Agenda of Council - Wednesday, 21 February 2024

Council

21 February 2024

5. Response to Notice of Motion - Open Briefings and Workshops
Reference / Te Tohutoro:	24/62265
Report of / Te Pou Matua:	Helen White, Head of Legal and Democratic Services, helen.white@ccc.govt.nz
Senior Manager / Pouwhakarae:	Lynn McClelland, Assistant Chief Executive Strategic Policy and Performance (lynn.mcclelland@ccc.govt.nz)

1. Purpose and Origin of Report Te Pūtake Pūrongo

1.1 The purpose of this report is to address the recommendations made by the Chief Ombudsman in their "Open for business" paper (October 2023).

1.2 The Council requested, at its meeting of 15 November 2023, a report on the resource and practice implications to change the default setting for Council and Community Board briefings and workshops to open from closed (CNCL/2023/00150).

1.3 The decisions in this report are of low significance in relation to the Christchurch City Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy. This level is set due to the subject of this report being limited to council processes.

2. Officer Recommendations Ngā Tūtohu

That the Council:

1. Agrees that informal meetings with the Council and Community Boards linked to a proposed decision are held in public by default, including but not limited to:

a. Briefings

b. Workshops

c. Seminars

2. Notes that informal meetings for Community Boards will be held in public by default after a full meeting round and no later than 1 April 2024.

3. Notes that pre-meeting informals remain as non-public session as they are for administrative or logistic purposes for the meeting they refer to.

4. Notes that agenda setting meetings remain as non-public sessions as they are for administrative or logistic purposes.

5. Notes that there is a process that reviews public excluded briefings and releases information when appropriate.

6. Notes that the process will be reviewed in six months.

3. Reason for Report Recommendations Ngā Take mō te Whakatau

3.1 In October 2023, the Ombudsman released Open for business: A report on the Chief Ombudsman’s investigation into local council meetings and workshops (the report). This reviewed the workshop/briefing practices of eight Councils and provided a number of recommendations that are relevant to the local government sector as a whole. This Council was not one of the eight and adoption of the recommendations is voluntary. The recommendations include:

3.1.1 Adopt a principle of openness by default for all workshops (and briefings, forums etc), including a commitment to record a clear basis for closure where justified, on a case-by-case basis.

3.1.2 Make sure the time, dates, venues, and subject matter, of all workshops are publicised in advance, along with the rationale for closing them where applicable.

3.1.3 Review practice and internal guidance for keeping of records of workshop proceedings, ensuring they contribute to a clear audit trail of the workshop (including details of information presented, relevant debate and consideration of options). Councils may wish to consider consulting with Archives NZ to determine good practice in this respect.

3.1.4 Publish workshop records on the council’s website as soon as reasonably practicable after the event.

3.1.5 Formalise a process for considering release of information from closed workshops.

3.1.6 Consider adding a message on a relevant section of council websites stating that members of the public can make a complaint to me in relation to the administration of workshops.

3.2 On 15 December 2023, following a Notice of Motion from Councillor Johanson, the Council resolved:

Request a report no later than February 2024 on the resource and practice implications to change the default setting for Council and Community Board briefings and workshops to open from closed.

4. Alternative Options Considered Ētahi atu Kōwhiringa

4.1 It is an option for the Council not to hold informal information sessions in public.

4.2 The implications of maintaining the current approach would likely include an investigation by the Ombudsman into the Council’s practices. The Ombudsman also considers that holding informal meetings behind closed doors may contribute to a public perception of secrecy.

5. Detail Te Whakamahuki

5.1 Informal meetings, such as briefings or workshops are used to prepare elected members with the necessary background and information to make good decisions. These sessions can be educational and enable discussion between staff and the elected members. Final decisions cannot be made outside of a formal meeting, but these informal meetings form part of the decision-making process.

5.2 The current Council practice is for informal meetings to be closed to the public. This is not consistent with the Ombudsman’s recommended approach which is to hold informal meetings in an open manner and only hold them in private when it is reasonable to do so. In the view of the Chief Ombudsman, grounds to withhold under the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 (LGOIMA) must be applied and a rigorous assessment of the public interest must be undertaken.

5.3 The LGOIMA does not define or regulate workshops or other informal meetings. As briefings/workshops cannot lawfully be used to make actual and effective decisions, they are not conducted under the meeting requirements in LGOIMA. This means that usually briefings/workshops are not notified to the public, the agenda is not published publicly and no minutes are taken.

5.4 Some informal meetings are held publicly. These relate to matters of high interest, for example, the Council holds some open briefings/workshops on the Long-Term Plan or Annual Plan. The Council ensures briefing topics, attendance and notes are recorded as part of the Council’s response to the 2019 Ombudsman’s investigation into the Council’s LGOIMA compliance. Generally, the Community Boards hold workshops in public.

5.5 The report describes various ways that informal meetings are undertaken. For example, Timaru, Rangitīkei and Clutha District Councils hold public briefings by default. Other Councils have a range of practices including advertising and publishing briefing information. Wellington City Council have open Councillor information sessions with all information and live streaming available on line: https://wellington.govt.nz/your-council/meetings/councillor-information-sessions

Proposed Approach

5.6 The table addresses Council and Community Board informal meetings and the proposed high-level approach:

Meeting Type	Definition	Recommended Approach
1. Agenda Setting	· A meeting of the Chair and Deputy Chair with staff to confirm agenda items prior to publication.	· Administrative/logistic meetings remain closed to the public.
2. Informals	· These are for elected members to meet and discuss topical matters and exchange information proximate and related to a particular formal meeting.	· Subjects to be limited to administrative/logistic meetings remain closed to the public. · If there are to be discussions that relate to a decision, then this should be at a public session.
3. Briefings (sharing/clarifying information with members in advance of a decision)	· These are opportunities for staff, and sometimes representatives from external agencies / strategic partners, to brief elected members about a wide range of matters in an informal setting. Subjects may include: o Matters that are under consideration, to ensure that all elected members understand the wider context. o Topics, which elected members need to understand prior to a decision-making process or prior to the information becoming public. · The key purpose of a briefing is to ensure that elected members are well informed. · Staff who also need to stay informed on the topic under discussion may attend in an observation role if invited. · Briefings are not for decision-making. · They also provide an opportunity for community groups to present ideas or proposals to elected members outside of the Annual Plan or deputation process. · Current examples include Council Tuesday Briefings and the monthly combined Board briefings.	· Renamed Councillor/Member Information Sessions · Open to the public by default. · Advertised on website in advance of meeting. · Live streamed via Zoom and/or recorded (where practicable) · Presentation and notes published on website. · PX briefing would require a specific reason in the LGOIMA that was assessed against the public interest test.
4. Workshops (this is for the purpose of seeking guidance and input into the development of staff advice)	· Workshops could be open to the public and will often be held either before or following a scheduled Committee, Sub-Committee or Community Board meeting. · Their purpose is for members to receive and discuss information and identify, guide and process options for further consideration and staff advice. · Following a community presentation, staff may be required to write a report for the Committee/Sub-Committee/Community Board, recommending some action or decision by Council. · The topics covered in workshops are limited to subject matter that is within the Terms of Reference and the work plan of the meeting. · Workshops are not for decision-making, but rather to provide elected members an opportunity to ask questions, to discuss policy options, to hear from the community if appropriate. They tend to be more interactive and allow elected members to give guidance to staff about matters that they would like to see included in a decision-making report.	· Open to the public by default. · Advertised on website in advance · Live streamed via Zoom and/or recorded (where practicable) · Presentation and notes published on website. · PX workshop would require a specific reason in the LGOIMA that was assessed against the public interest test. · Certain workshops to be held in non-public session if they are not specifically linked to a decision (such as risk or governance matters) without a PX reason. · There may be occasions where a workshop is considered sensitive as its publication would inhibit the future exchange of free and frank opinions (LGOIMA section 7(2)(f)(i). The free and frank withholding ground is not applicable to formal LGOIMA meetings but could be considered for some workshops on a case-by-case basis. The public interest test and the other LGOIMA withholding grounds will also need consideration.
5. Seminars	· This Council does not often use seminars as a meeting type but may do so in the future. · These are “one-off” events, scheduled either by the Mayor, a Community Board Chair or by staff, in response to the availability of a specialist or expert visiting Christchurch, where the topic is seen to be of value to the day-to-day operations of Council or to the rebuild and recovery of Christchurch (e.g. Rockefeller resilience “workshop”). · Attendance is by invitation only, and the invitation list can include internal and external participants.	· Open to the public by default. · Advertised on website in advance. · Presentation and notes published on website. · PX Seminar would require a specific reason in the LGOIMA that was assessed against the public interest test.

6. Policy Framework Implications Ngā Hīraunga ā- Kaupapa here

Impact of Change

6.1 The following implications may occur should briefings/workshops be held in public:

6.1.1 Councillor/Member Information Sessions on topics that are going to a decision-making body will reduce in number. It is expected that now most matters will go straight to Committee or Council. It is anticipated that information sessions will be mainly used only when there is a highly technical matter that takes significant time to ensure members have sufficient knowledge.

6.1.2 Any information sessions or workshops will be publicised in advance, with the date, time, topic and any supporting documents will also be available.

6.1.3 Council/Community Board meetings may take longer due to members asking more questions and/or more debate at formal meetings. To support the effective running of the meeting, members are reminded that it is a requirement of Standing Order 17.3 for questions to be submitted in advance when possible. Members are requested to submit questions to the Office of the Chief Executive/Community Governance Manager by 9 am on the preceding working day so that answers may be circulated to the meeting.

6.1.4 Council workshops will be held in either the Mayor’s Lounge or Committee Rooms to support effective two-way dialogue. Members of the public will not be able to physically attend due to the size of the rooms. They will be able to observe, but not participate online. The livestream/recording will be published on the website.

6.1.5 Increased public engagement and awareness on key issues at earlier stages.

6.1.6 Potential for information to be made public that has not been adequately presented and communicated.

6.1.7 Possible reduction in number of LGOIMA requests as increased information will be in the public realm at an earlier time.

6.1.8 Increased administrative work to run meetings and manage supporting processes (such as reviewing closed briefing information for potential release).

6.1.9 Increased administrative work to support enquiries and requests for information from the community.

6.1.10 It is expected that any technical changes in the short term will be absorbed within existing resources.

6.1.11 May require an update to process/staff training on minute taking.

6.1.12 At the start of the current triennium Community Board ordinary meetings were moved from twice monthly to monthly. As a result, the number of support officers was reduced, and savings made. Across the city, Board meetings now have large agendas, they are at capacity. There may be a need to schedule extraordinary meetings from time to time, to manage peak demand or return to two Board meetings a month.

6.1.13 The decrease in ordinary meetings at Community Boards was supported (made possible) by a range of briefings, workshops and informal meetings to ensure elected members have sufficient information to make robust decisions. In 2023 there were 180 ordinary meetings and formal scheduled briefings, there were roughly an equivalent number of informal meetings, briefings and workshops.

6.2 The implementation will be reviewed by staff in six months.

Strategic AlignmentTe Rautaki Tīaroaro

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

6.4 Governance

6.4.1 Activity: Governance and decision-making

· Level of Service: 4.1.18 Participation in and contribution to Council decision-making - Percentage of respondents who understand how Council makes decisions: At least 34%

Policy Consistency Te Whai Kaupapa here

6.5 The decision is consistent with Council’s Plans and Policies.

Impact on Mana Whenua Ngā Whai Take Mana Whenua

6.6 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 and traditions.

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

Climate Change Impact Considerations Ngā Whai Whakaaro mā te Āhuarangi

6.8 The proposals in this report are unlikely to contribute significantly to adaptation to the impacts of climate change or emissions reductions.

Accessibility Considerations Ngā Whai Whakaaro mā te Hunga Hauā

6.9 The public will be able to physically attend information sessions held in the Council Chamber and a recording of these sessions will be posted online. Workshops will be able to be viewed live online by following a published link and the recording will be published online.

7. Resource Implications Ngā Hīraunga Rauemi

Capex/Opex Ngā Utu Whakahaere

7.1 The proposed approach requires changes in practice by staff and are expected to be able to be absorbed within existing resources although this may require some redistribution within teams. Any financial and staffing implications will be reviewed as and when they materialise. For example, if there are fewer information sessions and longer council meetings this may lead to some shifts in staffing resources as they are supported by different units. This will be reviewed over the course of the first six months as it may be that there is no longer a demand to provide a briefing in advance of a decision.

7.2 Holding information sessions or workshops open to the public is not anticipated to require additional financial resource. The online offer will be the ‘lower quality’ recordings like the joint development sessions for the long-term plan.

7.3 Higher profile briefings or workshops may be live streamed at higher quality recordings as for Finance & Performance Committee and Council. This service is provided externally by audio-visual technical specialists. It is not currently intended to extend this professional service to information sessions or workshops. This can be reviewed if there are significant numbers of members of the public who choose to view the information sessions and workshops.

7.4 There are no significant changes to InfoCouncil that would require additional financial resource.

7.5 If during the course of implementation additional financial resource is required, then this will be considered by the Executive Leadership Team.

8. Legal Implications Ngā Hīraunga ā-Ture

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

8.1 Not applicable.

Other Legal Implications Ētahi atu Hīraunga-ā-Ture

8.2 Non-compliance with Ombudsman best practice carries legal and reputational risk. The Council operates under the principle of availability and openness emphasised by the LGOIMA. By continuing current practices for informal meetings, the Council could receive greater numbers of complaints under the LGOIMA and Ombudsmen Act. If the Council failed to hold briefings in public by default, this would place the Council at risk of a systemic practice investigation by the Ombudsman. This would involve a significant amount of staff resource and would likely result in adverse recommendations by the Ombudsman. This would have a reputational impact.

9. Risk Management Implications Ngā Hīraunga Tūraru

9.1 As contained within the report.

10. Next Steps Ngā Mahinga ā-muri

10.1 The recommendation is that briefings default to open with immediate effect should the Council adopt the staff recommendations.

10.2 Should there be matters that in the view of the presenter cannot be considered in public, legal advice must be sought to ensure that the requirements of LGOIMA can be satisfied. The decision to hold a matter in a confidential session will rest for the General Manager and/or Chief Executive taking into account the legal advice. This process will remain until suitable guidance can be prepared and a sustainable practice can be put in place.

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

Authors

Helen White - Head of Legal & Democratic Services

Megan Pearce - Manager Hearings and Council Support

Sean Rainey - Manager Official Information

Approved By

John Filsell - Head of Community Support and Partnerships

Lynn McClelland - Assistant Chief Executive Strategic Policy and Performance

Council

21 February 2024

6. Committee Structure Review
Reference / Te Tohutoro:	23/2071714
Report of / Te Pou Matua:	Megan Pearce, Manager Hearings and Council Support, (Megan.Pearce@ccc.govt.nz)
Senior Manager / Pouwhakarae:	Mary Richardson, Interim Chief Executive (Mary.Richardson@ccc.govt.nz)

1. Purpose and Origin of Report Te Pūtake Pūrongo

1.1 The purpose of this report is to provide staff advice on whether or not to establish a different committee structure.

1.2 The Council requested the committee structure be reviewed at its meeting of 15 November 2023 (CNCL/2023/00148):

Noting the strong support for the re-establishment of committees in the Portfolio Review, that staff bring a report to Council at the start of 2024 with advice to enable Council to make a decision on whether to reinstate a committee structure and options for a committee structure.

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 on the basis that this report evaluates the current committee structure and has minimal impact on the wider community.

2. Officer Recommendations Ngā Tūtohu

That the Council:

1. Agree to retain the current committee structure,

2. Agree to receive six monthly forward work programme reports at Council,

3. Agree to receive regular, six monthly information update reports from operational service delivery units,

4. Agree that Committee Chairs will be responsible for updating the Council on the work of the Committee when the committee minutes are received by the Council.

3. Reason for Report Recommendations Ngā Take mō te Whakatau

3.1 The Mayor, using his powers under section 41A of the Local Government Act 2002 (the Act), proposed a committee structure for the triennium which was adopted by the Council at its meeting of 2 November 2022. Since that time, a number of additional committees, working groups and portfolios have been added. The Council at its meeting of 15 November 2023 asked for the committee structure to be reviewed.

3.2 At its meeting of 14 December 2022, the Council agreed to allow nine months for portfolios to bed in and for other proposals to be received (CNCL/2022/00215 refers).

3.3 15 November 2023, the Council received a review of portfolios that reported back stating that there was strong support for a more extensive committee structure. This strong support came from a small subset of those who gave feedback which fell into two main areas of interest:

3.3.1 The need for greater governance oversight, and

3.3.2 A vehicle for specific interest groups to gain an audience with “Council”.

3.4 When Council considered the review of portfolio and adopted an updated terms of reference for portfolio holders (CNCL/2023/00149 refers), additional staff advice was requested on whether or not to establish a different committee structure that was similar to the structure adopted during the previous Council triennium (CNCL/2023/00148 refers).

4. Alternative Options Considered Ētahi atu Kōwhiringa

4.1 This report considers alternative committee structures to the one adopted by Council following the 2022 Local Government election, namely a committee structure that is either:

4.1.1 Delegated Committees – Establish four standing committees of between seven to nine Councillors, based on the four group areas of Council, with some sub-committees for specific areas. These committees would have full delegated decision-making authority to enhance efficiency and to prevent relitigation when the item reported to Council. This model also retains some special committees separate to the four primary committees.

4.1.2 Committees of the Whole - Establish four standing committees of all Councillors and the Mayor based on the four group areas of Council, with some sub-committees for specific areas and without delegated decision-making power. This model also retains some special committees separate to the four primary committees. Committees of the Whole would have full delegated decision-making authority.

4.2 This report has not considered removing portfolios as this was outside of the scope of the request.

4.3 An organisational chart setting out how this committee structure could look is included in Attachment 1, noting that the two options differ on membership and decision-making powers under this proposal.

4.4 For clarity, the four group areas proposed are:

4.4.1 Citizens & Community

4.4.2 Infrastructure

4.4.3 Regulatory & Planning

4.4.4 Finance & Performance

5. Detail Te Whakamahuki

5.1 Staff have considered both options based on the following points:

5.1.1 Resourcing Implications

5.1.2 Efficiency and Effectiveness

5.1.3 Governance Oversight

5.1.4 Upcoming Organisational Changes

Resourcing Implications

5.2 Any change to the committee structure will have organisational resourcing implications.

5.3 The Council is focused on delivering the 2024-2034 Long Term Plan and any change to the committee structure before this is completed in June 2024 will have an impact on existing Council resources. This is because staff resourcing is currently geared towards supporting Council through this process under the existing structure.

5.4 When committees are established, they require staff to:

5.4.1 Provide secretarial support, including coordinating members, reports and agendas, deputations and other business;

5.4.2 Develop additional reporting systems, gathering information from across the organisation and establishing new reporting lines; and

5.4.3 Connecting committee decisions into the Council’s central governing body.

5.5 With more committees, the number of reports is spread over a larger number of committees which can often result in meetings with very few reports to consider but still require resourcing to set up and run. This subsequently results in the requirement for more resources to cover each meeting. For example, the number of agendas would increase, and there would be more preparation meetings (such as agenda setting) increasing the staff resources for each meeting, including that for the committee’s Principal Advisors.

5.6 Adding these additional tasks will have an adverse impact on the current staff workload, by diverting the focus of the staff involved in the Long Term Plan to what would be non-urgent changes. This will extend the current workload to a level that staff believe will lead to other work being delayed.

5.7 The current committee structure also has a forward plan of meetings through to the end of the Council triennium in 2025. As elected members’ diaries are already at high capacity, any further committee meetings could have many scheduling issues and clashes. Any change will require amended schedules which may not be able to meet the requirements of all members.

5.8 Both alternative options considered will have this impact on the current workload. If either option is adopted, current resource in the Secretariat will need to be reviewed and may need to be increased to support the increased number of committees. This could be considered as an increase in spending under the 2024-2034 Long Term Plan, but any additional resourcing is unable to be established until the next financial year.

5.9 For reference, Attachment 2 outlines the existing meetings, committees, sub committees and other groups that receive Secretariat support from Council as at 31 January 2024.

Efficiency and Effectiveness

5.10 There is unlikely to be a change in the efficiency and effectiveness of committees unless Council is prepared to consider greater delegation of decision-making to committees, reducing the number of councillors required to attend a meeting, and reducing the number of meetings of the main governing body.

5.11 Under the previous Committee of the Whole structure, some committees at times had so few agenda items times that running of some meetings was not efficient, for example:

5.11.1 Just under 50% of reports to the Sustainability and Community Resilience Committee were requesting a decision. For the other ceased Committees, agendas were filled up with information sharing and administration reports ranging from 62% (the Urban Development and Transport Committee) to 96% (the Multicultural Committee) of agenda items considered at the meeting. Regardless of the content type, these meetings all required staff and Members’ time to prepare content for, attend and run.

5.11.2 Of the 173 meetings held for ceased Committees and Working Groups under the previous structure, 57 (33%) were held with only one report on the agenda.

5.12 Another impact is that additional committees of any type reduce efficiency of process. This is because there are times when there is no clear indication of which committee is best placed to deal with a particular report, leading to confusion and duplication. A report may cross the boundaries of multiple committees and could be interpreted as being within the terms of reference of more than one committee. At this point, there would need to be a robust process to identify reporting lines. As there has been such a process previously, this issue isn’t insurmountable but is does reduce the efficiency of decision-making processes.

5.13 To accommodate the additional committee meetings, it would be proposed to reduce the number of Council meetings per month to one. The committees would need to be half-day meetings and would be scheduled for the additional days currently occupied by Council and the Finance and Performance Committee meetings. Additional subcommittee meetings would need to be scheduled to fit around existing time commitments.

5.14 On balance, there is unlikely to be efficiency and effectiveness improvements under a change to a new committee structure for the above reasons.

Governance Oversight

5.15 The primary concern of Council was the reduced opportunities for governance oversight of forward work programmes within operational units under the existing structure.

5.16 Previously, committees received and reviewed forward work programmes for operational units to identify risks, key projects and level of service delivery. Council has expressed a desire to increase this type of work.

5.17 Both alternative options would allow for this, with Committees of the Whole offering the best opportunity for all members to review this information as all Councillors would be in attendance. Committees with smaller membership would mean that not all Councillors would be members of all committees and therefore not privy to the same level of information.

5.18 It should be noted that under the Local Government Act 2002, elected members are entitled to attend any meeting of a committee whether they are a member or not. If they are not a member of the committee, with the leave of the Chair they may take part in the discussion at the meeting but are not entitled to debate or vote on any matter.

5.19 There are opportunities under the existing structure to provide greater governance oversight opportunities through regular reports and forward work programmes to the main governing body (Council). The Council could receive regular updates from operational service delivery units such as Parks, Libraries and Transport etc. This would balance the pressures on resourcing reports against Council’s expectation for greater oversight of operational work programmes. It is noted that governance oversight does already exist in the form of performance reporting to the Finance and Performance Committee (of the Whole).

5.20 During the review of portfolios, concern was raised by some respondents that portfolio holders were less able to receive and reflect the community viewpoints previously expressed in specific committees. While more committees may resolve this, members of the public and specific interest groups are welcome to make public forum presentations or deputations at any current meeting. Portfolio holders are empowered to table, in their Portfolio Lead Reports to Council, issues which bring attention to specific community concerns. A change to either alternative option is unlikely to make a substantive impact on this concern.

5.21 Either alternative option would provide a greater number of forums for Council to provide increased governance oversight. Although there remain opportunities to increase governance oversight under the existing structure if Council wanted to consider those.

Upcoming Changes

5.22 The Council currently has a meeting structure that meets the needs of the organisation and allows for robust decision-making and information sharing within existing resourcing. Staff have adapted to this structure and processes are geared to operate under this model.

5.23 There are three upcoming changes which are likely to impact on the ability of Council to change the structure at this point in the triennium:

5.23.1 2024-2034 Long Term Plan starting on 1 July 2024;

5.23.2 New Chief Executive likely appointed in mid to late 2024; and

5.23.3 The 2025 Local Government Election in October 2025

5.24 If the Council were to decide to amend the committee structure, it is recommended that this be implemented to commence in July 2024, after the adoption of the Long Term Plan. The reasoning for this is the lack of capacity of the Secretariat to support a more extensive committee structure and running the submissions/hearings function of the Long Term Plan concurrently. Historically, meetings in May are limited to Council, and Finance and Performance Committee (of the whole) to provide adequate time for LTP hearings to occur.

5.25 If this was the case, there would only be one year left of the triennium before the 2025 Local Government election. Given this short remaining timeframe, Council would need to carefully consider the merits of changing the structure for the final twelve months of the term.

5.26 Additionally, the Council is in the process of recruiting a new Chief Executive who may wish to review systems and processes upon their arrival, meaning that there is a risk that any change now may be superseded within twelve months. Any reconsideration of the Committee structure would therefore be best completed following the appointment of the new Chief Executive, once their views are known, and to avoid repeating the process within a short period of time.

5.27 These upcoming changes in the final year of the triennium make the resourcing, efficiency, and effectiveness implications of any significant changes to the existing structure unlikely to generate a greater benefit of governance oversight. There are simpler ways to increase oversight opportunities, for example, through regular work programme reports to Council.

6. Summary

6.1 Based on assessment of the above areas, it is recommended that Council:

6.1.1 Maintain the existing committee structure; and

6.1.2 Request regular forward work programme updates to the governing body.

6.2 Returning to the previous committee structure with four Committees of the Whole, in addition to Council, whilst is an option, is not recommended. This structure proved to be an inefficient use of staff and Members’ resources as detailed in section 5 above.

6.3 If Council does want to change the committee structure, of the alternative options evaluated, the option of delegated decision-making of smaller committees is the most in line with the areas assessed in section 5 above. Providing the committees with full delegations would mean that matters are dealt with once and not subsequently relitigated at Council, where the committee recommendation(s) could be overturned. This should not be implemented until the new financial year due to the impact on resourcing.

7. Policy Framework Implications Ngā Hīraunga ā- Kaupapa here

Strategic AlignmentTe Rautaki Tīaroaro

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

7.2 Governance

7.2.1 Activity: Governance and decision-making

· Level of Service: 4.1.28.1 Schedule, support and record governance meetings. - Between 500 and 650 governance meetings are supported, unless committee structure provides otherwise

Policy Consistency Te Whai Kaupapa here

7.3 The decision is consistent with Council’s Plans and Policies by assisting in decision-making on such matters.

Impact on Mana Whenua Ngā Whai Take Mana Whenua

7.4 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 not specifically impact Mana Whenua, their culture, and traditions.

7.5 The decision does not involve a matter of interest to Mana Whenua and will not impact our agreed partnership priorities with Ngā Papatipu Rūnanga.

Climate Change Impact Considerations Ngā Whai Whakaaro mā te Āhuarangi

7.6 The proposals in this report are unlikely to contribute significantly to adaptation to the impacts of climate change or emissions reductions.

Accessibility Considerations Ngā Whai Whakaaro mā te Hunga Hauā

7.7 There are no direct accessibility implications associated with the decision to review the committee structure.

8. Resource Implications Ngā Hīraunga Rauemi

Capex/Opex Ngā Utu Whakahaere

8.1 Cost to Implement – The cost to implement a new committee structure would be negligible and could be covered by existing budgets. Committee report/agenda templates can be developed internally within existing resource. Additional advertising, assuming meetings are advertised in the monthly (existing) advert would result in a negligible increase in cost.

8.2 Maintenance/Ongoing costs - There may be the need for additional Secretariat resource to cover a more extensive structure. Additional meetings require additional agendas and meeting sessions, requiring more staff resource to service. If a new committee structure was implemented, a review would be required once embedded to identify adequate resourcing needs.

8.3 Additional meetings may result in increased costs to livestream. If livestreaming was required, depending on the length of the meeting, would incur an additional cost of approximately $40,000 to $80,000 per year. The cost of livestreaming per meeting is dependent on meeting length.

9. Legal Implications Ngā Hīraunga ā-Ture

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

9.1 The Council has the power under the LGA to amend the current committee structure.

Other Legal Implications Ētahi atu Hīraunga-ā-Ture

9.2 There is no legal context, issue, or implication relevant to this decision. Any change in the committee structure that would impact on delegated decision making will be brought back to Council for adoption via committee terms of reference.

10. Risk Management Implications Ngā Hīraunga Tūraru

10.1 There is the risk that should a structure of committees with delegations be adopted, the full Council will not have governance oversight of all matters as is the required outcome. There could also be the risk of relitigation and the overturning of committee recommendations at Council.

10.2 A backlog of decisions to be made may occur due to infrequent meetings. The Council currently meets twice a month, but the alternative committee structure would have Council and committees meeting once.

11. Next Steps Ngā Mahinga ā-muri

11.1 Should the Council decide to amend the committee structure, a future report will be provided to the Council to consider and adopt the desired structure and subsequent terms of reference.

Attachments Ngā Tāpirihanga

No.	Title	Reference	Page
a ⇩	Alternative committee structure	24/150275	21
b ⇩	Current committee structure	24/163895	22

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

Megan Pearce - Manager Hearings and Council Support

Boyd Becker - Principal Mayoral Advisor

Approved By

Helen White - Head of Legal & Democratic Services

Lynn McClelland - Assistant Chief Executive Strategic Policy and Performance

Mary Richardson - Interim Chief Executive

Council

21 February 2024

7. Better Off Funding Citywide Safety
Reference / Te Tohutoro:	23/1976232
Report of / Te Pou Matua:	Gary Watson Community Partnerships Manager
Senior Manager / Pouwhakarae:	Andrew Rutledge, Acting General Manager Citizens and Community (Andrew.Rutledge@ccc.govt.nz)

1. Purpose and Origin of Report Te Pūtake Pūrongo

1.1 The purpose of this report is to seek a decision from the Council on the proposed allocation of Better Off funding set aside by the Council for citywide safety related initiatives.

1.2 In December 2022, the Council resolved to apply for $1,970,000, to support citywide safety related initiatives as part of the Better Off funding programme (CNCL2022/00196). This staff-generated report aims to inform the Council's allocation of this fund.

1.3 The decisions in this report are of medium significance in relation to the Christchurch City Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy. The level of significance was determined by the number of people affected and with an interest, also the level of community interest in the issue. Safety issues and youth offending have been well documented and raised in numerous forums over the last 12 months. The proposals considered in this report are consistent with the Council’s direction to date and have been discussed with community stakeholders, relevant agencies, and staff.

2. Officer Recommendations Ngā Tūtohu

That the Council:

1. Grant the Christchurch City Mission a total sum of $560,000 over three years to deliver two outreach positions working across the city to support, and promote housing options for, Christchurch’s Street community.

2. Grant Youth and Cultural Development a total sum of $750,000 over three years to deliver a Mobile Youth Work project to address youth issues city wide and respond to hot spots as they arise.

3. Grant a total sum of $100,000 to provide three smart poles in priority areas namely New Brighton, Hornby, and Papanui.

4. Set aside a total sum of $200,000 to coordinate and deliver community safety, development, and cohesion initiatives across the East of the city.

5. Establish a funding pool using the remaining funds previously set aside by the Council for City-wide safety initiatives, a total of $116,000, to allow the Council to deliver future initiatives responding to issues as they arise.

6. Note the Council’s previous grant to the Christchurch Central City Business Association of $244,000 to deliver inner city safety patrols over three years.

7. Delegate authority to the Head of Community Support and Partnerships to make the necessary arrangements to implement the Council’s decision.

3. Reason for Report Recommendations Ngā Take mō te Whakatau

3.1 Council staff have engaged with partner organisations, including Police, the Ministry of Social Development (MSD), Business, and social services providers. From these discussions and staff consideration, the initiatives detailed in this report have emerged as priorities.

3.2 The recommended initiatives represent an immediate response to identified issues over a wider area across the city. This is consistent with the Council’s intended use of the Fund.

3.3 Youth and city safety concerns have been consistently raised at the Council and community level across the city. The identified initiatives are designed to respond to need and deliver in wider areas across the city. Each Community Board has also received Better Off Funding to put towards local responses to similar issues bespoke to local communities.

3.4 There is consensus amongst partner organisations and staff that the initiatives recommended are the most effective at this time.

4. Alternative Options Considered Ētahi atu Kōwhiringa

4.1 Alternative Options. Staff investigated alternative options such as employment programmes and ways of supporting housing providers.

4.1.1 These options were considered to have a long term rather than an immediate impact/response to the current need and were not progressed.

4.2 Support Selected Projects. The Council can support or decline any number of the projects recommended, the details of which are in Attachment B.

4.2.1 It is recommended that the Council consider each project on its merits.

4.3 To decline to award any part of the Better Off Funding at this time.

4.3.1 This option is not recommended as the projects are designed to address current need as identified in partnership with agencies across the city and are prioritised accordingly.

5. Detail Te Whakamahuki

5.1 Following the Council’s initial resolution on 12 December 2022, staff worked with partners to identify initiatives, agree funding terms, and key milestones. Community views have been incorporated via discussions with partners and, to a certain extent, media coverage. Consensus was reached with most partners with a strong endorsement to proceed. In part the initiatives represent a response to:

5.1.1 Ram raid numbers increasing and the reported increase in the frequency of antisocial youth behaviour.

5.1.2 Issues arising from homelessness particularly in the city centre.

5.1.3 Contributing to the delivery of the Council’s commitment to build relationships with effected communities in the East including affected by the wastewater plant fire and Organics Processing Plant.

5.1.4 The perception of safety by the public.

5.2 Initiatives are detailed in Attachment B and summarised below:

5.2.1 Grant Christchurch City Mission $560,000 over three years to deliver 2 outreach positions working across the city to support our street community and to promote housing options.

5.2.2 The Council has already allocated $244,000 to the Christchurch Central City Business Association to deliver inner city safety patrols over 3 years.

5.2.3 Grant Youth and Cultural Development $750,000 over three years to deliver a mobile Youth Work project to address youth issues and respond to hot spots as they arise.

5.2.4 Grant $100,000 to provide three smart poles, one in New Brighton, one in Hornby and one in Papanui. The poles are equipped with a range of smart features including a free Wi-Fi network, CCTV cameras linked to the police network, advanced lighting fixtures, pedestrian and vehicle counters, and speakers for public alerts.

5.2.5 The review of the Wastewater Treatment Plant fire raised issues of credibility and trust with the communities of the east of the city. There is currently a cross Council project being developed to respond to this and therefore a contribution of $200,000 to deliver safety, community development and cohesion initiatives in the east of the city is proposed.

5.2.6 Establish a funding pool using the remaining funds previously set aside by the Council for City-wide safety initiatives, $116,000, to allow the Council to deliver future initiatives responding to issues as they arise.

5.3 Initiatives were considered from a city-wide perspective responding to need in different areas in a co-ordinated manner and maintaining flexibility to adapt as circumstances change.

6. Policy Framework Implications Ngā Hīraunga ā- Kaupapa here

Strategic AlignmentTe Rautaki Tīaroaro

6.1 This report supports the Te Haumako, Te Whitingia - Strengthening Communities Together Strategy:

6.1.1 Actively promote a culture of equity by valuing diversity and fostering inclusion across communities and generations

6.1.2 People feel safe in their communities and neighbourhoods and work together to understand, adapt, and thrive in the context of change and disruption.

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

6.3 Citizens and communities

6.3.1 Activity: Community Development and Facilities

· Level of Service: 2.2.5.1 Community partner relationships are prioritised, improves and supported by robust information. - 130 Partner Organisations' relationship with Council is health-checked and reported

· Level of Service: 2.0.1.1 Support the development of strong, connected and resilient communities by supporting the provision of a sustainable network of community facilities. - 80 - 84 Facilities

· Level of Service: 2.3.1.1 Provide funding for projects and initiatives that build partnerships; resilient, engaged and stronger communities, empowered at a local or community of interest level. - 95% or more of reports presented demonstrate benefits that align to CCC community outcomes, Council's strategic priorities and, where appropriate Community Board plans

· Strengthening Communities Together Strategy

· Pillar 2: Place: Support and help build connections between communities to foster a sense of local identity, shared experience, and stewardship.

· Objective 2.1 Encourage Communities to create and sustain a sense of local identity and ownership.

· Objective 2.3 Support the Community activation and kaitiakitanga of public places and spaces.

· Pillar 4: Preparedness: People feel safe in their communities and neighbourhoods and work together to understand, adapt, and thrive in the context of change and disruption.

6.4 The decision is consistent with the Council’s Plans and Policies.

Impact on Mana Whenua Ngā Whai Take Mana Whenua

6.5 The decision has no significant impact 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 and traditions.

6.6 The decision is not a matter of interest to Mana Whenua and will not impact on our agreed partnership priorities with Ngā Papatipu Rūnanga. This is because the decision concerns the allocation of pre-approved community funding.

Climate Change Impact Considerations Ngā Whai Whakaaro mā te Āhuarangi

6.7 The proposals in this report are unlikely to contribute significantly to adaptation to the impacts of climate change or emissions reductions.

Accessibility Considerations Ngā Whai Whakaaro mā te Hunga Hauā

6.8 The decision does not have accessibility considerations because the decision primarily concerns the allocation of pre-approved community funding.

7. Resource Implications Ngā Hīraunga Rauemi

Capex/Opex Ngā Utu Whakahaere

7.1 Cost to Implement - The cost of implementing the decision will be met within existing operational budgets.

7.2 Maintenance/Ongoing costs - As above

7.3 Funding Source - Existing operational budgets. Grants will be paid from the Community Safety Programme - Better Off Funding. Proposed projects are summarised in the table below.

Project	Opening Balance $1,970,000
City Mission Outreach Positions	$560,000
CCBA Inner-City Patrols	$244,000
Mobile Youth Workers	$750,000
Smart Poles	$100,000
Eastern Suburbs Project	$200,000
Emerging Issues Contingency	116,000
	Closing Balance $0

8. Legal Implications Ngā Hīraunga ā-Ture

8.1 There is no specific legal context, issue, or implication relevant to this decision. It should be noted that the Council’s legal and democratic services unit draft and review funding and transactional agreement templates and processes.

Other Legal Implications Ētahi atu Hīraunga-ā-Ture

8.2 See 8.1 above.

9. Risk Management Implications Ngā Hīraunga Tūraru

9.1 The principal risk involves the Council, having secured Better Off funding, failing to act in a collaborative manner with a city-wide focus and not optimising the value of the Fund.

9.1.1 This risk is rated as low and is effectively mitigated by the collaborative approach used to identify and recommend initiatives, and the city-wide focus on responses to current issues.

9.2 There is a risk that a pressing need will emerge after the Council have allocated the Fund and Council will be unable to respond.

9.2.1 This risk is rated low due the level of engagement with partner organisations and the expertise of staff and Councillors in allocating the fund. The risk is partially mitigated by the fact that a sum exceeding $116,000 will remain for future allocation dependent on need.

Attachments Ngā Tāpirihanga

No.	Title	Reference	Page
a ⇩	Fresh Events 2024 Better Off Funding	24/199746	29
b ⇩	City Wide Safety Projects Proposed for Better Off Funding February 2024	24/154726	30

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

Gary Watson - Manager Community Partnerships

John Filsell - Head of Community Support and Partnerships

Approved By

John Filsell - Head of Community Support and Partnerships

Peter Langbein - Finance Business Partner

Andrew Rutledge - Acting General Manager Citizens and Community

Council

21 February 2024

8. Metropolitan Discretionary Response Fund - The New Zealand Symphony Orchestra Foundation
Reference / Te Tohutoro:	24/114558
Report of / Te Pou Matua:	Joshua Wharton, Team Leader Community Funding, Joshua.Wharton@ccc.govt.nz
Senior Manager / Pouwhakarae:	Andrew Rutledge, Acting General Manager Citizens and Community (Andrew.Rutledge@ccc.govt.nz)

1. Purpose of Report Te Pūtake Pūrongo

1.1 The purpose of this report is for the Council to consider an application for funding from its 2023/24 Discretionary Response Fund from the organisation listed below.

Funding Request Number	Organisation	Project Name	Amount Requested	Amount Recommended
00066885	New Zealand Symphony Orchestra Foundation	Beyond Words - A programme of events to pay tribute those who lost their lives and loved ones in the Christchurch Mosque Attacks on 15 March 2019.	$50,000	$0.00

1.2 There is currently a balance of $159,565 remaining in the fund.

2. Staff Recommendations / Ngā Tūtohu

That the Council:

1. Decline the application from the New Zealand Symphony Orchestra Foundation to its 2023/24 Discretionary Response Fund for the Beyond Words Programme.

3. Key Points Ngā Take Matua

Strategic Alignment Te Rautaki Tīaroaro

3.1 The recommendation to decline the application for funding is consistent with the Strengthening Communities Together Strategy and the Multicultural Strategy, and the 2023/24 Discretionary Response Fund Metropolitan Decision Matrix.

Decision Making Authority Te Mana Whakatau

3.2 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.

3.7 Due to the assessment of low significance, no further community engagement and consultation is required.

Discussion Kōrerorero

3.8 At the time of writing, the balance of the 2023/24 Discretionary Response Fund is as below.

Total Budget <Enter Year>	Granted To Date	Available for allocation	Balance If Staff Recommendation adopted
$585,679	$426,115	$159,565	$159,565

3.9 $122,814 of the Metropolitan DRF funding pool this financial year has been approved to 19 organisations under delegation of the Head of the Community Governance and Partnerships Unit.

3.10 Based on the current Discretionary Response Fund criteria, the application listed above is eligible for funding. However, consistent with the staff assessment provided in Attachment A, it is recommended that the application for funding be declined.

3.11 The attached Decision Matrix 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 ⇩	Metropolitan Discretionary Response Fund - January Matrix	24/111404	37

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

Josh Wharton - Team Leader Community Funding

Approved By

Gary Watson - Manager Community Partnerships

John Filsell - Head of Community Support and Partnerships

ITEM NO.	GENERAL SUBJECT OF EACH MATTER TO BE CONSIDERED	SECTION	SUBCLAUSE AND REASON UNDER THE ACT	PLAIN ENGLISH REASON	WHEN REPORTS CAN BE REVIEWED FOR POTENTIAL RELEASE
10.	141 Wigram Road lease	s7(2)(b)(ii)	Prejudice Commercial Position	Information contained in this report contains financial disclosures that may prejudice the Association's financial position.	Upon the establishment of the charitable investment Trust.