulation context that is needed for understanding lifecycle performance of urban drainage systems and devices.

The ideal would be a nationwide consistency of approach to rainfall runoff estimation that gave the industry and the public greater confidence in reliability.

This approach would include different methods for different design / analysis contexts, but would be based on real flow data and appropriate validation in different contexts across the country.

Consideration should be given to methods that allow for continuous simulation, to better reflect the importance of environmental effects and everyday flows, rather than just for flood estimation.

>>

www.localgovernmentmag.co.nz Go to our website for Graham Levy’s full paper.

Search: bit.ly/TP108_WhereToFromHere

JUNE 2017 LOCAL GOVERNMENT MAGAZINE

l

41

TECHNICAL BRIEFINGS

The following paper was presented at Water New Zealand’s 2017 Stormwater Conference.

CLIMATE CHANGE EFFECTS ON AQUATIC ECOLOGY

and the future for stormwater management Paul Battersby & Emily Jones (both from Opus International Consultants).

ABSTRACT

Climate change is predicted to have varying effects on the regions of New Zealand. The general effects in the eastern regions will be extended drought periods and decreased seasonal rainfall. In contrast, northern regions will likely experience more intense rain and storm events.

The environmental effects of climate change will be extended periods of low base flow during drought in the eastern regions and subsequent stress on aquatic biota. In Auckland, effects will be increased flash floods and seawater inundation of freshwater systems, with similar detrimental effects on aquatic species.

Regional and district plans are starting to give strong direction towards water-sensitive design and the requirement to improve the aquatic environment during stormwater management planning.

It is likely these statutory requirements will increase in the future.

It is difficult to predict what the stormwater industry will be like post2050 but it is obvious the nuanced effects of climate change will require adaptation and management. We are already seeing some of these effects.

In our full paper, we look at the likely environmental effects of climate change in two contrasting regions of New Zealand, how these will affect aquatic ecology and the implications for stormwater management.

Risks and opportunities to aquatic biota along riparian margins are discussed, with a multidimensional assessment of climate change impacts on aquatic species and the impact on the water quality in our waterways given.

Technical developments and potential tolls for adapting to climate change in New Zealand are also provided.

New technology will play an increasing role in future decades. While atsource treatment will be the guiding strategy, it will be important to monitor downstream systems to ensure desired outcomes are being met. New technology such as artificial intelligence will play a critical role in getting better and more data than is feasible with current technologies.

Environment in design is a fundamental concept that is incorporated throughout Opus projects through the collaboration between different specialists, industry and regulators. We have adopted this to guide and educate the professionals in our company to address the future challenges while delivering the projects for our clients.

As an industry we need to look at how we provide guidance to practitioners to give consideration to options that have a better outcome for the environment.

CONCLUSIONS

Some aspects of future stormwater management can be fixed by further refinement of standards such as GD04 for Water Sensitive Designs, GD05 for Sediment and Erosion Control in the Auckland region or the National Policy Statement on freshwater quality and quantity nationwide.

Nutrient and dissolved solids (DS) removal may be incorporated into stormwater standards in addition to the current total suspended solids (TSS) requirements.

Policies can be changed to focus on a more interdisciplinary approach that incorporates the concepts of green urbanism. The Auckland Unitary Plan is moving in this direction with a catchment scale focus and a focus away from ‘end of pipe treatment’.

42 l www.localgovernmentmag.co.nz

Giant kokopu.

>>

www.localgovernmentmag.co.nz Go to our website for the full paper by Paul Battersby and Emily Jones. Search: bit.ly/AquaticEcology

ELIZABETH HUGHES / LOCAL GOVERNMENT 101 E LIZAB ETH H UG H ES COM M U N ICATION. www.elizabethhughes.co.nz

Disasters R Us Three ways to improve emergency communication.

I

IT IS ALMOST IMPOSSIBLE FOR LOCAL GOVERNMENT TO DELIVER EFFECTIVE, CONSISTENT AND CLEAR COMMUNICATION TO THEIR LOCAL COMMUNITY WHEN CENTRAL GOVERNMENT TREATS THEM LIKE A BRANCH OFFICE.

magine a natural or civil disaster where afterwards the affected people say, “The communication was outstanding.” Or this: “I always took a pretty cynical view of what people were saying on Facebook because I trusted what the council was telling me.” Well it ain’t gonna happen….

But that doesn’t mean councils and Civil Defence can’t get a “B” instead of a “D” for their work. From my observation, the consistent negative feedback that emerges in the days and weeks following a natural disaster is always about communication.

There’s never enough, it’s inconsistent, people don’t feel they are being listened to, it lacks credibility or it’s too slow. Why? 1.

People are under immense stress; often frightened and totally dislocated after disaster strikes. This brings with it a significantly higher bar when it comes to their need for personal, relevant and caring communication.

And, sadly, this is not something at which public sector institutions of any sort have a lot of practice.

2. The media – traditionally a source of trusted communication for many people – might be helpful during the event to some extent. But it quite quickly needs to feed its appetite for fresh and new things. This begins a focus on stories that may inflame rather than inform.

3.

The sheer volume of messages and number of ways of communicating overwhelms and confuses.

4.

The bureaucracy of CYA (look it up). This usually means messages have to go through so many approvals that they end up being lame or late. It can also stop staff and those working directly with affected people being human, open and helpful.

Since councils are the most visible institution in the initial and recovery stages of a disaster (they are, in fact, “civil defence”) and are actually doing the hard yards, it is generally they who get the flak about communication.

In my experience, one of the biggest problems councils face (and the smaller you are the worse it gets) is the myriad of well-intentioned government agencies, organisations and ministers trying to achieve what may euphemistically be called delusions of relevance.

It is almost impossible for local government to deliver effective, consistent and clear communication to their local community when central government treats them like a branch office.

So, what might councils do to improve communication through a disastrous event and the recovery period that follows?

1. Prioritise communication. Every council would say they do this. But they don’t.

Make every meeting and every decision, before you leave the room, address the question – how does this affect our people and how will we communicate it?

Don’t leave communication to the last thing you do, once everything is perfect and the quotes in the media release are “approved”.

Just get the information out there.

Believe in yourselves, your staff and the naturalness of common sense. Ironically, actual belief about the primacy of communication requires action – not words.

2.

Stop it with the silos.

Effective communication, based around the needs of people, does not happen when information is presented in a silo. There may well be elements of a military-style chain-ofcommand approach needed in a disaster and recovery situation. But that does not mean your communication has to be siloed as well.

Start with the people. Build your response around them and the places in which they live (or lived). For example, ask, “What does the group of people who live in this street, suburb or town need to know from us?” Don’t work from the premise, “We’re organised this way and therefore will communicate to you in ways that suit us.” Bad move.

3. Take charge. Be assertive about what your community needs and be very determined about who they should hear it from. Every disaster or recovery is an opportunity for your council to demonstrate one of the clearest reasons why you matter. They are your people after all. LG

>>

www.localgovernmentmag.co.nz For more articles by this writer go to our website.

Search: Elizabeth Hughes

JUNE 2017 LOCAL GOVERNMENT MAGAZINE

l

43

FRANA DIVICH / ON LEGAL ISSUES PARTN E R, H EAN EY & PARTN E R S. frana.divich@heaneypartners.com

Southland Stadium A win for councils in the Court of Appeal.

O WE CELEBRATE THIS WONDERFUL VICTORY FOR COUNCILS AT APPELLANT LEVEL.

n March 21, 2017, the Court of Appeal gave judgment in a case concerning the collapse of Stadium Southland’s roof. The Court of Appeal overturned the High Court’s decision and found that the Invercargill City Council was not liable. (Invercargill City Council v Southland Stadium Leisure Centre Charitable Trust [2017] NZCA 68.)

The case is important for a number of reasons but in this article we focus on the comments made by the court on duty.

The legal background In 1996 the Privy Council considered the “duty” owed by New Zealand councils for building defects. (Invercargill City Council v Hamlin [1996] 1 NZLR 513.) It found that councils owe a duty to act reasonably in exercising their statutory functions to ensure that houses are constructed in accordance with the appropriate building regulations.

Over the years we have conducted a number of cases challenging the extent of the duty owed by councils. We managed to successfully defend commercial claims (ie, motels, rest homes, lodges etc) until 2013 when the argument was considered by the Supreme Court in a case known as Spencer on Byron. (Body Corporate 207624 v North Shore City Council [Spencer on Byron] [2013] 2 NZLR 297.)

This case concerned a high-rise apartment block containing hotel rooms and private residences. The Supreme Court held that the Hamlin duty was applicable to all owners including commercial ones.

The facts In 2000, the Southland Stadium Trust constructed a substantial stadium complex in Invercargill. During construction the roof trusses were found to be sagging. The Trust had to carry out repair work. The council required a building consent for that work. The Trust, through its experts and building parties, carried out the repairs and the council issued a code compliance certificate.

The council did not inspect the repairs because it relied upon the Trust’s engineer. It was a condition of the building consent that

44 l www.localgovernmentmag.co.nz

the engineer provide a producer statement for the remedial work. Unfortunately, the code compliance certificate was issued before the council obtained the engineer’s producer statement and thus in error.

By 2006 the Trust was concerned that the roof was flexing. It engaged its own engineer to review the design. The Trust was told that it should check the repair welds. It failed to heed the advice of its own expert.

In September 2010, there was a significant snow storm in Invercargill. The roof trusses were unable to withstand the snow load because they had been inadequately repaired. The stadium roof collapsed. The losses were huge.

The Trust’s insurers sued the council for close to $30 million.

High Court In 2015 the case was heard in the Christchurch High Court. The High Court determined that the council owed the Trust a duty of care in connection with the repair work and gave judgment against the council for approximately $15 million.

Appeal One of the Court of Appeal judges (Justice Miller) determined that the council only had a limited duty. Though the council may have been negligent, it was not liable to the Trust because it was not the council that caused the loss. The Trust knew that the council was not inspecting the remedial work and relied upon its own experts rather than the council. Justice Miller was critical of the Trust for failing to heed the warnings it received from its own engineers in 2006, particularly because it appears it did not pass the information on to the council.

The other two judges (Justices Harrison and Cooper) held that the council did not owe the Trust a duty of care in circumstances like this where the defective work was undertaken by the party’s own contracted building parties and under the guidance of their experts.

We will be sure to update you on the likely appeal to the Supreme Court. In the meantime, we celebrate this wonderful victory for councils at appellant level. LG

PETER SILCOCK / FROM CIVIL CONTRACTORS NZ CH I E F EXECUTIVE, CIVI L CONTRACTOR S N EW Z EALAN D. peter@civilcontractors.co.nz

Shared understanding & vision Partnerships produce the best results.

A IF YOU WANT TO GET THE BEST OUT OF YOUR CONTRACTORS, CREATE PARTNERSHIPS.

t this time of year CCNZ is calling for contractors to put forward their best work to be considered for the CCNZ/Hirepool Construction Excellence Awards. The winners will be announced at CCNZ’s Annual Conference in Dunedin in early August.

The black-tie dinner is the civil construction industry’s version of the Oscars. Our premier event provides an opportunity for contractors to be recognised by their peers and to showcase the fantastic work that staff and subcontractors do.

So, what makes a great project?

Many successful entries have a strong partnership between the contractor and the client. This is not simply about having good relationships and communication, although that is important. It is about having a shared understanding and vision for the project.

When the contractor and client share that vision, they can deal with the issues and opportunities that arise (and there are always some) effectively and efficiently. That shared vision creates a framework on which to base discussions looking at the impact (positive or negative) that potential solutions will have and to make decisions aligned to what is best for the project.

So, if you want to get the best out of your contractors, create partnerships. Of course there are commercial tensions but CCNZ has branches in 14 regions and we can help local authorities to connect and start building relationships with a wide range of contractors outside of the commercial to and fro of individual projects.

The construction and maintenance of civil infrastructure is a core service supplied to communities by local government. These long-term investments in areas such as transport, freshwater supply, wastewater treatment, stormwater management, flood and sea protection, and parks and reserves are fundamental services for modern productive societies.

Given the importance of those services to local government and the communities it serves there are very good reasons why the councils

that are responsible for them should have a very strong relationship with the contractors that build and maintain those assets.

It is in the interests of local authorities to ensure contractors are developing people with the skills and expertise to undertake that work and that a range of contractors is present to compete for the work they have.

It is the local authorities that will suffer if there are not enough qualified people to maintain and build their assets in the future or there are no (or very few) contractors to bid for the work they have. As the long-term asset owners councils need to take a long-term view rather than a project-by-project approach.

Councils need to provide opportunities for a range of contractors so we maintain a healthy civil construction industry with the capability to do the work required. Assessing through tenders or prequalification processes what contractors are doing to develop their people is also important.

While, getting a good price can drive councils, best price on the day will rarely result in the lowest cost over the life of the asset.

To get value for money councils need to take a different approach. They need to: • Understand the assets. Have a clear understanding of the services that the assets provide to your community and what capabilities are needed to maintain, improve or replace that asset in the future.

• Understand and connect with the contracting community in your region. CCNZ can help councils with this.

• Develop and clearly communicate your vision for each major project or contract. It’s about being on the same page and creating a shared vision.

• B e realistic and honest with yourself and your partners. Shopping for a high-performance sports car when the budget is $5000 does not work.

• B e consistent. Decisions should be made with a vision in mind. What is best for the project and / or contract? LG

JUNE 2017 LOCAL GOVERNMENT MAGAZINE

l

45

LAWRENCE YULE / FROM LGNZ PR ESI DE NT, LOCAL G OVE R N M E NT N EW Z EALAN D (LG NZ). lawrence.yule@hdc.govt.nz

Packed agenda ahead LGNZ events covering key issues for local government.

L WATER IS AN ISSUE FOR OUR TIMES AND WE WILL BE CONTINUING TO FOCUS ON THIS AREA FOR THE FORESEEABLE FUTURE.

GNZ’s major events in 2017 are designed to keep the sector up to date with the latest policies and thinking around a range of important issues, and contribute to the wider discussions taking place in New Zealand.

Late last month we held a Freshwater Symposium to further examine one of the biggest issues we face as a country. Water is an issue for our times and we will be continuing to focus on this area for the foreseeable future.

The symposium’s theme was: Freshwater – focus on managing water quality, quantity and funding: how do we move to integrated policy that gets the right outcomes for communities?

The symposium looked at some of the issues local government faces.

With both territorial authorities and regional councils playing significant roles in managing and enhancing our freshwater resources, local government is the major player in the water space. This event aimed to provide valuable insights from a range of voices to everyone with an interest in freshwater management.

Presentations and panel speakers included local government leaders, iwi, primary sector leaders, environmental NGOs and an international keynote speaker in David Maidment of Austin University.

The symposium covered some of the big questions around freshwater management, including what are the strategic issues around freshwater for New Zealand, local government and its communities; asking what successful partnerships between iwi and local government look like; and considering how New Zealand’s water resource stacks up in a global context.

We will be sharing stories and key messages from the symposium in the coming weeks and months, and it will help inform LGNZ’s ongoing work in water policy.

Fast approaching is the LGNZ Conference 2017, to be held in Auckland next month.

The conference is a highlight of the year and an important opportunity for local government to get together to hear from leaders from a

46 l www.localgovernmentmag.co.nz

range of industries and sectors, both local and international, and share their experiences with their colleagues from other councils.

This year’s conference theme, ‘Creating pathways to 2050: liveable spaces and loveable places’, will canvass the major challenges New Zealand faces in the coming decades.

These include: looking at the role of technology in transport and how smart technology can be integrated into councils’ future plans; how the world’s most liveable cities continue to improve quality of life for communities; and managing community expectations and delivering the government’s objectives for freshwater quality, which is a challenge facing all of New Zealand.

These and other issues are front of mind for all councils, and this year’s conference will provide valuable information and ideas to be adapted and applied in our diverse communities.

It is going to be a fantastic, illuminating and challenging occasion.

Finally, in December LGNZ will be hosting the second New Zealand China Mayoral Forum, this time in Wellington.

The inaugural forum held in Xiamen in 2015 was a great success, strengthening the relationships between regions of both countries.

On that occasion, 12 mayors and a significant number of business delegates from New Zealand’s cities and regions travelled to Xiamen to meet with our Chinese counterparts and establish better connections between Chinese and New Zealand cities.

The forum was hosted by the Chinese People’s Association for Friendship with Foreign Countries and over 300 delegates from some of China’s largest cities were involved.

There were a number of positive outcomes including the signing of the Xiamen Declaration, which signifies cooperation at the sub-national level to achieve economic development outcomes.

China is our biggest trading partner and, as such, the relationship is extremely important to our economy. We look forward to meeting again later this year. LG

Business Plan sets course for next three years In the last year LGNZ delivered a number of positive results against the policy priorities that guide the work it does.

Whether it was making the case for retaining local democracy through our advocacy on the Government’s proposals to create Council Controlled Organisations, which is a matter for councils and their communities to decide, or seeing the progression of debates initiated by LGNZ around matters such as new revenue sources for local government, regional development, policing, tourism infrastructure and water policy enter the mainstream, there have been some great successes.

A new Business Plan to carry LGNZ through the next triennium has been finalised by the recently selected National Council and will continue to help us achieve our vision of “local democracy powering community and national success”.

The plan includes a series of updated policy priorities that reflect the focus of LGNZ and its members, and which will drive debate on the issues that matter to councils and their communities.

Policy priorities 2017-2019 Infrastructure

Risk and resilience Understanding and addressing risks from natural hazards and other events – both for infrastructure and to support resilience in the economy and our communities.

Environmental

Leading and championing policy and working alongside central government and iwi to deal with the increasing impact of environmental issues including climate change, the quality and quantity of New Zealand’s freshwater resources, and biodiversity.

Social

Working alongside central government, iwi and stakeholders to address social issues and needs in our communities including an ageing population, disparity between social groups, housing (including social housing) supply and quality, and community safety.

Economic

Developing a range of policy levers, to address and fund economic development and growth across all of New Zealand.

In preparing the Business Plan the National Council decided to continue and heighten a focus on climate change policy and water policy.

The climate change work will build on the sector’s work around risk and resilience, with a fit for purpose framework on adaptation to climate change a focus. The work on water policy will seek to integrate the quality, quantity, infrastructure and affordability debates.

The Business Plan will be refreshed in 2018.

< Local democracy powering community and national success >

Ensuring infrastructure and associated funding mechanisms are in place to allow for growth and maintenance across housing, building, transport, broadband, tourism-related, three waters and flood control infrastructure.

47

EDITOR

LED Lighting Package EquiP is proud to introduce our LED Lighting Package to the local government sector, which brings the best systems and technologies to the widest possible council audience.

The benefits of LED are well known in terms of less maintenance, longer life, lower energy use and safety for citizens and customers. The EquiP offering helps councils to rapidly achieve compliant NZTA funding with a specialist business case package which is high value for money.

EquiP’s business case offering in partnership with consultant Paul Glennie will enable councils to build a compliant business case framework with intelligence that understands the demand for a technology solution that benefits smaller councils. This solution will give these councils access to the same technologies that the larger metropolitan communities are receiving with a connected digital platform through their streetlights. The added benefit from this offering is the proposition of bundling procurement solutions so that smaller councils can benefit price-wise from an enlarged procurement package with access to future-proofed infrastructure.

These connected digital platforms also enable reductions in maintenance costs, which can be significant when new road maintenance contracts come up for renewal. EquiP is leveraging learnings from Auckland’s prior installation of the early luminaires at an urban level, and taking these learnings to enable a national conversation around fit-for-purpose solutions to give councils options and a high-value package where the technology risk is minimised.

This includes giving rural communities the ability to have fit-for-purpose luminaires for better community outcomes, as well as the option to enhance the savings over the whole-of-life cost, and access to innovation surrounding the networks that can be embedded inside LED light technology.

This proven technology solution, which is available now for the first time in New Zealand nationally, will provide councils with smarter community outcomes. To access this opportunity, our immediate offering is available now, and we’re very pleased to see councils are already signing up to this package.

For more details, email equip@lgnz.co.nz

About Paul Glennie Paul brings 13 years of central and local government experience to EquiP, with the last eight years seeing him involved in a wide range of technical infrastructure projects for the Wellington City Council. Over recent years, his priority has been researching LED street lighting opportunities for Wellington City and developing a strategic business case for replacing the 18,000 street lights A detailed understanding of the possibilities and advantages coming from a LED street lighting replacement programme, along with the barriers to implementation and the role of electricity network companies in producing a sustainable result, provides for an encompassing business case suitable for the council’s consultative and funding requirements.

Confirming this, Paul was invited to appear as a keynote speaker at the 2016 Australian Smart Lighting Summit.

This work includes developing trials for both residential areas and retail precincts in which an approach focused on lighting outcomes saw energy reductions of over 75%. Light levels prescribed by the New Zealand Standards were achieved in all examples.

The photos below show the outcome of one of the LED trial areas produced by Paul in Wellington.

In this example nine 83w (including ballast) high-pressure sodium lights were replaced with eleven 14w LED lights. The standard compliant design (P3) achieves energy savings of 79% without dimming.

Setting out to provide a better lighting solution proved that energy reductions can be delivered alongside an improved level of service through the careful selection of a luminaire.

GROW Webinars – On-demand EquiP’s GROW webinars are now available on-demand at EquiPTV, which allows you to view our webinars anytime, anywhere. You also get your very own personal development space to review material and hone your skills.

The Grow Webinar Series includes: > > > > > > > >

48

For access to these webinars, email equip.pd@lgnz.co.nz

Decision making and the LTP; Meeting procedures; Financial management and funding; The 1991 Resource Management Act; Engagement and consultation; Council performance; Stewardship – looking after your assets; and Rules and regulations.

Photo credit: Wellington City Council

Six months in – Reflect and review At the end of the first six months of the triennium it is useful to reflect on what you and your council have achieved so far.

Reflection

Solutions

By now you’ve completed your first annual plan consultation and your triennial agreement. Very soon (by June 30) you’ll strike your first set of rates in this term of Council. Your officers are well underway with building the draft long-term plan for next year, and you will be all over how it’s developing from a governance perspective.

It’s never too late to build your local government knowledge and competency. Whether as an in-house or regional group, or as an individual, there are a lot of learning solutions available to you. EquiP offers an ever increasing range of workshops, webinars and digital modules to support your elected term. Can’t travel? No problem, we can bring the workshops to you (in-house or to your region) if that’s what you need. And webinars and digital modules can be completed anywhere with an internet connection. Data connection not good at your house?

Call into your council office and ask your friendly governance advisor to help you watch from a space in there. Watch either individually, so you can control the pace to suit, or collectively with your council group.

Stay on afterwards and work together to make some ‘plans for action’ surrounding what your council will do next.

Review Have you put together a governance calendar for the whole of this term of Council? Have you made sure you know what the key policy decisions are that need to be taken, and when their deadlines are? Have you had reports on what bylaws and reserve management plans need to be reviewed over the three years and made sure that the timeframes for getting them done have been built into your calendar?

Have you been brought up to speed with the new Resource Legislation Amendment Act 2017 and what it means to you, either as an accredited decision maker or a governor under the Local Government Act? Are you part of a team improving your council’s reputation for great performance?

There’s been a lot to learn. How are you feeling? Depending on your previous experiences and level of induction training, you may now be starting to settle in and feeling that you are effectively contributing to all those big council decisions you are required to make. You are frequently consulting and engaging with the community you represent and actively bringing their issues to the council table.

But what if these things aren’t happening and you don’t feel this way? Are others getting their voices heard, and being positively reflected in the media while you sit quietly, unsure or hesitant about the facts behind some of the issues? And if you are, are some of your peers also feeling the same, even if they may be able to cover the issue with a superficial level of confidence?

Many experienced councillors we have talked to shared that they often took a full term to ‘learn the ropes’ and just had to hope they would be re-elected, so that next time they could make the difference that they had promised. Unfortunately, some weren’t re-elected as their voters didn’t know their names, or wondered what they had achieved in their three years.

So, where do you find solutions?

Older learners Over forty and finding some information you have been told hasn’t sunk in? Don’t take it personally. It’s a fact that it may take you twice as long to learn something as your younger colleagues, but you will still learn and benefit from that learning. Research shows that abilities associated with learning new information decrease with age. This is especially true when information to be learned is completely novel/different than what has been known before (e.g. use of council process or the legislation in your first term).

Older learners learn best from training that is designed to meet their needs. Here’s where ‘On Demand’ webinars, videos and digital learning modules are valuable. These enable individuals to watch at their own pace, and repeat or return to learning activities as and when needed. In the privacy of your own home, or office, learn what you need, and then proceed confidently to make those council decisions your community expects of you.

To find out what training content is available to you and your council, please visit lgnz.co.nz/equip/professional-development-offerings/ To book a training activity with EquiP, simply email equip.pd@lgnz.co.nz For more information, please contact jill.calogaras@lgnz.co.nz

49

The Final Word Police rollout a positive step for community safety Details released about the roll out of an extra 880 police over the next four years gives rural communities some assurance their concerns have been heard.

Over the last year LGNZ has raised community safety and a lack of a police presence in our rural areas as an issue of concern for many regions. This has been a significant issue for many smaller communities and was the subject of a very well-supported remit at our conference last year which asked the Government to increase Police resourcing to ensure adequate staffing and coverage for New Zealand communities, and that Police chiefs are not forced to compromise community policing because of budget constraints.

LGNZ will continue to highlight the issues being faced by communties around the country. We now have an opportunity to further work with the Commissioner, our local Area Commanders and the Government to make sure the safety of our communities continues to improve.

The chief concerns were over the lack of a local police in smaller towns, the loss of community knowledge that can only be gained by time on the ground and the limited response to more minor crimes. Many councils around New Zealand have been forced to spend ratepayer money on measures like CCTV, community patrols and security guards to fill a gap left by diminishing police numbers.

LGNZ Rural Sector chairman and mayor of Waitomo Brian Hanna says the task now for local government is to support the Police in this challenge.

Recent issues have seen growing areas like Cambridge , which currently has no 24/7 police presence, experience a spate of ram raids as criminals know the closest officers could be up to half an hour away.

In February the Government announced a $503m package over four years for the courts, corrections and new police and last month Police Commissioner Mike Bush announced where those new officers will be deployed. Of the 880 new sworn officers 140 are destined for rural and regional areas, and a further 20 stations will have a 24/7 officer on duty. All 12 police districts are to receive more police over the four years.

These additional resources will be welcomed by rural and provincial communities which have expressed concern over the reduction in police availability for less serious crime and safety issues, and overall LGNZ is pleased to see some steps in the right direction.

50

And while a four year rollout is a long time to wait for relief, the challenge of recruiting and training 880 new officers can not be underestimated.

â&#x20AC;&#x153;In fact councils can play a role in this by identifying and supporting those in our communities who could go on to join the police,â&#x20AC;? Mr Hanna says.

LGNZ will continue to work with rural mayors to ensure any ongoing concerns are heard.

How it breaks down: > 880 new police over four years; > 140 more officers for up to 20 regional and rural police stations.

Police Minister Paula Bennett says this will mean 95 per cent of the population will live within 25km of a 24/7 police presence; > 500 officers will be allocated to respond to crime in the community; > Every Police District is to get more Police; > Priority Districts are Eastern, Bay of Plenty, Waikato and Northland.

CONTRAFED

PUBLISHING CO. LTD THE VOICE OF NEW ZEALAND INDUSTRY RAVEEN JADURAM: WATERCARE CEO

MANA WHAKAHONO A ROHE What Iwi Participation Agreements mean for councils p18

One man’s view of the water industry p30

HOROWHENUA DISTRICT COUNCIL Co-design shaves LIM report delivery times p34

SOLGM AWARDS McGredy Winder 2017 SOLGM Local Government Excellence Awards p22

STREET LIGHTING Spotlight on innovation p38

DOLLARS IN DIRTY WATER Wastewater energy mapping in Dunedin p28

NZ LOCAL GOVERNMENT MAGAZINE

NZ LOCAL GOVERNMENT MAGAZINE

NZ LOCAL GOVERNMENT MAGAZINE

VOL 54 • MAY 2017 • $8.95

VOL 54 • MARCH 2017 • $8.95

VOL 54 • APRIL 2017 • $8.95

Smile

BRIBERY & CORRUPTION How vulnerable is your council? p32

I

I

COUNCIL MAORI ENGAGEMENT

on the Dial

TIPPING

POINT

New models on the horizon? p14

A SEISMIC SHIFT IN DESIGN

NZ LOCAL GOVERNMENT MAGAZINE

Safety, resilience and value: Beca & Christchurch City Council p41

VOL 54 • FEBRUARY 2017 • $8.95

New skills strategy aims to make councils employers of choice p16

The year ahead

ROADMAP 2017

February

p14

Talking rubbish Council or private collection?

August

p20

November

BRIBERY & CORRUPTION Recent cases highlight concerns p28

LG May 1705 v2.indd 1

20/04/17 3:21 PM

M AY 2 0 1 7

$8.95

BUSTING OUT THE MOVES

A TALE OF TWO CITIES

More funding & new plan boost lighting options p30

Four T2 leaders talk careers p36

How community events are helping build social capital p46

LG April 1704 v3.indd 1

CONTRACTOR PERSPECTIVES 2017

NEW ZEALAND’S CIVIL CONTRACTING INDUSTRY MAGAZINE

SHEDDING NEW LIGHT

21/03/17 4:39 PM

LG March 1703.indd 1

20/02/17 2:48 PM

BREAKING NEW GROUND

KAIKOURA TRANSPORT NETWORK

Three ICT projects: the what, why and how p21

Modelling tool helps quickly identify options after the Kaikoura earthquake p26

IN THE PIPELINE

SURVEY TECHNOLOGY

Water assets project could save councils millions of dollars p30

Discovery Marine and the Rotorua Te Arawa Lakes Programme p40

LG FEB 1702.indd 1

20/01/17 2:41 PM

water MAY 2015 | ISSUE 189

NEW ZEALAND QUARRYING & MINING

MAY / JUNE 2017 ISSUE 199

Volume 14 - No 2 | April-May 2017 | $8.95

NEW ZEALAND CIVIL CONTRACTING

PERSPECTIVES 2017

Stormwater When you need real tough steel

Ammann

Hardox steel is the preferred option for hard-working gear in Road Metals’ quarries

expands compaction range

Stormwater 2017 Conference OECD report – Significant environmental challenges Michael Taylor's passion for clean water

Flying start for IOQ youth scheme Pilot youth incentive programme exceeds expectations

INSIDE:

Stones and scones mix well

Talking with the King of Airports – Arnold Bayliss in profile National Excavator Operators’ Competition – behind the scenes Transmission Gully – a major motorway project in progress Moving in a new direction – Alpha Specialised Movers update

Aggregate News

20/04/17 3:32 PM

JANUARY

Cover_Upfront.indd 1

Winstone’s river-side Otaki Quarry and its gourmet neighbour INCORPORATING

VISIT OUR WEBSITE www.localgovernmentmag.co.nz

Q&M __1704v1.indd 1

Second time lucky Trans-Tasman Resources is optimistic over EPA approval

22/03/17 1:17 PM

Water May – June 2017 v3.indd 1

16/05/17 11:15 AM

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR e-NEWSLETTER

EDITORIAL ENQUIRIES

ADVERTISING ENQUIRIES

NZ Local Government Ruth Le Pla Email ruth@localgovernmentmag.co.nz Phone +64 21 266 3978

NZ Local Government Charles Fairbairn Email charles@contrafed.co.nz Phone +64 9 636 5724 Mob +64 21 411 890

Contractor, Q&M, EnergyNZ and Water Alan Titchall Email alan@contrafed.co.nz Phone +64 9 636 5712

Contractor, Q&M and EnergyNZ Charles Fairbairn Email charles@contrafed.co.nz Phone +64 9 636 5724 Mob +64 21 411 890

LGJobs: Connecting councils with the best local government candidates

LGJobs is the only local government specific jobs board in New Zealand. As itâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s operated by SOLGM, the not-for-profit membership organisation for sector professionals, its aim is to help councils find the very best candidates.

Councils and their recruitment agencies can find out more at LGJobs.co.nz or email lgjobs@SOLGM.org.nz or phone 04 978 1280 for more information.