Agenda of Council - Wednesday, 7 December 2022

Council

07 December 2022

8. Water Management Zone Committee updates
Reference / Te Tohutoro:	22/1385087
Report of / Te Pou Matua:	Gina Waibl, Chair, Trudi Bishop, Deputy Chair Banks Peninsula Zone Committee Annabelle Hasselman, Chair, Mike Patchett, Deputy Chair Christchurch-West Melton Zone Committee Les Wanhalla, Chair Selwyn Waihora Zone Committee
General Manager / Pouwhakarae:	Lynn McClelland, Assistant Chief Executive Strategic Policy and Performance (lynn.mcclelland@ccc.govt.nz)

1. Nature of Information Update and Report Origin

1.1 Receive Information in the Zone Committees' update reports.

1.2 Triannual reports from the Zone Committees'.

2. Officer Recommendations Ngā Tūtohu

That the Council:

1. Receive the information in the Tri-annual Zone Committees Update report.

2. Receive the information in the 2021-2022 Annual Progress Reports for the three central Water Management Zone Committees.

3. Notes and discusses the work of each Water Management Zone Committee.

Attachments / Ngā Tāpirihanga

No.	Title	Reference	Page
a ⇩	Central Zone Committees Tri-annual report to Christchurch City Council Final 14 November 2022	22/1589969	31
b ⇩	Christchurch West Melton ZC Action Plan_APRIL 2021	22/1587003	43
c ⇩	Christchurch West Melton Zone Committee Annual Progress Report 2021-2022	22/1587001	45
d ⇩	Banks Peninsula ZC Action Plan_AUG2022	22/1587008	50
e ⇩	Banks Peninsula Zone Committee Annual Progress Report Final 2021-2022	22/1588550	52
f ⇩	Selwyn Waihora Zone Committee Annual Progress Report 2021-2022	22/1587011	57
g ⇩	Selwyn Waihora ZC Action Plan_APRIL 2021	22/1589854	62

In addition to the attached documents, the following background information is available:

Document Name – Location / File Link

Not applicable

Confirmation of Statutory Compliance / Te Whakatūturutanga ā-Ture

Compliance with Statutory Decision-making Requirements (ss 76 - 81 Local Government Act 2002).

(a) This report contains:

(i) sufficient information about all reasonably practicable options identified and assessed in terms of their advantages and disadvantages; and

(ii) adequate consideration of the views and preferences of affected and interested persons bearing in mind any proposed or previous community engagement.

(b) The information reflects the level of significance of the matters covered by the report, as determined in accordance with the Council's significance and engagement policy.

Signatories / Ngā Kaiwaitohu

Author

Luke Smeele - Committee & Hearings Advisor

Approved By

Helen White - Head of Legal & Democratic Services

Lynn McClelland - Assistant Chief Executive Strategic Policy and Performance

Council

07 December 2022

9. ChristchurchNZ Holdings Ltd - Draft Letter of Expectations for 2023/24
Reference / Te Tohutoro:	22/1284821
Report of / Te Pou Matua:	Linda Gibb, Performance Advisor, Resources (linda.gibb@ccc.govt.nz)
General Manager / Pouwhakarae:	Leah Scales, General Manager Resources/Chief Financial Officer (Leah.Scales@ccc.govt.nz)

1. Purpose of the Report Te Pūtake Pūrongo

1.1 The purpose of this report is to seek the Council’s approval to issue the draft Letter of Expectations (LOE) at Attachment A to the board of ChristchurchNZ Holdings Ltd (CNZHL) for 2023/24.

1.2 This report has been written to meet the LOE milestone in the Council’s annual end-to-end governance and accountability process.

1.3 The decision in this report is of low significance in relation to the Christchurch City Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy. The level of significance was determined by considering the extent to which the content of the draft LOE would impact the community.

2. Officer Recommendations Ngā Tūtohu

That the Council:

1. Approves the draft Letter of Expectations for ChristchurchNZ Holdings Ltd for 2023/24.

3. Reason for Report Recommendations Ngā Take mō te Whakatau

3.1 To allow the Council as shareholder of CNZHL to influence the company’s direction through its Statement of Intent (SOI). The LOE will inform the 2023/24 Statement of Intent (SOI).

4. Alternative Options Considered Ētahi atu Kōwhiringa

4.1 The only alternative option is to not issue a LOE in which case the Council would need to communicate any expectations it may have as part of feedback on the draft SOI. This would be a less efficient way of engaging with the company on the shareholder’s expectations.

5. Detail Te Whakamahuki

5.1 The LOE is an administrative tool that the Council, as shareholder of CNZHL uses to influence the strategic direction of the company. The expectations:

· are pitched at a governance level;

· are a matter for the CNZHL board to determine the acceptability of, taking into account, among other things its requirement under section 131(1) of the Companies Act 1993 to act in the best interests of the company;

· if acceptable to the board will be reflected in CNZHL’s SOI for 2023/24, a draft of which is due on 1 March 2023, and which councillors have the opportunity to review and formally comment on within two months of receiving it (refer clauses 1-3 of part 1, schedule 8 of the LGA); and

· leaves decisions their operationalisation to CNZHL to determine based on its expertise and experience in the delivery of activities and services to meet its strategic objectives.

5.2 The draft LOE was reviewed by councillors at a workshop on 29 November 2022. The following issues were raised by councillors and have been reflected in the draft LOE (in track changes):

· Develop performance targets to demonstrate progress in achieving mana whenua outcomes - growth of Māori business and Māori economic excellence including removing barriers to accessing business support and opportunities;

· Reiterating the Council’s desire for CNZHL to report returns on Council investment (land and/or capital) for urban development, (noting that CNZHL has advised its commitment to doing so);

· Clarity of the three-way partnership - CNZHL, Venues Ōtautahi and the Council’s events’ team - in attracting events to the city including for Te Kaha; and

· Reporting annually to the Council on the diversity of the CNZHL board.

5.3 Several other issues were raised which have not been included in the draft LOE. CNZHL will address these issues at the Council meeting should they be asked. These included CNZHL’s activities, if any in the creative sector in Christchurch (particularly music) and development activity in the eastern suburbs of Christchurch.

5.4 Work will begin next year on developing the LTP for 2024-34, and this will be the appropriate mechanism for the Council to review funding levels and prioritisation of the services delivered by CNZHL on behalf of Council.

6. Policy Framework Implications Ngā Hīraunga ā- Kaupapa here

Strategic Alignment Te Rautaki Tīaroaro

6.1 LOEs are strongly aligned to the strategic objectives of the Council and to its Long Term Plan.

Policy Consistency / Te Whai Kaupapa here

6.2 The decision is consistent with Council’s Plans and Policies – in particular a LOE is part of the governance and accountability framework for CCOs.

6.3 This report does not supports the Council's Long Term Plan (2021 - 2031).

Impact on Mana Whenua Ngā Whai Take Mana Whenua

6.4 The decision does not involve a significant decision in relation to ancestral land or a body of water or other elements of intrinsic value, therefore this decision does specifically impact Mana Whenua, their culture and traditions.

6.5 The decision does not relate to a matter of interest to Mana Whenua and will not impact on our agreed partnership with Ngā Papatipu Rūnanga.

6.6 Although the draft LOE contains expectations relating to Mana Whenua, they are entirely consistent with the expectations set out in the Council’s enduring Statement of Expectations issued to all CCOs in 2021.

Climate Change Impact Considerations Ngā Whai Whakaaro mā te Āhuarangi

6.7 The draft LOE contains climate change expectations.

7. Resource Implications Ngā Hīraunga Rauemi

Capex/Opex / Ngā Utu Whakahaere

7.1 Cost to Implement – there is no identifiable cost of implementation. Whether there are hidden costs associated with the expectations is a matter for CNZHL to advise on as part of the accountability and governance process.

7.2 Funding Source - CNZHL would be expected to identify how the costs, if any could be met without new Council funding.

8. Legal Implications Ngā Hīraunga ā-Ture

Statutory power to undertake proposals in the report / Te Manatū Whakahaere Kaupapa

8.1 Local Government Act 2002 (LGA).

Other Legal Implications / Ētahi atu Hīraunga-ā-Ture

8.2 There is no legal context, issue or implication relevant to this decision. Note that the LOE is an administrative accountability and governance tool and is therefore non-mandatory.

9. Risk Management Implications Ngā Hīraunga Tūraru

9.1 The recipient CCO board of a LOE is able to raise issues of concern with the content of the draft LOE if risks should become known. However, Council staff socialise the draft LOE with the company and therefore risks needing managing are likely to be raised at that point.

Attachments / Ngā Tāpirihanga

No.	Title	Reference	Page
a ⇩	ChristchurchNZ Holdings Ltd - Draft Letter of Expectations for 2023/24	22/1678860	69

In addition to the attached documents, the following background information is available:

Document Name	Location / File Link
Not applicable

Confirmation of Statutory Compliance / Te Whakatūturutanga ā-Ture

Compliance with Statutory Decision-making Requirements (ss 76 - 81 Local Government Act 2002).

(a) This report contains:

(i) sufficient information about all reasonably practicable options identified and assessed in terms of their advantages and disadvantages; and

(ii) adequate consideration of the views and preferences of affected and interested persons bearing in mind any proposed or previous community engagement.

(b) The information reflects the level of significance of the matters covered by the report, as determined in accordance with the Council's significance and engagement policy.

Signatories / Ngā Kaiwaitohu

Author	Linda Gibb - Performance Monitoring Advisor CCO
Approved By	Leah Scales - General Manager Resources/Chief Financial Officer

Council

07 December 2022

10. Venues Ōtautahi - Draft Letter of Expectations for 2023/24
Reference / Te Tohutoro:	22/1284835
Report of / Te Pou Matua:	Linda Gibb, Performance Advisor, Resources (linda.gibb@ccc.govt.nz).
General Manager / Pouwhakarae:	Leah Scales, General Manager Resources/Chief Financial Officer (Leah.Scales@ccc.govt.nz)

1. Purpose of the Report Te Pūtake Pūrongo

1.1 The purpose of this report is to seek the Council’s approval to issue the draft Letter of Expectations (LOE) at Attachment A to the board of Venues Ōtautahi (VŌ) for 2023/24.

1.2 This report has been written to meet the LOE milestone in the Council’s annual end-to-end governance and accountability process.

2. Officer Recommendations Ngā Tūtohu

That the Council:

1. Approves the draft Letter of Expectations for Venues Ōtautahi for 2023/24.

3. Reason for Report Recommendations Ngā Take mō te Whakatau

3.1 To allow the Council as shareholder of VŌ to influence the company’s direction through its Statement of Intent (SOI). The LOE will inform the SOI.

4. Alternative Options Considered Ētahi atu Kōwhiringa

5. Detail Te Whakamahuki

5.1 The LOE is an administrative tool that the Council, as shareholder of VŌ uses to influence the strategic direction of the company. The expectations:

· are pitched at a governance level;

· are a matter for the VŌ board to determine the acceptability of, taking into account, among other things its requirement under section 131(1) of the Companies Act 1993 to act in the best interests of the company;

· if acceptable to the VŌ board will be reflected in the company’s SOI for 2023/24, a draft of which is due on 1 March 2023, and which councillors have the opportunity to review and formally comment on within two months of receiving it (refer clauses 1-3 of part 1, schedule 8 of the LGA); and

· leave the decisions about how to operationalise the expectations to VŌ’s discretion, based on it having the requisite experience and expertise in venue management and event attraction and delivery.

5.2 Taking into account the enormous disruption to its business over the past two years as a result of COVID-19 restrictions, the need to re-stabilise the business, and for it to continue its contribution to the development of Te Kaha, the scope of the draft LOE is relatively narrow so as to allow VŌ to focus on these important activities without distraction.

5.3 The draft LOE was reviewed by councillors at a workshop on 29 November 2022. The following issues were raised by councillors and have been reflected in the draft LOE (in track changes):

· VŌ’s progress in sustainability initiatives, including buy local has been acknowledged;

· Clarity regarding the partnership relationship between VŌ, ChristchurchNZ Holdings Ltd and the Council’s events’ team has been provided;

· That the Council be informed of new events in a timely manner has been requested;

· For VŌ to consider seeking living wage accreditation, and as a first step looking at the pathway towards achieving that.

6. Policy Framework Implications Ngā Hīraunga ā- Kaupapa here

Strategic Alignment /Te Rautaki Tīaroaro

6.1 LOEs are strongly aligned to the strategic objectives of the Council and to its Long Term Plan.

Policy Consistency / Te Whai Kaupapa here

6.2 The decision is consistent with Council’s Plans and Policies – in particular a LOE is part of the governance and accountability framework for CCOs.

6.3 This report does not supports the Council's Long Term Plan (2021 - 2031).

Impact on Mana Whenua Ngā Whai Take Mana Whenua

6.5 The decision does not relate to a matter of interest to Mana Whenua and will not impact on our agreed partnership with Ngā Papatipu Rūnanga.

Climate Change Impact Considerations Ngā Whai Whakaaro mā te Āhuarangi

6.7 The draft LOE contains climate change expectations.

7. Resource Implications Ngā Hīraunga Rauemi

Capex/Opex / Ngā Utu Whakahaere

7.1 Cost to Implement – there is no identifiable cost of implementation. Whether there are hidden costs associated with the expectations is a matter for VŌ to advise on as part of the accountability and governance process.

7.2 Funding Source - VŌ would be expected to identify how the costs, if any could be met without new Council funding.

8. Legal Implications Ngā Hīraunga ā-Ture

Statutory power to undertake proposals in the report / Te Manatū Whakahaere Kaupapa

8.1 Local Government Act 2002 (LGA).

Other Legal Implications / Ētahi atu Hīraunga-ā-Ture

8.2 There is no legal context, issue or implication relevant to this decision. Note that the LOE is an administrative accountability and governance tool and is therefore non-mandatory.

9. Risk Management Implications Ngā Hīraunga Tūraru

Attachments / Ngā Tāpirihanga

No.	Title	Reference	Page
a ⇩	Venues Otautahi - Draft Letter of Expectations for 2023/24	22/1649012	78

In addition to the attached documents, the following background information is available:

Document Name	Location / File Link
Not applicable

Confirmation of Statutory Compliance / Te Whakatūturutanga ā-Ture

Compliance with Statutory Decision-making Requirements (ss 76 - 81 Local Government Act 2002).

(a) This report contains:

(i) sufficient information about all reasonably practicable options identified and assessed in terms of their advantages and disadvantages; and

(ii) adequate consideration of the views and preferences of affected and interested persons bearing in mind any proposed or previous community engagement.

(b) The information reflects the level of significance of the matters covered by the report, as determined in accordance with the Council's significance and engagement policy.

Signatories / Ngā Kaiwaitohu

Author	Linda Gibb - Performance Monitoring Advisor CCO
Approved By	Leah Scales - General Manager Resources/Chief Financial Officer

Council

07 December 2022

11. Elected Member Appointments
Reference / Te Tohutoro:	22/1487653
Report of / Te Pou Matua:	Simone Gordon, Committee and Hearings Advisor (simone.gordon@ccc.govt.nz)
General Manager / Pouwhakarae:	Lynn McClelland, Assistant Chief Executive Strategic Policy and Performance (lynn.mcclelland@ccc.govt.nz)

1. Nature of Decision or Issue and Report Origin

1.1 The purpose of this report is to appoint the Mayor and elected members to a number of joint committees, council organisations, external bodies and trusts for the 2022-2025 triennium.

1.2 This report is staff generated to provide continuity with the Council's representative arrangements with numerous joint committees, council organisations, external bodies and trusts.

1.3 The decisions in this report are of low significance in relation to the Christchurch City Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy. The level of significance was determined by using the Significance Assessment matrix and considering the extent to which the decisions would potentially impact the community.

2. Officer Recommendations / Ngā Tūtohu

That the Council:

1. Approve the appointment of elected members to the following joint committees, as recommended by the Mayor and Deputy Mayor:

a. The Mayor, Councillors Henstock and Templeton to the Greater Christchurch Partnership Committee.

b. The Mayor, Councillors Henstock and Templeton to the Whakawhanake Kāinga Committee.

c. Councillor Fields to the Banks Peninsula Water Management Zone Committee.

d. Councillor Moore to the Selwyn-Waihora Water Management Zone Committee.

e. Councillor Harrison-Hunt to the Christchurch-West Melton Water Management Zone Committee.

f. Councillors Harrison-Hunt, Moore and Fields to the Water Management Zone Committee Selection Group.

g. Councillor Harrison-Hunt to Te Waihora Co-Governance Group.

h. Councillors Barber, Gough and Peters to the Canterbury Regional Landfill Joint Committee.

i. Councillors Barber, Gough and Peters to the Canterbury Waste Joint Committee.

j. The Mayor to the Canterbury Civil Defence Emergency Management Group.

k. The Mayor to the Canterbury Regional Transport Committee.

2. Approve the appointment of elected members to the following Council organisations and external bodies, as recommended by the Mayor and Deputy Mayor:

a. Councillors Coker and Fields to the Canterbury Museum Trust.

b. Councillor Fields to the Rod Donald Banks Peninsula Trust.

c. Councillor Peters to the Riccarton House and Bush Trust.

d. Councillor Johanson to the Mayor’s Welfare Fund Charitable Trust Committee.

e. Councillor Coker to Canterbury Neighbourhood Support Inc.

f. Councillor Donovan to the Christchurch Foundation.

g. Councillor Coker to the Kate Sheppard Memorial Award Trust

h. Councillor Johanson to Keep Christchurch Beautiful Inc.

i. Deputy Mayor Cotter and Councillor McLellan to the Ōtautahi Community Housing Trust.

j. The Mayor to Ngā Hau e Whā National Marae Charitable Trust.

k. Councillor Barber to the Avon-Heathcote Estuary Ihutai Trust.

l. Councillor Templeton to the Pest Free Banks Peninsula Trust.

3. Nominates Councillor Moore to the Royal New Zealand Air Force Trust Board.

4. Approve the appointment of elected members to the following Sister City Committees:

a. Councillor Johanson to the Christchurch-Seattle Sister City Committee.

b. Councillors Harrison-Hunt and Moore to the Christchurch-Songpa Gu Sister City Committee.

c. Deputy Mayor Cotter to the Christchurch-Adelaide Sister City Committee.

d. Councillor Donovan to the Christchurch-Kurashiki Sister City Committee.

e. Councillor Moore to the Christchurch-England UK Sister City Committee.

5. Note that the elected member(s) appointed to ChristchurchNZ Holdings will automatically be appointed to the Christchurch China Sister Cities Committee.

6. Note that the appointments to Christchurch City Holdings Limited, Christchurch NZ, Transwaste, Civic Building and Venues Ōtautahi will be made through a separate Expression of Interest process.

7. Approve the appointment of the Mayoress Christene Mauger to the Mayor’s Welfare Trust, as recommended by the Mayor.

8. Approve that the below appointments to various bodies be delegated as follows, as recommended by the Mayor:

a. Delegate the Head of Strategic Policy and Resilience to nominate a staff expert in open space and park management to the Summit Road Protection Authority’s Advisory Committee to occupy the dedicated role for a member with that knowledge following the retirement of the last staff expert.

b. Delegate the appointment of one representative for the McLean Institute to the Waimāero Fendalton-Waimairi-Harewood Community Board.

c. Delegate to the Waimāero Fendalton-Waimairi-Harewood and Waipuna Halswell-Hornby-Riccarton Community Boards to appoint two representatives each to the Riccarton Bush Trust.

d. Approves the recommendation from the Waihoro Spreydon-Cashmere-Heathcote Community Board to appoint Community Board Member Keir Leslie as a representative on the Summit Road Protection Authority and Advisory Committee.

e. Delegates future appointments to the Summit Road Protection Authority and Advisory Committee to the Waihoro Spreydon-Cashmere-Heathcote Community Board.

9. Approve the below appointments to the following two Canterbury Mayoral Forum advisory committees, as recommended by the Mayor:

a. Councillor Templeton to the Climate Change Action Planning Reference Group.

b. Councillor Donovan to the Biodiversity Champions Group.

3. Reason for Report Recommendations / Ngā Take mō te Whakatau

3.1 Each triennium, the Council has routinely appointed representatives to various joint decision-making bodies, trusts and external organisations.

4. Alternative Options Considered / Ētahi atu Kōwhiringa

4.1 The only other reasonably practicable option would be to not resolve to appoint elected members to the bodies specified in this report. This option could hinder the efficiency and effectiveness of the bodies for the 2022-25 triennium, and officers do not recommend this approach.

5. Detail / Te Whakamahuki

Joint Committees

5.1 Christchurch City Council is a member of several joint committees with other territorial authorities and regional partners. Councillors are appointed to represent the Christchurch City Council on joint committees and to contribute to updates to the Council on the work of these committees as required.

5.2 The Mayor has met and discussed with Councillors their membership of the joint committees listed below. In making these recommendations the Mayor has consulted the Deputy Mayor and considered a variety of factors, including ward representation, Councillors’ interests in certain appointments and the requirements of each committee.

5.2.1 Greater Christchurch Partnership Committee: The GCPC is a voluntary coalition of local government, iwi, health and government agencies working collaboratively for the prosperity of Greater Christchurch. The Partnership is a joint committee established under the Local Government Act 2002.

5.2.2 Whakawhanake Kāinga Committee: The Whakawhanake Kāinga Committee is an urban growth partnership for the Greater Christchurch area. The partnership is between the Greater Christchurch Partnership, Te Rūnanga o Ngāi Tahu and the Crown.

5.2.3 Water Management Zone Committees: The Christchurch-West Melton and Selwyn-Waihora zone committees are joint committees of Environment Canterbury, Selwyn District Council and the Council. The Banks Peninsula Zone Committee is a joint body of Environment Canterbury and the Council. The purpose of the zone committees is to develop zone implementation programmes (ZIP) to give effect to the fundamental principles and targets of the Canterbury Water Management Strategy within each zone and to monitor the progress in implementing the actions and recommendations in their ZIP.

5.2.4 Water Management Committee Selection Working Group Zone committee membership is made up of a wide range of people with interest in water issues and who have a strong connection to that zone. The purpose of the selection working group is to shortlist candidates for appointment to water management zone committees and assists in the interview process as required.

5.2.5 Te Waihora Co-Governance Group: Te Waihora Co-Governance group members; Te Rūnanga o Ngāi Tahu, Environment Canterbury, Selwyn District Council and Christchurch City Council, respectively hold kaitiaki and statutory responsibilities in relation to Te Waihora/Lake Ellesmere and its catchment. The Council is a signatory to a Co-Governance Agreement providing direction for all those who have a role in, or responsibility for, restoring the mauri of Te Waihora while maintaining a prosperous land based economy and thriving communities for current and future generations.

5.2.6 Canterbury Regional Landfill Joint Committee: Membership of this joint committee is Christchurch City Council and the Ashburton, Selwyn, Waimakariri and Hurunui District Councils as shareholders of Kate Valley Landfill owned by Transwaste Canterbury Ltd. The joint interests of the councils on the board of Transwaste are managed through this committee, including the appointment of the Council’s representative on the Transwaste Board.

5.2.7 Canterbury Waste Joint Committee: Joint committee of Christchurch City Council, Environment Canterbury and the Canterbury District Councils responsible for advancing regional solid waste and hazardous waste minimisation in Canterbury. The three Councillors appointed to the Regional Landfill Committee are also appointed on this committee in recognition of the nexus of the issues in front of both committees.

5.2.8 Canterbury Civil Defence Emergency Management Group: As required by the Civil Defence Emergency Management Act (CDEM Act), this is a joint committee of the participating local authorities for the purposes of the Local Government Act 2002. The CDEM Group cannot be discharged, either as permitted by the LGA 2002, or by a decision of the participating Councils (s. 12(2) of the CDEM Act). Under s. 13(4) of the CDEM Act, the Council can only have one representative on the CDEM Group, either the Mayor or an elected member who has delegated authority to act for the Mayor. In accordance with this provision, the Mayor is currently the Council’s representative. It is recommended the Council gives the Mayor the authority to appoint, if necessary, an elected member as an alternate with delegated authority to act for the Mayor.

5.2.9 Canterbury Regional Transport Committee: The Canterbury Regional Transport Committee (RTC) comprises representatives from the region's councils as well as Waka Kotahi. The primary role of the RTC is to develop and implement the Canterbury Regional Land Transport Plan (RLTP).

5.2.10 Summit Road Protection Authority and Advisory Committee: Joint Committee of the Christchurch City and Selwyn District Councils. Appointments are under the Summit Road (Canterbury) Protection Act 2001. The appointment of a second elected member is delegated to Te Pātaka o Rākaihautū Banks Peninsula Community Board. The Council and Board appointee are also the Council’s nominees to the Summit Road Protection Authority Advisory Committee.

5.2.11 Canterbury Mayoral Forum Climate Change Action Planning Reference Group: This group is made up of elected members from partner Council’s that will provide feedback and advice at a governance level to the Canterbury Mayoral Forum Climate Change Working Group as they develop the Climate Change Action Plan.

5.2.12 Canterbury Mayoral Fund Biodiversity Champions Group: This group aims to raise awareness amongst council colleagues of the importance of biodiversity and to advocate for the role of councils and communities in weaving biodiversity through Canterbury’s living and working landscapes.

Council Organisations, External Bodies and Trusts

5.3 The Council has an interest and right to make appointments to a number of council organisations and external bodies (such as Trusts). The statutory definition of a council organisation includes those entities to which the Council has the right to appoint 1 or more trustees, directors or members (s6, LGA 2002).

5.4 Councillors were asked to express interest in the list of appointments to be made. In making the recommendations for appointment to the organisations listed below, the Mayor has consulted the Deputy Mayor and considered a variety of factors, including ward representation, Councillors’ interests in certain appointments and the requirements of each organisation.

5.4.1 The Canterbury Museum Trust: this is a non-profit making permanent institution with a purpose to ensure the long term sustainability of the Canterbury Museum. The Trust is a joint body with the Council required to appoint four members (these do not need to all be elected members). The Council is required to appoint four people within three months of the local body elections as per the Canterbury Museum Trust Board Act 1993.

5.4.2 Rod Donald Banks Peninsula Trust: Rod Donald Banks Peninsula Trust was established by the Council on 12 July 2010. The Trust promotes the sustainable management and conservation of the natural environment of the Banks Peninsula.

5.4.3 Riccarton Bush Trust: The Trust manages the 6.4 hectare native bush remnant gifted to the people of Canterbury in 1914. The Trust manages Riccarton House and its grounds including Deans Cottage.

5.4.4 Mayors Welfare Fund Charitable Trust Committee: provides assistance to families and individuals in the Christchurch community who are in extreme financial distress. The Fund works with other agencies in the city.

5.4.5 Canterbury Neighbourhood Support Inc: Neighbourhood Support aims to make our homes, streets, neighbourhoods and communities safer and more caring places to live.

5.4.6 The Christchurch Foundation: The Christchurch Foundation is a registered charity with an aim to make Christchurch better by growing philanthropy. The foundation was set up in 2017 to actively collect, manage and distribute funds for a wide range of activities and projects that provide betterment for Christchurch.

5.4.7 Kate Sheppard Memorial Trust: The Trust was set up to establish an annual award to provide an opportunity for a woman to develop her potential by undertaking further education, study, research or training in areas which are of value in the community of New Zealand.

5.4.8 Keep Christchurch Beautiful Inc: is a voluntary, not-for-profit organisation which aims to promote a litter free, cleaner and more beautiful environment within Christchurch. The organisation aims to raise the level of awareness of what individuals can do to improve their community.

5.4.9 Otautahi Community Housing Trust: the OCHT leases the Council’s social housing portfolio and in addition operates housing owned by the Trust. OCHT provides tenancy management services and minor maintenance services.

5.4.10 Ngā Hau e Whā National Marae Charitable Trust: The Marae is managed as a community facility by Te Runanga o Nga Maata Waka, an Urban Maori Authority. Te Runanga o Nga Maata Waka provides a range of services on site including social housing, support for disadvantaged members of the community, educational and recreational services and support for operations of Government entities and NGOs.

5.4.11 Avon-Heathcote Estuary Ihutai Trust: The Trust is a non-profit organisation formed in 2002 by the general public for the restoration and protection of the Estuary. A Memorandum of Understanding between Environment Canterbury, Christchurch City Council, Avon Heathcote Estuary and the Trust provides for each Council to make an appointment to the Trust.

5.4.12 Pest Free Banks Peninsula Governance Group: Pest Free Banks Peninsula/Te Pātaka o Rākaihautū is a collaborative programme to protect and enhance biodiversity on the Peninsula through the widespread eradication of animal pests. This community-led initiative has been formalised through a Memorandum of Understanding signed by 14 foundation signatories in November 2018, including the Council.

5.4.13 Royal New Zealand Air Force Museum Trust Board The Museum Trust Board has governance responsibility for the Air Force Museum of New Zealand, located at the RNZAF base in Wigram. The Council can nominate a Councillor for appointment to the Board.

5.4.14 The McLean Institute: The McLean Institute is a 104-year-old charitable trust governed by a board of 13 voluntary members as determined by the will of Allan McLean. McLean left a substantial amount of his estate to be used by the Institute. The McLean Institute solely owns Holly Lea Retirement Village in Fendalton.

Sister City Committees

5.5 Sister City Committees are community committees which support the Council’s Sister City partnerships. The role of elected members on Sister City Committees is to represent the Council’s interests as an active and equal member of the Sister City Committee whilst appointed by Council; to assist Sister City Committees and the Mayor in the hosting of Sister City delegations; and to formally and informally communicate the activities of the Sister City Committee to the Council.

6. Policy Framework Implications Ngā Hīraunga ā- Kaupapa here

Strategic Alignment /Te Rautaki Tīaroaro

6.1 This report supports the Council's Long Term Plan (2021 - 2031):

6.1.1 Activity: Governance and decision-making

· Level of Service: 4.1.28.3 Establish and maintain documented governance processes that ensure compliance with the local government legislation - Governance processes are maintained and published on council's website.

Policy Consistency / Te Whai Kaupapa here

6.2 The decision is consistent with Council’s Plans and Policies, including the Council’s Delegation Policy.

Impact on Mana Whenua Ngā Whai Take Mana Whenua

6.3 The decision does not involve a significant decision in relation to ancestral land or a body of water or other elements of intrinsic value, therefore this decision does not specifically impact mana whenua, their culture or traditions. However, it is important to ensure that appropriate appointments are made that reflect mana whenua priorities and considerations.

Climate Change Impact Considerations / Ngā Whai Whakaaro mā te Āhuarangi

6.4 This decision does not have climate change impacts.

Accessibility Considerations / Ngā Whai Whakaaro mā te Hunga Hauā

6.5 The decisions in this report do not raise accessibility considerations.

7. Resource Implications Ngā Hīraunga Rauemi

Capex/Opex / Ngā Utu Whakahaere

7.1 Cost to Implement – There is no cost to implement this decision.

7.2 Maintenance/Ongoing costs – There are no ongoing costs from making this decision.

7.1 Funding Source – not applicable.

Other / He mea anō

7.2 Nil.

8. Legal Implications Ngā Hīraunga ā-Ture

Statutory power to undertake proposals in the report / Te Manatū Whakahaere Kaupapa

8.1 The power to appoint committees, sub-committees, other subordinate decision-making bodies, and joint committees is contained in clause 30 schedule 7 of the Local Government Act 2002.

8.2 The Council has an interest and the right to make appointments to a number of council organisations. The statutory definition of a council organisation includes those entities to which the Council has the right to appoint one or more trustees, directors or members (S6, Local Government Act 2002).

9. Risk Management Implications Ngā Hīraunga Tūraru

9.1 Environment Canterbury (ECan) and other partner councils are undertaking simular work in appointing representatives to the joint committees named in this report. Not appointing members could pose a risk to the administrative functions and effectiveness of the bodies named in this report, and could hinder the Council having input if these bodies were to meet before we have appointed elected members.

Attachments / Ngā Tāpirihanga

There are no attachments to this report.

In addition to the attached documents, the following background information is available:

Document Name – Location / File Link

Not applicable

Confirmation of Statutory Compliance / Te Whakatūturutanga ā-Ture

Compliance with Statutory Decision-making Requirements (ss 76 - 81 Local Government Act 2002).

(a) This report contains:

(i) sufficient information about all reasonably practicable options identified and assessed in terms of their advantages and disadvantages; and

(ii) adequate consideration of the views and preferences of affected and interested persons bearing in mind any proposed or previous community engagement.

(b) The information reflects the level of significance of the matters covered by the report, as determined in accordance with the Council's significance and engagement policy.

Signatories / Ngā Kaiwaitohu

Author	Simone Gordon - Committee and Hearings Advisor
Approved By	Lynn McClelland - Assistant Chief Executive Strategic Policy and Performance

Council

07 December 2022

12. Three Waters Better Off Funding - Funding Proposal Application
Reference / Te Tohutoro:	22/1360163
Report of / Te Pou Matua:	David Griffiths, Head of Strategic Policy and Resilience (david.griffiths@ccc.govt.nz) Mary Richardson, General Manager Citizens and Community (mary.richardson@ccc.govt.nz)
General Manager / Pouwhakarae:	Lynn McClelland, Assistant Chief Executive Strategic Policy and Performance (lynn.mcclelland@ccc.govt.nz)

1. Nature of Decision or Issue and Report Origin

1.1 Tranche 1 of funding for Three Waters Better Off funding has opened for applications to Te Tari Taiwhenua Department of Internal Affairs (DIA). The Government has created this funding pool to recognise the impact on councils resulting from shifting three waters assets and service delivery from councils to Water Service Entities.

1.2 The Council has been allocated $30.61 million in Tranche 1 and must submit an application to DIA that meets the Government’s criteria by 16 December 2022.

1.3 Better Off funding (tranche 1) will to be used to sustain and nurture our community’s wellbeing, by prioritising things that communities have told us are important. The projects proposed to be put forward for funding (Attachment A) have been grouped into three programmes of work that meet the Government’s wellbeing criteria and align with mana whenua priorities and the Council’s strategic direction:

1.3.1 Community place-making and wellbeing

1.3.2 Pathways to partnership

1.3.3 Environment and climate resilience.

1.4 The decision in this report is of low significance in relation to the Christchurch City Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy. The level of significance was determined by the relatively minor funding implications as a proportion of the Council’s overall annual budget and there being no call on rates funding nor any other Council funding. It is noted that engagement with mana whenua identified a number of local projects of priority to Rūnanga whose takiwā fall within the Council’s district, which have been included in the proposals.

2. Officer Recommendations / Ngā Tūtohu

That the Council:

1. Confirms to the proposed projects in Attachment A to be included in the Three Waters Reform Better Off Funding Proposal, which must be submitted to Te Tari Taiwhenua Department of Internal Affairs by 16 December 2022.

2. Agrees that, if the Funding Proposal is approved by Te Tari Taiwhenua Department of Internal Affairs, the Funding Agreement will be signed by the Mayor and Chief Executive on behalf of the Council.

3. Reason for Report Recommendations / Ngā Take mō te Whakatau

3.1 The Government has created the Three Waters Better Off funding pool to recognise the impact on councils resulting from shifting three waters assets and service delivery from councils to Water Service Entities. Christchurch City Council has been allocated $30.61 million in Tranche 1 of funding with a further $91.82 million allocated in Tranche 2 (available 1 July 2024).

3.2 To access this allocation, the Council is required to submit a funding application for projects that meet the Government’s criteria. The deadline to make an application for Tranche 1 was 30 September 2022, however the Council applied for and was granted an extension to 16 December 2022 to enable engagement with mana whenua.

3.3 The programmes of work contained in the application will enable the Council to enhance wellbeing in our communities across three priority areas of work.

4. Alternative Options Considered / Ētahi atu Kōwhiringa

4.1 Do not apply for Better Off funding – If the Council were to decide not to apply for the Better Off funding, it would lose the opportunity to access its allocation of the Three Waters Reform support package. Any unallocated or unspent Tranche 1 funds will roll over to Tranche 2, so this option could be reconsidered but it is not recommended for the same reasons as described in the paragraph below.

4.2 Wait until Tranche 2 to apply for Better Off funding - The Council could hold off submitting an application for funding. It could then apply for Tranche 1 funding at the same time it applies for Tranche 2 funding in 2024. Local Authorities do not have to apply for the full Tranche 1 notional amount upfront, funds not applied for in Tranche 1 will be available in the Tranche 2 application round. However, if the Three Waters Reform Programme doesn’t proceed or is materially changed the Council could lose access to Tranche 1 funding altogether. Due the risk of losing access to funding, this option is not recommended.

4.3 Alternative projects –The Council has used a strategic prioritisation approach to identifying projects included in this funding proposal application and briefed the Council on a number of variations. This has enabled a range of projects to be considered and weighted according to their alignment to the Better Off funding criteria, Council’s strategic direction, alignment with mana whenua priorities and the level of community wellbeing to be provided. In order to meet the deadline for submitting an application, Council has agreed to the attached projects (Attachment A). Additional projects can be considered for Tranche 2.

5. Detail / Te Whakamahuki

Three Waters Reforms Programme – support package

5.1 In July 2021, the Government announced a comprehensive Three Waters support package of $2.5 billion to support local government through the transition to the new water services delivery system, and to position the sector for the future. This support package was developed in partnership with Local Government New Zealand. A summary of the support package is available on Te Tari Taiwhenua Department of Internal Affairs’ webpage.

5.2 There are two broad components to this support package:

· Better off: an investment of $2 billion into the future for local government and community wellbeing, consistent with the priorities of both central and local government; and

· No worse off: an allocation of up to around $500 million to ensure that no local authority is in a materially worse position financially to provide services to its community as a direct result of the reform.

5.3 The ‘better off’ component of the support package (comprising $1 billion Crown funding and $1 billion from the new water services entities) is allocated to councils on the basis of a nationally-consistent formula taking into account population, relative deprivation and land area.

5.4 This report and proposals are specific to the first tranche of funding. It is expected that access to Tranche 2 funding will follow a similar process.

Applying for Better Off funding

5.5 In order to access the Better Off funding allocation, the Council must submit a Funding Proposal using the DIA application form. Once submitted, the Funding Proposal will be reviewed by DIA, with a decision issued within 6 weeks.

5.6 DIA has provided the Better Off Support Package Guidance and appointed a relationship manager to each council to provide advice on preparing an application that meets the criteria for the funding. Staff have been in contact with our relationship manager throughout this process, and have shared details of the projects as they were being assessed for funding.

5.7 A funding proposal may include multiple projects, which cover projects up to five years in duration. Funding proposals must be for:

5.7.1 New initiatives/projects; and/or

5.7.2 To accelerate, scale-up and/or enhance the quality of planned investment.

5.8 It is intended that councils will use this funding to help transition to our new roles post-reform through investing in projects that meet some or all of the following government criteria:

5.8.1 Supporting communities to transition to a sustainable and low-emissions economy, including by building resilience to climate change and natural hazards

5.8.2 Delivery of infrastructure and/or services that support local place-making and improvements in community well-being.

5.8.3 Delivery of infrastructure and/or services that enable housing development and growth, with a focus on brownfield and infill development opportunities where those are available.

The Council’s Funding Proposal

5.9 The Council has taken a strategic approach to using its funding allocation to ensure a proposed project meets the Government’s wellbeing criteria and aligns with Ngā Rūnanga priorities and the Council’s own strategic direction.

5.10 Better Off funding (tranche 1) will to be used to sustain and nurture our community’s wellbeing, by prioritising things that mana whenua and communities have told us are important. These include increasing the tree canopy across the city and our regional parks, enhancing biodiversity, safer neighbourhoods, repairing infrastructure and facilities, responding to climate change through adaptation planning and encouraging active travel. Partnering with mana whenua, government agencies and community-based organisations and groups to deliver these projects will underpin their success.

5.11 The projects proposed to be put forward for funding have been grouped into three programmes of work. Common outcomes of building climate resilience and increasing community wellbeing are shared across each of the programmes, which are:

5.11.1 Community place-making and wellbeing

5.11.2 Pathways to partnership

5.11.3 Environment and climate resilience.

5.12 Further detail on the projects is summarised in Attachment A. The information within this attachment will be adapted to fit the application form template.

6. Policy Framework Implications Ngā Hīraunga ā- Kaupapa here

Strategic Alignment /Te Rautaki Tīaroaro

6.1 The proposed projects for inclusion in the Better Off funding application align with the Council’s strategic priorities and community outcomes, particularly the priorities to meet the challenge of climate change and to enable active and connected communities to own their future.

6.2 This report supports the Council's Long Term Plan (2021 - 2031):

6.2.1 Activity: Strategic Planning, Future Development and Regeneration

· Level of Service: 17.0.1.2 Advice to Council on high priority policy and planning issues that affect the City. Advice is aligned with and delivers on the governance expectations as evidenced through the Council Strategic Framework. - Annual strategy and policy forward work programme is aligned to Council Strategic Framework, and is submitted to Executive Leadership Team, and Council as required.

Policy Consistency / Te Whai Kaupapa here

6.3 The decision is consistent with Council’s Plans and Policies. In particular, the Council’s adaptation planning policies, the Climate Resilience Strategy and the Strengthening Communities Together Strategy, and the direction of the Urban Forest Plan currently being developed.

Impact on Mana Whenua Ngā Whai Take Mana Whenua

6.4 The decision involves a matter of interest to mana whenua and could impact on our agreed partnership priorities with Ngā Papatipu Rūnanga.

6.5 The criteria for the Better Off funding package recognises that local authorities are expected to engage with iwi/Māori in determining how it will use its funding allocation. For Tranche 1, it is expected that the Funding Proposal demonstrates genuine engagement, extending beyond standing committees. For Tranche 2, funding proposals are expected to be co-designed and decisions on projects have been made jointly.

6.6 Senior staff arranged two hui with Papatipu Rūnanga chairs to discuss their priorities for use of the funding (one with Ngai Tūāhuriri and one with the five Rūnanga whose takiwā is on the Banks Peninsula). In preparation and to prompt discussions, previous requests for projects or investment were reviewed – including matters raised through long term and annual planning processes, at Te Hononga, or through working relationships/partnerships were reviewed.

6.7 Rūnanga on Banks Peninsula suggested a range of projects of priority to local communities across three waters (protect waterways and harbour and sites of mahinga kai, improve water supply, and improve management of stormwater catchment systems) roading (road, gutters, culvert and bridge repairs or improvement), provision or improvement of amenities such as public toilets near settlements, marae, or tourist areas), planting restoration and land stabilisation. A number of the projects raised are either already in work programmes (underway or scheduled) and will benefit from enhancement or earlier scheduling, and therefore form the basis of the funding requested under the ‘Rūnanga priorities’ project.

Climate Change Impact Considerations / Ngā Whai Whakaaro mā te Āhuarangi

6.8 One of the Government’s criteria is “supporting communities to transition to a sustainable and low-emissions economy, including by building resilience to climate change and natural hazards”. A number of proposed projects to be included in the application meet this, for example, trees and biodiversity, community coastal hazards adaptation planning and active travel.

Accessibility Considerations / Ngā Whai Whakaaro mā te Hunga Hauā

6.9 One of the proposals included in the application is funding a one-year trial to work in partnership with relevant agencies to reduce the barriers to participation in swimming.

6.10 Delivery of other proposals will improve access to active travel options to and around schools, make available information to inform local communities’ climate change adaptation planning and decision-making, and make repairs to local roads on Banks Peninsula that will improve access for residents to local places of importance to them.

7. Resource Implications Ngā Hīraunga Rauemi

Capex/Opex / Ngā Utu Whakahaere

7.1 Cost to Implement - Costs associated with preparing the application for funding have been met from the Council’s operating expenditure.

7.2 Maintenance/Ongoing costs - Costs associated with delivering projects will be funded from Better Off funding received.

7.3 Funding Source - The Tranche 1 funding allocation is provided via Crown funding; Tranche 2 is to be funded by the new Water Services Entities.

Other / He mea anō

7.4 An initial instalment of 10% of allocated funds will be released on approval of the Funding Proposal. Subsequent instalments will be released in arrears of costs incurred, on receipt of:

7.4.1 A payment request (up to one a month can be submitted); and

7.4.2 Proof of progress on the expenditure programme.

8. Legal Implications Ngā Hīraunga ā-Ture

Statutory power to undertake proposals in the report / Te Manatū Whakahaere Kaupapa

8.1 The Council has authority to agree to the Funding Proposal application to be submitted on behalf of the Council.

8.2 Te Tari Taiwhenua Department of Internal Affairs will assess the application and make a decision on whether to approve the Funding Proposal.

8.3 Once approved, projects will then become part of the Council’s approved programmes of capital delivery and operational expenditure.

Other Legal Implications / Ētahi atu Hīraunga-ā-Ture

8.4 In order to apply for the Better Off funding, the Council has to sign a Funding Agreement with Te Tari Taiwhenua Department of Internal Affairs. The parties are bound by the terms and conditions of this Agreement. DIA will provide a completed Funding Agreement following its review of the funding proposal. A pro forma Agreement is available on the DIA webpage.

8.5 The Agreement sets out the purpose of the funding, and the requirements and conditions that local authorities agree to meet to access the funding. The Agreement includes detail on the following:

8.5.1 Funding conditions and criteria

8.5.2 Overview of what the funding stimulus may be spent on

8.5.3 Conditions attached to the funding

8.5.4 Engaging with and supporting transition activities

8.5.5 Reporting and other requirements.

9. Risk Management Implications Ngā Hīraunga Tūraru

9.1 There is a low risk that the Council will be unable to deliver the projects within the agreed timeframes: capital projects identified in the application are either already in work programmes (and Better Off Funding enables enhancement or re-phasing), or any slippage in delivery could be managed through re-phasing of other capital projects, to accommodate delivery of Better Off-funded ones. The Council is accountable for the projects’ delivery, being required to provide milestones for progress and completion as part of the application process.

9.2 For projects where the outcome sought requires community behaviour change (e.g. uptake of active travel, city safety), a flexible approach to projects’ planning and delivery will be desirable – so that that tactics can be adapted to optimise effectiveness.

Attachments / Ngā Tāpirihanga

No.	Title	Reference	Page
a ⇩	Better Off funding proposal - summary of projects	22/1661659	98

In addition to the attached documents, the following background information is available:

Document Name – Location / File Link

Not applicable

Confirmation of Statutory Compliance / Te Whakatūturutanga ā-Ture

Compliance with Statutory Decision-making Requirements (ss 76 - 81 Local Government Act 2002).

(a) This report contains:

(i) sufficient information about all reasonably practicable options identified and assessed in terms of their advantages and disadvantages; and

(ii) adequate consideration of the views and preferences of affected and interested persons bearing in mind any proposed or previous community engagement.

(b) The information reflects the level of significance of the matters covered by the report, as determined in accordance with the Council's significance and engagement policy.

Signatories / Ngā Kaiwaitohu

Authors

Libby Elvidge - Senior Policy Analyst

Adair Bruorton - Principal Advisor Citizens and Community

Approved By

Elizabeth Wilson - Team Leader Policy

Lynn McClelland - Assistant Chief Executive Strategic Policy and Performance

Mary Richardson - General Manager Citizens & Community

Council

07 December 2022

13. Ngā Puna Wai- Carpark Extension and Landscape Mitigation Works
Reference / Te Tohutoro:	22/1431539
Report of / Te Pou Matua:	Richard Gibbs, Senior Project Manager Parks (richard.gibbs@ccc.govt.nz) Rupert Bool, Manager Hagley Park and Ngā Puna Wai (rupert.bool@ccc.govt.nz)
General Manager / Pouwhakarae:	Mary Richardson, General Manager Citizens & Community (Mary.Richardson@ccc.govt.nz)

1. Nature of Decision or Issue and Report Origin

1.1 A decision of Council is required to approve the alteration of Ngā Puna Wai Reserve for the addition of carparking and landscape mitigation works.

1.2 This decision is required due to staff fulfilling previous actions requested by Council when granting of a lease at Ngā Puna Wai to Netsal for the development of an indoor netball and futsal facility.

1.3 The decision in this report is of medium significance in relation to the Christchurch City Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy. The level of significance was determined by consideration of the metropolitan nature of the sports facilities at Ngā Puna Wai, the existing impact on both users of the park from a citywide and regional perspective as well as the impact on the local neighbourhood communities and surroundings.

1.4 Ngā Puna Wai is considered a metropolitan facility in accordance with Council’s delegations policy on the basis that the nature of the activity is such that decision-making on a district-wide basis will better promote the interests of all communities, as the impact of the decision will extend beyond the Community Board area.

1.5 Council’s contribution to the development of the Netsal Centre relates to provision of underground services, stormwater management, ground improvements and the provision of 120 carparks to meet the requirement of the Netsal Centre resource consent. This is consistent with the initial development of the sports hub at Ngā Puna Wai where partner sporting entities contributed funding to the build of the sports infrastructure.

1.6 The decision required within this report relates to the modification to the land to provide an additional 310 carparks to meet the demand identified within the traffic assessment and the landscape mitigation proposed.

2. Officer Recommendations / Ngā Tūtohu

That the Council:

1. Receive the Ngā Puna Wai- Carpark Extension and Landscape Mitigation Works report.

2. Approve the extension of the car parking to address the demand shortage identified and the associated landscape mitigation works at Ngā Puna Wai.

3. Reason for Report Recommendations / Ngā Take mō te Whakatau

3.1 During the hearings and deliberations associated with the decision to grant a lease of land to the Netsal centre at Ngā Puna Wai, Council heard many deputations relating to the existing deficiency in car park provision for the Ngā Puna Wai sports hub, and the impact this was having on the local community. This concern was amplified with respect to the potential granting of a ground lease for the Netsal Centre development.

3.2 Council requested that staff undertake an assessment and traffic study and report the outcome to council (Attached). This study identified an issue with current provision of adequate parking. The traffic assessment experts recommended the development of additional car parking to manage the existing and future demand generated by the Netsal development.

3.3 The staff recommendation in this report is consistent with this external expert’s recommendation that additional formalised car parking capacity was required, beyond that stipulated by the District Plan.

4. Alternative Options Considered / Ētahi atu Kōwhiringa

4.1 Not to extend the car park provision or limiting the extent of the carpark provision.

4.1.1 The benefits associated with not proceeding with the recommended development include:

· cost avoidance; and

· retention of open space for other recreational activities.

4.1.2 The disadvantages of not proceeding with the recommended development include:

· ongoing and increased impact on local surrounding communities and potential for generation of conflict with the sporting community.

· no mitigation of the impacts of the large Netsal facility on the park and surrounding neighbourhood.

· not meeting the expectations or mitigating the concerns raised by the local communities and existing sports currently utilising the reserve in particular the lack of suitable parking capacity for all seasons.

· not meeting the growing demand for participation in recreation and sports activity.

· developing the land for additional formal recreation use will further increase demand associated with traffic management.

5. Detail / Te Whakamahuki

5.1 Christchurch Netball Club (CNC) Incorporated and Mainland Football Incorporated have entered into a Joint Venture (JV) to develop a 10 court indoor facility to meet the current and future needs of Netball and Futsal in the wider Christchurch community.

5.2 A proposed facility located within the Ngā Puna Wai sports hub was proposed and the proponents requested the granting of a lease to enable the building to proceed.

5.3 The Netsal development has been made possible by an $11 million gift to the city from an Auckland based benefactor committed to supporting women’s sport, and in particular netball in Christchurch after the earthquakes.

5.4 Council approved the granting of a lease to Netsal in May 2020 following a comprehensive public consultation and hearings process. The lease was granted alongside several resolutions of Council requiring staff to pursue mitigation of several concerns raised by the surrounding residents, community groups and Ngā Puna Wai sports’ user groups regarding the impact of the development.

5.5 Netsal are funding the development of the building. Council’s contribution to the development relates to provision of underground services, ground improvements and the provision of public car parking and landscape mitigations. This is consistent with the initial development of the sports hub at Ngā Puna Wai, where partner sporting entities contributed funding to the build of the sports infrastructure.

5.6 Council requested staff complete the following actions and report back. The following actions are complete and form the basis of the decision required to implement the response:

5.6.1 Requests staff to develop a comprehensive Traffic Management Plan (TMP) with input from existing operational parties within Ngā Puna Wai including:

5.6.2 Mitigating the amount of parking on residential streets and encouraging parking within Ngā Puna Wai grounds itself, such as use of the community fields.

5.6.3 Both internal traffic and parking issues within Ngā Puna Wai and surrounding residential streets.

5.6.4 Requests staff to investigate possible options to soften the impact of the building on the adjoining neighbours.

5.7 The following actions are progressing and will be subject to future decisions:

5.7.1 Requests staff to consider options for traffic calming measures on surrounding residential streets and leading in to Ngā Puna Wai, and report back to the Halswell-Hornby-Riccarton Community Board for consideration.

5.7.2 Requests staff to investigate the future of a shared cycleway from Curletts Road to Ngā Puna Wai.

5.7.3 Requests staff to work with Environment Canterbury on options for future travel plans for public transport to and from Ngā Puna Wai.

5.7.4 Requests staff to report back to the Council on options for the development of an additional entrance at Ngā Puna Wai for the inclusion in the draft 2021-2031 Long Term Plan. Noting that the primary concern of the majority of submitters related to the impact on the existing entrance off Augustine Drive.

5.8 Staff presented a briefing to Council on 15February 2022 detailing:

· the Netsal build programme;

· the outcome of the traffic assessment and ongoing work associated with public transport options and cycleway developments; and

· Council’s commitment to purchase the netball centre at Hagley Park and repurpose this as a Multicultural Recreation Centre and to build additional shared car parking at Ngā Puna Wai.

5.9 Staff have hosted open and ongoing public information sessions with involvement from residents, resident associations, the sporting user groups and community board members, to discuss findings of the traffic assessment and subsequent design solutions options. This has aided the development of the final design solution. There has been good quality engagement and feedback has been adopted by the designers and incorporated into the final version for delivery.

5.10 Participants have requested that these sessions continue into the future as staff progress other changes associated with the use of Ngā Puna Wai including the second entranceway and staff have committed to this ongoing direct engagement process.

5.11 The outcome of this work is the subject of this report requesting approval to alter the reserve and develop the extended carpark and landscape modification to mitigate the impact of the new building. Design documentation is attached to this report.

5.12 The decision affects the following wards/Community Board areas:

5.12.1 Halswell-Hornby- Riccarton.

6. Policy Framework Implications Ngā Hīraunga ā- Kaupapa here

Strategic Alignment /Te Rautaki Tīaroaro

6.1 This recommendation is consistent with Council policy.

6.2 The delivery of this project supports the following Council strategic priorities:

· Enabling active and connected communities to own their future.

· Accelerating the momentum the city needs.

6.3 The delivery of this project supports the following Community outcomes:

· Celebration of our identity through arts, culture, heritage, sport and recreation.

6.4 This report supports the Council's Long Term Plan (2021 - 2031):

6.4.1 Activity: Parks and Foreshore

· Level of Service: 6.8.5 Satisfaction with the overall availability of recreation facilities within the city's parks and foreshore network. - Resident satisfaction with the availability of recreation facilities across the parks and foreshore network: >= 70%.

Policy Consistency / Te Whai Kaupapa here

6.5 The decision is consistent with Council’s Plans and Policies. The development is consistent with the Reserve Management Plan for Ngā Puna Wai and the Christchurch District Plan.

Impact on Mana Whenua Ngā Whai Take Mana Whenua

6.6 The decision does involve a significant decision in relation to ancestral land or a body of water or other elements of intrinsic value; therefore this decision does specifically impact Mana Whenua, their culture and traditions.

6.7 The decision involves a matter of interest to Mana Whenua and will not impact on our agreed partnership priorities with Ngā Papatipu Rūnanga.

6.8 Te Ngāi Tūāhuriri place high importance on the cultural and environmental values associated with this area. The Ihutai catchment is of great cultural and historical importance to tāngata whenua due to its associations with mahinga kai and past settlement and occupation. This catchment includes the Ōpāwaho/Heathcote River. The cultural health of this river is of primary importance to Te Ngāi Tūāhuriri Rūnanga.

6.9 The proposed development is adjacent to the Ōpāwaho Heathcote River. Containment release into the river would be of significant concern to mana whenua. Storm water treatment for the proposal has been designed to control and treat stormwater through a range of devices incorporated into the carpark to ensure no storm water enters the river.

6.10 Mahaanui Kurataiao Limited raised a number of concerns regarding the potential impact on the Ōpāwaho/Heathcote River as a result of stormwater overflow from the development. These issues have been resolved and Environment Canterbury have issued the stormwater discharge consent.

Climate Change Impact Considerations / Ngā Whai Whakaaro mā te Āhuarangi

6.11 The expansion of car parking is related to the demand associated with developing multiple sports facilities in a single location. As this is a metropolitan facility servicing the whole city and in some cases regional participation, it is somewhat inevitable that private cars will be a preferred mode of transportation.

6.12 Mitigation of the impact of accommodating cars is somewhat offset by the significant level of landscaping including canopy tree coverage for the new development. Additional landscaping and tree canopy planting planning is also progressing for the wider facility.

6.13 In granting approval for the lease in its original decision, Council also requested the following considerations:

· Requests staff to investigate the future of a shared cycleway from Curletts Road to Ngā Puna Wai.

· Requests staff to work with Environment Canterbury on options for future travel plans for public transport to and from Ngā Puna Wai.

6.14 Both of these initiatives have progressed through the development process. The cycleway connection is being planned as a component of the additional entrance design and implementation.

6.15 Discussions have progressed with Environment Canterbury regarding the inclusion of the facility in a regular bus route. Environment Canterbury have indicated that they will include this in the public consultation process they are soon to commit to regarding the public Bus Route 7 review.

Accessibility Considerations / Ngā Whai Whakaaro mā te Hunga Hauā

6.16 The design of the carpark concourse and entranceway are all fully aligned to meet the needs of persons of all abilities and accessibility needs.

7. Resource Implications Ngā Hīraunga Rauemi

Capex/Opex / Ngā Utu Whakahaere

7.1 Cost to Implement – Cost to implement is $8.6M. A full cost report including the contract sum is an attached to this report. The report is confidential at this time as it includes details of the proposed contractor’s price. This will be released once commercial negotiations are complete.

7.2 As the development Council are responsible for needs to be fully integrated into the Netsal build contract Council have requested a price for the development from the Netsal build main contractor.

7.3 Pricing for all of the necessary packages of work have been competitively tendered through the Netsal Centre principal contractor. Council’s independent Quantity Surveyor has had full access to this information for review and has recommended to council that the pricing is appropriate and in line with market value.

7.4 This evaluation included multiple rounds of value engineering to reduce the cost as much as possible.

7.5 Maintenance/Ongoing costs - Neutral. The area is currently maintained by our in house Ngā Puna Wai team. The area is currently a large grass paddock requiring regular maintenance. This will change to regular maintenance of the rain gardens and other landscaped areas.

7.5.1 Funding Source – Capex. The funding for the project is included in the current long term plan.

· Ngā Puna Wai Carpark and Access Improvements 50%, Project ID -61531

· Land Development (Development Contributions) 50% Project ID’s –3177, 61729, 61731. These budgets will be drawn down into the project above once a decision to proceed is confirmed.

Other / He mea anō

7.6 Council’s contribution to the development of the Netsal centre relates to provision of underground services, ground improvements and the provision of public car parking and landscape mitigations. This is consistent with the initial development of the sports hub at Ngā Puna Wai where partner sporting entities contributed funding to the build of the sports infrastructure.

8. Legal Implications Ngā Hīraunga ā-Ture

Statutory power to undertake proposals in the report / Te Manatū Whakahaere Kaupapa

8.1 Council has the ability to exercise all of the Ministerial powers that have been delegated to the Council under the Reserves Act 1977, including approve the location of, and construction of, or alteration or addition to, any structure or area on parks and reserves provided the matter is within the policy and budget set by the Council.

Other Legal Implications / Ētahi atu Hīraunga-ā-Ture

8.2 This development is subject to specific resource consent and building consent conditions. Modifications to the design may expose Council to delay costs for the Netsal building build.

9. Risk Management Implications Ngā Hīraunga Tūraru

9.1 Delayed decision making:

9.1.1 Will expose Council to delay costs for the Netsal Centre build as the designs are fully integrated.

Likelihood: Very high

Impact: moderate to high

9.2 Decision not to proceed or partial delivery only

9.2.1 Will not meet the needs of the local communities nor the sporting fraternity in regard to provision of adequate parking on site to mitigate the impact of the hub activity on the local community.

Likelihood: high

Impact: moderate

Attachments / Ngā Tāpirihanga

No.	Title	Reference	Page
a	Ngā Puna Wai Civil Works Package (Under Separate Cover)	22/1586924
b	Ngā Puna Wai Car Park Landscape Design (Under Separate Cover)	22/1586925
c	Ngā Puna Wai Civil Works and Landscape Design Cost Report (Under Separate Cover) - Confidential	22/1589505
d	Ngā Puna Wai Traffic Planning and Engineering Report (Under Separate Cover)	22/358566

In addition to the attached documents, the following background information is available:

Document Name – Location / File Link

Not applicable

Confirmation of Statutory Compliance / Te Whakatūturutanga ā-Ture

Compliance with Statutory Decision-making Requirements (ss 76 - 81 Local Government Act 2002).

(a) This report contains:

(i) sufficient information about all reasonably practicable options identified and assessed in terms of their advantages and disadvantages; and

(ii) adequate consideration of the views and preferences of affected and interested persons bearing in mind any proposed or previous community engagement.

(b) The information reflects the level of significance of the matters covered by the report, as determined in accordance with the Council's significance and engagement policy.

Signatories / Ngā Kaiwaitohu

Author

Richard Gibbs - Senior Project Manager

Approved By

Rupert Bool - Manager Hagley Park

Andrew Rutledge - Head of Parks

Mary Richardson - General Manager Citizens & Community

Council

07 December 2022

14. 2022-23 Metropolitan Discretionary Response Fund - Community Law Canterbury and Pacific People's Trust
Reference / Te Tohutoro:	22/1502894
Report of / Te Pou Matua:	Lexie Reuben, Team Leader Community Funding (Lexie.Reuben@ccc.govt.nz)
General Manager / Pouwhakarae:	Mary Richardson, General Manager Citizens & Community (Mary.Richardson@ccc.govt.nz)

1. Purpose of Report Te Pūtake Pūrongo

1.1 The purpose of this report is for the Council to consider two applications for funding from its 2022-23 Metropolitan Discretionary Response Fund from the organisations listed below.

Funding Request Number	Organisation	Project Name	Amount Requested	Amount Recommended
00064929	Community Law Canterbury	Bridging Service – Tenants Protection	$40,000	$40,000
00064877	Pacific Peoples Trust	Financial literacy programme & youth employment programme	$25,000	$20,000

1.2 There is currently a balance of $248,076 remaining in the fund.

2. Officer Recommendations Ngā Tūtohu

That the Council:

1. Makes a grant of $40,000 from the 2022/23 Metropolitan Discretionary Response Fund to Community Law Canterbury towards the costs of bridging services for Tenants Protection.

2. Makes a grant of $20,000 from the 2022-23 Metropolitan Discretionary Response Fund to Pacific Peoples Trust towards wages.

3. Key Points Ngā Take Matua

Strategic Alignment Te Rautaki Tīaroaro

3.1 The recommendations are aligned to the Strategic Framework and in particular the strategic priority of enabling active and connected communities to own their future. It will contribute to three community outcomes, resilient communities, liveable city and healthy environment. The recommendations are consistent with the Strengthening Communities Together Strategy.

Decision Making Authority Te Mana Whakatau

3.2 Council can determine the allocation of the Discretionary Response Fund for each community.

3.3 Allocations must be consistent with any policies, standards or criteria adopted by the Council.

3.4 The Fund does not cover:

· Legal challenges or Environment Court challenges against the Council, Council Controlled organisations or Community Board decisions.

· Projects or initiatives that change the scope of a Council project or that will lead to ongoing operational costs to the Council (though Community Boards can recommend to the Council that it consider a grant for this purpose).

Assessment of Significance and Engagement Te Aromatawai Whakahirahira

3.5 The decisions in this report are of low significance in relation to the Christchurch City Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy.

3.6 The level of significance was determined by the number of people affected and/or with an interest. It is also due to the decision required being the allocation of an existing funs using approved criteria.

3.7 Due to the assessment of low significance the applications have been discussed with the applicants and other stakeholders in the course of providing an assessment, no further community engagement and consultation is required.

Discussion Kōrerorero

3.8 At the time of writing, the balance of the 2022-23 Discretionary Response Fund is as below.

Total Budget 2022-23	Granted To Date	Returns made to the DRF	Available for allocation	Balance If Staff Recommendation adopted
$302,768	$56,692	$2,000	$248,076	$188,076

3.9 Based on the current Discretionary Response Fund criteria, the applications listed above are eligible for funding.

3.10 The attached Decision Matrixes provides detailed information for the applications. This includes organisational details, project details, financial information and a staff assessment.

Attachments Ngā Tāpirihanga

No.	Title	Reference	Page
a ⇩	Decision Matrix - 00064929 - Community Law Canterbury	22/1433580	112
b ⇩	Decision Matrix - 00064877 - Pacific Peoples Trust	22/1441412	113

Confirmation of Statutory Compliance / Te Whakatūturutanga ā-Ture

Compliance with Statutory Decision-making Requirements (ss 76 - 81 Local Government Act 2002).

(a) This report contains:

(i) sufficient information about all reasonably practicable options identified and assessed in terms of their advantages and disadvantages; and

(ii) adequate consideration of the views and preferences of affected and interested persons bearing in mind any proposed or previous community engagement.

(b) The information reflects the level of significance of the matters covered by the report, as determined in accordance with the Council's significance and engagement policy.

Signatories / Ngā Kaiwaitohu

Authors

Katie MacDonald - Support Officer

Lexie Reuben - Team Leader Community Funding

Approved By

Matthew McLintock - Manager Community Governance Team

Peter Langbein - Finance Business Partner

John Filsell - Head of Community Support and Partnerships

Mary Richardson - General Manager Citizens & Community

Council

07 December 2022

15. Suburban Regeneration Biannual Report - April to September 2022
Reference / Te Tohutoro:	22/1187739
Report of / Te Pou Matua:	Janine Sowerby, Senior Planner, Urban Regeneration (janine.sowerby@ccc.govt.nz)
General Manager / Pouwhakarae:	Jane Davis, General Manager Infrastructure, Planning & Regulatory Services (jane.davis@ccc.govt.nz)

1. Brief Summary

1.1 The purpose of this report is to inform councillors of implementation progress on suburban regeneration projects over the six month period from 1 April to 30 September 2022. The report focuses on projects for which there is current funding or activity.

1.2 Detail of progress updates, including photos, is provided in the attached dashboard (Attachment A). The dashboard is structured around place/location, to align with the currently-agreed higher priority suburban regeneration locations.

1.3 Staff have been reporting on suburban regeneration implementation progress on a biannual basis since 2015, initially focusing on the nine suburban master plans. This is a ‘sister report’ to the Central City Biannual Report and collates information from across a range of Council teams, other organisations (including ChristchurchNZ) and city-making partners.

1.4 Progress updates of particular note are provided in Section 3 below. Ōtākaro Avon River Corridor information was included in the two previous biannual reports but is now principally reported separately (primarily through the Ōtākaro Avon River Corridor Co-governance Establishment Committee and via the Parks quarterly updates).

1.5 The dashboard is usually circulated to community boards before being reported to committee. Given the timing with the election, this attachment was instead reviewed by all Community Board Advisers, with no requested amendments received.

2. Officer Recommendations Ngā Tūtohu

That the Council:

1. Receive the information in the Suburban Regeneration Biannual Report for April to September 2022.

3. Progress updates

3.1 Progress updates of note this reporting period are provided below. The attached dashboard has a comprehensive range of other updates with supporting information and images.

3.2 The previous Council requested consideration be given to extending the City Vacant Differential Rate (currently being applied in areas of the Central City) to other locations. Staff will report further on this separately.

3.4 Higher priority suburban regeneration locations:

3.4.1 New Brighton:

· $70,000 of funding was brought forward into the FY22/23 Annual Plan for some initial scoping of the New Brighton Mall upgrade (scheduled in FY26/27 and FY27/28) and provision of some cycle stands in the interim.

· Well-received residential, economic and placemaking initiatives to support the commercial core continued to be developed and rolled out.

· The Art-omat (one of the Tiny Huts from the 2016 design competition) was repaired, repainted and gifted to the New Brighton Community Gardens.

3.4.2 Linwood Village/Inner City East:

· The Waikura Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board and Council approved the proposed scheme design for the Linwood Village streetscape upgrade – a project identified in the 2012 Linwood Village Master Plan. A funding shortfall requires resolution before proceeding to construction.

· The community’s Inner City East/Linwood Revitalisation Plan is being implemented, including through promotion of the Council’s community-led placemaking resources and funding sources.

3.5 Other master plan locations:

3.5.1 Main Road:

· Construction began of the last section of the Coastal Pathway, at Moncks Bay.

3.5.2 Ferry Road:

· Combined on-site construction of the Ferry Road crossing enhancements, estuary edge/Coastal Pathway connection and Humphreys Drive crossings progressed, with the above ground works completed and the final surface layers being placed.

3.5.3 Selwyn Street Shops:

· New planting areas and refreshed pathways on Selwyn Street Reserve were completed.

· The redevelopment of 299 Selwyn Street, with 25 new houses, has progressed.

3.5.4 Sumner Village Centre:

· Plans have progressed for a comprehensive, mixed-use project at the intersection of The Esplanade and Marriner Street-west (including the former Cave Rock apartments’ site).

3.5.5 Sydenham:

· A new, modern playground was installed at Buchan Park.

3.5.6 Lyttelton:

· Work has progressed to upgrade toilet facilities at the Lyttelton Information Centre and in Albion Square.

· Work continued towards completion of the western car park area and pedestrian-related upgrades at Te Nukutai o Tapoa – Naval Point, and to Godley Quay from Te Ana Marina to the coastal edge, in time for the busy summer sailing season, SailGP and to support use of the site for other community events.

· Of particular relevance to Lyttelton, ChristchurchNZ started work on two Destination Management Plans, including one for Banks Peninsula because of its unique characteristics and significant cruise visitation.

3.6 Other suburban locations:

3.6.1 Diamond Harbour ‘Getting to the Point’ community led plan:

· Construction began on the Diamond Harbour Wharf renewal in early September.

3.6.2 Little River ‘Little River Big Ideas’ community led plan:

· Initial design and consent work for the upgrade of Coronation Library has progressed, with contract approvals and site works expected in October.

3.7 City-making partners Life in Vacant Spaces (LiVS) and The Green Lab continued supporting projects in New Brighton, Sydenham, Lyttelton, the Ōtākaro Avon River Corridor, Phillipstown, Mairehau and Waltham.

3.8 New Brighton, Linwood Village and Sydenham continued to benefit from Enliven Places Rates Incentive funding. Community-led projects in New Brighton, Birdlings Flat and Hoon Hay have received Place Partnership or Shape your Place Toolkit (SYPT) funding.

Attachments / Ngā Tāpirihanga

No.	Title	Reference	Page
a ⇩	Council Suburban Regeneration Biannual Report - April to September 2022 7 December 2022 - Attachment A	22/1494263	118

In addition to the attached documents, the following background information is available:

Document Name	Location / File Link
Not applicable

Confirmation of Statutory Compliance / Te Whakatūturutanga ā-Ture

Compliance with Statutory Decision-making Requirements (ss 76 - 81 Local Government Act 2002).

(a) This report contains:

(i) sufficient information about all reasonably practicable options identified and assessed in terms of their advantages and disadvantages; and

(ii) adequate consideration of the views and preferences of affected and interested persons bearing in mind any proposed or previous community engagement.

(b) The information reflects the level of significance of the matters covered by the report, as determined in accordance with the Council's significance and engagement policy.

Signatories / Ngā Kaiwaitohu

Author

Janine Sowerby - Senior Planner

Approved By

Carolyn Bonis - Team Leader Urban Regeneration

Bruce Rendall - Head of City Growth & Property

Jane Davis - General Manager Infrastructure, Planning & Regulatory Services

5. Council Minutes - 23 November 2022
Reference / Te Tohutoro:	22/1640390
Report of / Te Pou Matua:	Samantha Kelly, Team Leader Hearings & Committee Support (Samantha.Kelly@ccc.govt.nz)
General Manager / Pouwhakarae:	Dawn Baxendale, Chief Executive (Dawn.Baxendale@ccc.govt.nz)

6. Chairpersons Report - Local Alcohol Policy
Reference Te Tohutoro:	22/1582113
Report of Te Pou Matua:	Paul McMahon, Chairperson, Waitai Coastal-Burwood-Linwood Community Board
General Manager Pouwhakarae:	Mary Richardson, General Manager Citizens & Community (Mary.Richardson@ccc.govt.nz)

ITEM NO.	GENERAL SUBJECT OF EACH MATTER TO BE CONSIDERED	SECTION	SUBCLAUSE AND REASON UNDER THE ACT	PLAIN ENGLISH REASON	WHEN REPORTS CAN BE RELEASED
13.	Ngā Puna Wai- Carpark Extension and Landscape Mitigation Works
	Attachment c - Ngā Puna Wai Civil Works and Landscape Design Cost Report	s7(2)(b)(ii)	Prejudice Commercial Position	The report contains Contract Price Information. Commercial Negotiations are not complete at this time	31 January 2023 Commercial negotiations complete
17.	Public Excluded Council Minutes - 23 November 2022			Refer to the previous public excluded reason in the agendas for these meetings.

No.	Report Title	Reference	Page
1	Chairpersons Report - Local Alcohol Policy		18

Chairpersons Report - Local Alcohol Policy
Reference / Te Tohutoro:	22/1522571
Report of / Te Pou Matua:	Paul McMahon, Chair Waitai Coastal-Burwood-Linwood Community Board paul.mcmahon@ccc.govt.nz
General Manager / Pouwhakarae:	Mary Richardson, General Manager Citizens & Community (Mary.Richardson@ccc.govt.nz)

7. Selwyn Waihora Zone Committee Minutes - 9 May 2022
Reference / Te Tohutoro:	22/1385280
Report of / Te Pou Matua:	Luke Smeele, Committee and Hearings Advisor, luke.smeele@ccc.govt.nz
General Manager / Pouwhakarae:	Lynn McClelland, Assistant Chief Executive Strategic Policy and Performance (lynn.mcclelland@ccc.govt.nz)