Agenda of Strategy and Policy Committee



Report To:	Strategy and Policy Committee
Meeting Date:	11 August 2020
Report Authoriser:	Namouta Poutasi

Operating Environment Report

Executive Summary

Council’s operating environment is currently significantly influenced by the objective of supporting the Bay of Plenty to recover well from the ongoing impacts of COVID19.

The organisation is also facing a number of Central Government policy initiatives and has business as usual to deliver or prioritise.

Recommendations

That the Strategy and Policy Committee:

1 Receives the report, Operating Environment Report.

1. Purpose

To provide an update on the operating environment and to provide a signal to the Committee of upcoming decisions.

2. Introduction

Council’s work is currently informally categorised into two types: recovery and BAU. This report provides information on the operating environment and highlights a number of upcoming decisions that will be required of Council and this Committee. In particular there continues to be a number of Central Government policy changes that impact on Council’s work. Submissions are generally made on these and the refinement of Council’s current submission process, that involves councillors, is being looked at by staff.

Alongside the “recovery” activities and planning, work has continued on a number of strategic policy issues. A number of these have been completed while others will require Council/Committee decisions in due course. Examples of this include the completed Strategic Directions work (now being incorporated into the LTP, the Regional Pest Management Plan (on this agenda for recommending to Full Council) and the re-set of the Climate Change Action Plan (process being proposed for approval by this Committee).

3. Operating Environment - Recovery

COVID19 is still providing the overarching context for Council’s business. This ranges from the Annual Plan with its focus on assisting the region to recover well, through the coordination work of Bay of Connections linking local and sub-regional recovery activities, to the work being undertaken in the Integrated Catchment Management Group to set up and deliver a substantial volume of “green” stimulus projects.

Staff have been working with Bay of Connections to map stimulus projects within the Bay of Plenty. Recovery work has two main focuses at present: drafting a Regional Recovery Strategy (Bay of Connections) and implementing Regional Council’s recovery work programme. Both strands involve linkages to and working with local councils and economic development agencies (EDA). What is clear is that there is a significant amount of recovery work occurring at a local level through these organisations.

Council currently provides funding support for the region’s EDAs and has provided additional project funding for Toi Kai Rawa. In alignment with the principle of adding value – in this case to supporting local programmes - and particularly in recognition of the local recovery workloads, staff are exploring the provision of extra operational/administration funding to the EDAs in particular to support them to connect with Council’s programme. This does not include any project funding which will be a future decision for Council.

Staff are also looking to provide “secretariat” type support to the recently formed Regional Leadership Group. This initiative is a collective approach to identify the opportunities in the region, both now and in the future, and coordinate on actions to cultivate these. The group’s membership will draw significantly from Central Government agencies, will link to sectors, and will have local representation (iwi, local government). This initiative is still developing its purpose/kaupapa and more information will become available in the near future.

Both the above funding proposals are being considered within existing budgets/delegations.

4. Operating Environment – National Issues

4.1 RMA Reform

Councillors will be aware of the recently report “New Directions for Resource Management in New Zealand” by the Resource Management Review Panel (released on Wednesday 29 July 2020). The Report recommends fundamental changes to NZ’s resource management system including repealing and replacing the Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA) with the following new legislation:

• a Natural and Built Environments Act

• a Strategic Planning Act

• a Managed Retreat and Climate Change Adaptation Act.

Staff are assessing the implications at this early stage of the process of potential legislative change.

4.2 3 Waters Review

A recent forum (DIA/SOLGM/LGNZ) provided more information in the likely timing and process for the 3Waters Review. Funding is being made available – approx. $750m. A date of 31 August has been identified for regions to sign up on a MOU basis to a process of working together. The largest impacts are on TLAs rather than regional councils. Two key risks being identified are how this reform will be communicated to the community, and what the impact of the unresolved challenges by iwi around the ownership of water may have.

4.3 Current climate change initiatives

Dr Carr, Climate Change Commissioner, is presenting to Council on 6August 2020. This presentation will provide information that will assist Council as it moves into the LTP workshops. The LTP process is being recommended as the way for Council to discuss policy positions to re-set its Climate Change Action Plan (report on this agenda).

Regionally two initiatives have been signalled. One is Whakatāne District Council who are launching their draft Climate Change Strategy and Action Plans on 3^rd August. Community consultation will run until the 4th of September.

Tauranga City Council is looking to progress a sustainability framework through the use of an “independent sustainability advisory board”. Discussions are continuing around the role of the Board and how it is supported.

StatsNZ has also released regional greenhouse gas emission data for 2018 (see link below). This information shows that between 2007 and 2018 total emissions rose by 12%. During this period Bay of Plenty’s population rose 19 percent.

https://www.stats.govt.nz/information-releases/greenhouse-gas-emissions-by-region-industry-and-household-year-ended-2018

Council staff are currently finalising the planning for an initial forum around Climate Change Adaptation in the Bay of Plenty. This forum will be with local councils and iwi representatives to explore climate change risks and to discuss how the Bay of Plenty might respond.

5. National Direction under Development

Council continues to respond to a significant number of Central Government policy initiatives. In some cases timeframes have been amended due to COVID19 however more certainty is now becoming available around policy implications. The following table provides the list of resource management matters the Government is developing national direction on.

National Instrument	Lead Agency	Status
National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management	Ministry for the Environment (MfE) and Ministry for Primary Industries (MPI)	· Replacing the NPSFM 2014 (amended 2017). · Gazettal by mid-August 2020. · More information on implementation timeframes can be found at: https://www.mfe.govt.nz/sites/default/files/media/Fresh%20water/action-for-healthy-waterways-information-for-regional-councils.pdf
National Environmental Standard for Freshwater	MfE and MPI	· Sets national rules relating to wetland loss, structures affecting fish passage, stream loss, rural land use intensification, and farming activities posing a high risk of contaminant losses. · Comes in to force in early September 2020.
Stock Exclusion section 360 Regulation	MfE and MPI	· Sets national regulations for stock exclusion.
Resource Management (Measurement and Reporting of Water Takes) Regulations 2010	MfE	· Amendment to existing regulations to introduce requirement to telemeter and send data to regional council for all consented takes of 5L/s, staged over time.
Pre-draft NES-Freshwater Farm Plans	MfE with MPI	· Not initiated yet, but signalled. · First round likely to be prepared and gazetted by end of 2021. This will set regulations for mandatory freshwater farm plans, including priorities and time frames.
RMA Amendments	MfE	· Enacted: changes to introduce fast track consenting, freshwater hearings panel and process, framework for freshwater farm plans, amends sections relating to climate change. · Further reforms will be considered in the next 3 years.
National Planning Standards	MfE	· In force. · Sets out requirements for structure, headings, format, definitions, e-plans for RPS, Regional Plans, Regional Coastal Plans, and District Plans.
Climate Change	MfE	· Provisions from RMA Amendment Act relating to climate change come into force December 2021.
National Policy Statement for Urban Development (NPS-UD)	MfE and Ministry of Housing and Urban Development (MHUD)	· Replacing the existing National Policy Statement on Urban Development Capacity. · Gazettal 23 July 2020.
Proposed National Policy Statement for Highly Productive Land (NPS-HPL)	Ministry for Primary Industries (MPI) with support from MfE	· Submissions under review. · Likely to be gazetted in mid-2020.
Proposed amendments to the National Environmental Standard for Sources of Human Drinking Water (NES-DW)	MfE with support from Department of Internal Affairs (DIA) and Ministry of Health (MoH)	· These amendments are part of the drinking water regulatory reforms being progressed through the Three Waters Review. · Status to be confirmed.
Water Services Regulator Bill	Cross government, led by Minister of Local Govt and DIA	· Establishes Taumata Arowai—the Water Services Regulator as a new Crown agent and provides for its objectives, functions, operating principles, and governance arrangements. · Government has indicated that more detailed drinking water source protection, stormwater and wastewater policy proposals will be consulted on in mid-2020.
Proposed National Environmental Standards for Wastewater Discharges and Overflows (NES- WDO	MfE with support from DIA	· These regulations are the Three Waters Review. · Proposed. · Uncertain status.
Proposed National Policy Statement for Indigenous Biodiversity	MfE with support from Department of Conservation (DoC)	· Public consultation has closed and submissions are under review. · Following lockdown and a reprioritisation of work programmes, the timeframe for the delivery of the proposed National Policy Statement for Indigenous Biodiversity (NPS-IB) has been extended to April 2021 (previously due around mid-2020). · Within the next few months MfE will publish the key themes from submissions and consultation. · The longer timeframe means the joint project team (Ministry for the Environment and the Department of Conservation) can now work on an implementation plan to support the roll-out of the policy statement once it is finalised, while working to address feedback from consultation.
Proposed amendments to the National Policy Statement for Renewable Electricity Generation (NPS REG)	Ministry for Business, Innovation and Employment (MBIE), with support from MfE	· Amendments in response to the Interim Climate Change Committee’s recommendations on accelerated electrification and the Productivity Commission’s recommendations on low-emissions economy. · Public consultation likely in late 2020.
Proposed amendments to the National Environmental Standards for Air Quality 2004 (NESAQ)	MfE	· The Government is proposing amendments to some provisions of the NESAQ that: o take into account improved scientific understanding and evidence about the health impacts of particulate matter o better target controllable sources of air pollution. Including provisions relating to particulate matter, domestic solid-fuel burners and mercury emissions. · The amendments to the NESAQ would come into immediate effect once the Minister’s decisions are gazetted. Transitional provisions may be needed to allow time for compliance. · The deadline for submissions has been extended to 31 July 2020. Staff have engaged with MfE to understand the implications for Council.
Proposed National Environmental Standards for the Outdoor Storage of Tyres (NES-OST)	MfE	· One of the main tools to respond to risks associated with tyres stored outdoors and to provide the clarity about regulation of such tyres under the RMA. The main risks are fire (causing toxic smoke and run-off) and leachates. The proposed NES would provide a consistent regulatory approach for local authorities on how tyres stored outside should be managed. Public consultation has closed. Submissions are under review.
Proposed National Environmental Standards for Marine Aquaculture	MPI with support from MfE and DoC	· BOPRC staff provided technical feedback on the exposure draft which covered both planning and biosecurity · Finalising instrument - likely to take effect in 2020. · Cabinet has approved final policy provisions for drafting. BOPRC staff have provided feedback on exposure draft. Text will be presented to Cabinet for final decisions.

6. Council’s Submission Process

Given the large amount of national direction it is timely to review and clarify the current process of how we make submissions on the proposals of other organisations. The delegation has the caveat that submissions are authorised “in discussion with the Chair of the relevant Committee”.

The Submission Process is designed to allow BOPRC to respond to the policy development and operational implementation decisions of other organisations. This can involve informal or formal feedback and may include subsequent Hearing processes.

Council’s submission process is guided by delegation from Council/Committee and by staff identification of the significance of the subjects/documents where feedback is begin sought.

The delegation to staff is:

Where submissions are being made on legislative bills, proposed regulations, proposed NPSs and NESs – that affect Council or Council’s functions and policy – these are outside of the delegation and require a resolution of Council.

There are four types of submission processes:

• Council/Committee resolution required

• Standard: content developed by staff, all councillors have opportunity to comment, Chair to resolve any conflicting comments, GM sign-off

• Short timeframe: as determined by GM/Chair of the relevant Committee, GM sign-off

• Operational/Small-scale or as delegated: reviewed by Chair of the relevant Committee, GM sign-off.

The following submissions were made in the last financial year:

	Name
1	Tauranga City Council Draft Coastal Structures Policy
2	Climate Change (Zero Carbon) Amendment Bill
3	Legislation to establish UDAs – RPS and Urban Policy implications
4	LINZ Outdated Land Related Legislation
5	NZ Productivity Commission – Productivity Commission report
6	NZ Transport Agency – BOP Speed Reviews
7	Proposed National Policy Statement for Highly Productive Land
8	Whakatāne District Council Climate Change Principles
9	Proposed National Policy Statement and National Environmental Standards for Freshwater Management
10	Proposed National Policy Statement for Urban Development
11	Proposed Resource Management Act Amendment Bill
12	Proposed National Policy Statement Indigenous Biodiversity
13	Transforming the resource management system: Opportunities for change: Issues and Options Paper
14	Draft District Bylaws Ōpōtiki district
15	ODC Reserve management Plan Review
16	DoC Improving Whitebait Management
17	Proposed National Environmental Standard for the Outdoor Storage of Tyres
18	Local Government (Rating of Whenua Māori) Amendment Bill



Report To:	Strategy and Policy Committee
Meeting Date:	11 August 2020
Report Writer:	Jane Palmer, Senior Planner Climate Change
Report Authoriser:	Chris Ingle, General Manager, Integrated Catchments
Purpose:	To establish the process to reset the Climate Change Action Plan.

Climate Change Action Plan reset

Executive Summary

Council adopted the first iteration of its Climate Change Action Plan in June 2019. This initial plan was designed as a “house-in-order” approach that served to enable Council to further develop its climate change position. Following a full year of the Action Plan and with climate change confirmed as a strategic priority for the Long Term Plan 2021-2031, it is an opportune time to consider a reset of the Action Plan.

This paper outlines a proposed approach to resetting the Climate Change Action Plan with the overall aim of lifting up the content of the Action Plan and make it more policy focused, in order to guide and direct decision-making around climate change. The actual content of the revised Action Plan will be developed through the Long Term Plan process, commencing with setting the overall direction on climate change at the 12 August Long Term Plan workshop.

Recommendations

That the Strategy and Policy Committee:

1 Receives the report, Climate Change Action Plan reset.

2 Approves the proposed approach to reset the Climate Change Action Plan, as outlined under section 2 of the report.

1. Introduction

As a signatory to the New Zealand Local Government Leaders’ Climate Change Declaration, Council committed to ‘develop and implement ambitious action plans’, which led to Council adopting the Climate Change Action Plan in June 2019 as the ‘first iteration in identifying Council priorities and resources in relation to deliberate climate change actions’. The first iteration was designed as a “house-in-order” approach, positioning Council to be able to develop its climate change position further.The Action Plan contains an ongoing commitment to reviewing and updating the content:

Over time this will mean that Council’s action plan and role will evolve and develop and we welcome community input on the content of our action plan at any time. We will also engage with the community around our role and priorities for climate change as the action plan develops. The action plan will be reported on and reviewed on an annual basis, when we will reaffirm or revise our next steps and where we are heading, with a more in-depth reset every three years as part of the Long Term Plan process. New versions will be published through these regular processes.

The Action Plan has been in place for just over a year and with the Long Term Plan process now underway and confirmation that climate change remains a strategic priority for Council (Strategy and Policy Committee 25 June meeting), it is the opportune time to consider a reset of the Action Plan.

An update on Action Plan progress was provided to the Monitoring and Operations Committee on 16 June 2020, at which Councillors requested a report on the future direction of the Action Plan to be provided to the 11 August Strategy and Policy Committee. This paper outlines a proposed process for the reset, with the specific content of the Action Plan to be determined through the LTP process. Direction on the scale of effort to be delivered on climate change will be discussed through the LTP workshop on 12 August and will be used to inform the reset of the Action Plan.

1.1 Legislative Framework

New Zealand’s response to climate change at a national level is framed by Central Government’s Climate Change Response (Zero Carbon) Amendment Act 2019, which covers both mitigation (reducing greenhouse gas emissions) and adaptation (building resilience and dealing with the impacts of climate change). Under this Act, the Government will establish a system of emissions budgets and reductions plans and a series of national climate change risk assessments and national adaptation plans.

The Resource Management Amendment Act came into force on 30 June 2020, with the climate change provisions coming into force from 31 December 2021. These will require councils to have regard to emissions reduction plans and national adaptation plans when making and amending regional policy statements, regional plans and district plans; and also enable councils to consider discharges to air of greenhouse gas emissions through the consenting process.

1.2 Alignment with Strategic Framework

A Healthy Environment	We develop and implement regional plans and policy to protect our natural environment.
Freshwater for Life	We collaborate with others to maintain and improve our water resource for future generations.
Safe and Resilient Communities	We provide systems and information to increase understanding of natural hazard risks and climate change impacts.
A Vibrant Region	We work with and connect the right people to create a prosperous region and economy.
The Way We Work	We look to partnerships for best outcomes.

Climate Change is identified as one of the Council’s strategic challenges. The Climate Change Action Plan is a cross-Council document that includes actions relating to the majority of Council functions and therefore aligns to all four Community Outcomes. As a cross-cutting issue, working in partnership, both within Council and with our external partners, is crucial to delivering an effective response to the complex issues relating to climate change.

Progress on the Climate Change Action Plan is currently monitored through the Chief Executives KPIs and the Property KPI relating to the carbon emissions of Council buildings. Going forward, incorporating actions from the Action Plan into the Long Term Plan business planning will provide the opportunity to introduce climate change related KPIs across the relevant Council functions.

1.2.1 Community Well-beings Assessment

Dominant Well-Beings Affected

þ Environmental

High - Positive

þ Cultural

Medium - Positive

þ Social

Medium - Positive

þ Economic

Medium - Positive

Climate change is an established environmental, social, cultural and economic issue which has wide ranging effects on all aspects of our society. The Climate Change Action Plan signals Council’s commitment to responding to the challenges of climate change and contains initiatives that impact across all four well-beings.

Overall, the impacts on the well-beings are expected to be positive. However, the substantial shifts needed to transition to a low carbon and climate resilient society will involve necessary trade-offs that may negatively impact the well-beings of particular sectors at certain points in time, although these are likely to be counterbalanced by positive impacts in other areas. For instance, a reduction in energy use and a shift to distributed generation (i.e. solar panels) across the region may have an initial negative economic impact for the electricity supply sector, but also presents opportunities for new business models, such as energy supply companies which provide a broad range of energy solutions where energy is considered a service rather than as a commodity. Likewise, where the impacts of climate change result in a community having to relocate assets, there will be a range of negative impacts on the well-being of the affected community, whilst at the same time presenting opportunities with many positive impacts, such as greater social cohesion and being able to ‘build back better’.

2. Approach to the Action Plan reset

2.1 Background

The Action Plan outlines our response to climate change in terms of mitigation adaption and engagement and awareness, structured around four focus areas:

· House in order;

· Decision making;

· The work we do;

· Working with our communities.

Each focus area contains a number of actions and pathways, ranging in size and scale and covering a range of Council functions, organised under the 12 overarching goals. The action plan also identifies an internal emissions target to reduce our organisational greenhouse gases (expect biogenic methane) to net zero by 2050, as a minimum.

The first year of the Action Plan has been focused on building a strong foundation to support climate change becoming embedded in the work we do, both internally and externally. The Action Plan is very much a first step in building our work in the climate change space.

The steps taken over this first year will culminate in actions from the action plan being incorporated into the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 process and embedded into the LTP service plans across the organisation.

Direction from 16 June Monitoring and Operations Committee meeting was for the Strategy and Policy Committee to consider the future direction of the Climate Change Action Plan. A proposed approach to resetting the Action Plan is presented here for consideration, whilst the overall direction on climate change will be discussed at the 12 August LTP workshop.

2.2 Proposed approach

The overall aim is to lift up the content of the Action Plan and make it more policy focused and strategic, to guide and direct decision-making around climate change, with less detail around the specific actions being undertaken. Instead, delivery of the actions will be facilitated by two key processes:

· Actions will be incorporated into the LTP 2021-2031 service plans and so the detail can be removed from the Action Plan itself

· A climate change internal work programme is being established that will monitor and report on delivery of the actions.

The policy content of the reset Action Plan would therefore focus on:

· National level policy settings

· BOP context

· Council objectives and targets

· Translation into decision-making and implementation

· Monitoring and review

The policy content of the reset Action Plan will be guided by Councillor direction through Council workshops as part of the LTP development process.

Drafting of version two of the Action Plan would take place during September and October, incorporating LTP discussions and decisions, and ensuring key linkages are made to policy in other areas that relate to climate change including:

· Regional recovery

· Bay of Connections (low emissions economy)

· Climate Change Fund

· Public transport/transport planning.

Key inputs to support the development of the Action Plan content include:

· Feedback obtained through the LTP pre-engagement survey

· Direction from 12 August LTP workshop

· Direction from Councillors through LTP workshops

· LTP service planning processes across the Council functions

· Discussions with staff working on related areas

· Review of approaches taken by other NZ councils

· Monitoring of progress by Central Government (noting the national climate change risk assessment is due later this year and the Climate Change Commission will be recommending the first three emissions budgets in early 2021).

The aim will be to present a draft version two of the Action Plan to the Strategy and Policy Committee on 3 November for discussion, with adoption for consultation alongside the LTP engagement at the Council meeting on 17 December.

2.2.1 Timeline for the reset

3. Considerations

3.1 Risks and Mitigations

With the Council declaring a climate emergency in June 2019, there is a reputational risk of Council being perceived as not taking sufficient action on climate change considered commensurate with an ‘emergency’. The next iteration of the Action Plan mitigates this risk by signalling Council’s ongoing engagement with this issue.

There are also financial risks associated with lack of action on climate change; investment in both mitigation and adaptation measures sooner rather than later will avoid significant costs at a later date when the issues have become far more severe.

3.2 Climate Change

Mitigation			Adaptation
Reduce GHG emissions	Produce GHG emissions	Sequester carbon	Anticipate climate change impacts	Respond to climate change impacts
☒	☐	☒	☐	☒

The Climate Change Action Plan outlines Council’s response to climate change in terms of actions around both mitigation and adaptation.

3.3 Implications for Māori

Crtl + click for Guideline material.

Climate change is of interest to Māori as it is to the whole community. Māori have particular interests around the impacts of climate change on land and land use – and in climate change adaptation where coastal areas are subject to sea level rise and weather event erosion. Climate change is beginning to be identified specifically in iwi management plans with the inclusion of natural hazards as a key topic.

The Climate Change Action Plan includes specific actions relating to Māori, where Council can support and work together with Tangata whenua. Building upon Council’s He Korowai Mātauranga framework, there are opportunities to widen Council’s understanding of the Te Ao Māori view on climate change and recognise the important contribution tangata whenua can make in Council’s climate change initiatives.

3.4 Community Engagement

Consider identifying in the report:

CONSULT

Whakauiuia

To obtain input or feedback from affected communities about our analysis, alternatives, and /or proposed decisions.

Previous consultation with our community has identified climate change as a key issue of concern. It will be important to seek feedback from the community on the reset of the Action Plan; consultation on the revised document is planned to take place alongside the Long Term Plan consultation process.

3.5 Financial Implications

There are no material unbudgeted financial implications in undertaking a reset of the Climate Change Action Plan and this process fits within the allocated budget. However, depending on the emphasis on additional climate change actions through the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 process that will then feed into the reset of the Climate Change Action Plan, there is likely to be additional budget required under specific functional areas to deliver these new action areas.

4. Next Steps

4.1 Conclusion

The first year of the Council’s Climate Change Action Plan, with its focus on getting ‘our house in order’, has provided a good foundation for Council to further refine its position on climate change. The development of the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 presents an ideal opportunity to align the reset of the Action Plan with this process. The proposed approach to the Action Plan reset will bring in a stronger policy focus, with the content guided by Councillor direction and informed by the Long Term Plan development.

4.2 Next steps

· Approval of the approach to re-setting the Climate Change Action Plan

· Council to discuss the scale of effort to be delivered on climate change at the 12 August LTP workshop

· Further workshops with Council to work through the development of version two of the Climate Action Plan in parallel with the LTP process

· New and existing climate change actions will be embedded into the activity work programmes through the LTP process

· A draft Climate Action Plan (version 2) will be presented to Council in December 2020 for community consultation in early 2021 (as part of the LTP consultation process).



Report To:	Strategy and Policy Committee
Meeting Date:	11 August 2020
Report Writer:	Annika Lane, Contractor
Report Authoriser:	Namouta Poutasi, General Manager, Strategy & Science
Purpose:	The purpose of this report is to provide Councillors with an overview of the western Bay of Plenty Transport System Plan (TSP) and to provide an update on the TSP programme.

Update on Western Bay Transport System Plan (TSP)

Executive Summary

The purpose of this paper is to provide Councillors with an overview of the western Bay of Plenty Transport System Plan (TSP) and to provide an update on the TSP programme. Councillors have also requested an overview of the relationship between SmartGrowth, UFTI and the TSP.

The UFTI project was a SmartGrowth initiative and has provided the SmartGrowth partnership with a recommended spatial and transport programme that sets the direction for land use and transport planning for the next 30 and 50 years, and in the longer term.

Accompanying the recommended programme, UFTI provides SmartGrowth with a renewed sub-regional investment story about the integration of land use and transport to achieve good public outcomes.

The UFTI programme has been estimated to be approximately $7billion in 2020 dollars over the next 50-100 years, including capital expenditure (new infrastructure) of approximately $3.2 billion and operational expenditure of $3.8 billion.

The western Bay of Plenty Transport System Plan (TSP) will identify projects across Tauranga that contribute to achieving the long term vision of UFTI. Projects identified will be added to the Regional Land Transport Plan and Council Long Term Plans for consultation and funding allocation.

Bay of Plenty Regional Council is taking a leadership role in the public transport components of the project.

The TSP Independent Chair, Dean Kimpton and Programme Director, Neil Mason will present an update on the TSP project at the Committee Meeting

Recommendations

That the Strategy and Policy Committee:

1 Receives the report, Update on Western Bay Transport System Plan (TSP).

1. Introduction

The UFTI project was a SmartGrowth initiative to provide the SmartGrowth partnership with a recommended spatial and transport programme that sets the direction for land use and transport planning for the next 30 and 50 years, and in the longer term.

Accompanying the recommended programme, UFTI provides SmartGrowth with a renewed sub-regional investment story about the integration of land use and transport to achieve good public outcomes.

On 1 July 2020 the SmartGrowth Partners approved the UFTI Final Report which sets out the programme business case for investment in an integrated land use and transport programme and delivery plan for the western Bay of Plenty Region. This programme is called “Connected Centres”.

An independent peer review has found the UFTI approach reflects best practice as an innovative urban form lead business case. There are a few identified areas that will need further improvement in the next stages, none of which undermine the overall credibility of the UFTI Final Report. However the review does note that there are significant Maori land blocks and cultural values in the proposed urban growth areas that need to be discussed in an open and positive way with representatives of both tangata whenua and Māori land trusts in order to progress the Joint Spatial Plan.The Peer Review is available on the UFTI website https://ufti.org.nz/reports/.

UFTI implementation activities include the Joint Spatial Plan, Regional Land Transport Plan, Regional Public Transport Plan and the Western Bay of Plenty Transport System Plan. The relationship between UFTI, Smartgrowth and the Governing Structure to deliver the Connected Centres Programme is attached at Appendix 1.

The relationship between UFTI and the Western Bay of Plenty Transport System Plan (TSP) is described in the following diagram.

1.1 Legislative Framework

UFTI has placed significant emphasis on achieving the strategic priorities outlined in the Government Policy Statement (GPS) on Land Transport.

1.2 Alignment with Strategic Framework

A Vibrant Region

We lead regional transport strategy and system planning, working with others to deliver a safe and reliable public transport system.

1.2.1 Community Well-beings Assessment

Dominant Well-Beings Affected

þ Environmental

High - Positive

þ Cultural

Medium - Positive

þ Social

Medium - Positive

þ Economic

Medium - Positive

2. Western Bay of Plenty Transport System Plan (TSP)

2.1 Purpose

The purpose of the TSP project is to:

· Translate UFTI into implementation.

· Identify the preferred strategic form (e.g. key corridor typical cross section) of the sub-region’s key transport network.

· Deliver a sub-regional network wide, multi-modal, corridor level, operating framework for the transport network (i.e. System Operating Framework).

· Progress the investment case for the sub-region.

· Inform Council transport investment programmes.

The project will deliver the Transport System Operating Framework (TSOF) which identifies projects across Tauranga that contribute to achieving the long term vision of UFTI. Top priority projects will be taken forward as Single Stage Business Cases (SSBCs). Projects identified in the TSOF are added to the Regional Land Transport Plan and Council Long Term Plans for consultation and funding allocation.

2.2 Project Governance and Structure

The TSP Project Structure is set out below. Bay of Plenty Regional Council is taking a leadership role in the public transport components of the project and inputs to the Regional Land Transport Plan.

3. Considerations

3.1 Risks and Mitigations

A key challenge is the very tight programme to meet Council processes. BOPRC staff are working closely with the TSP project to ensure that public transport technical inputs are provided to the project for modelling purposes, noting that these are not BOPRC policy i.e. any future service levels will need to be defined and agreed to by Council as part of LTP processes. BOPRC staff are also developing a Public Transport Activity Plan to implement the UFTI Public Transport components which will need to be endorsed by the Public Transport Committee in late August.

3.2 Climate Change

The matters addressed in this report are of a procedural nature and there is no need to consider climate change impacts.

3.3 Implications for Māori

There are significant Maori land and cultural interests in the proposed growth areas that need to be resolved in a positive way and there is further engagement required to ensure that tangata whenua are provided a greater voice about the long-term direction for the western Bay of Plenty sub-region. This will be a focus for the Joint Spatial Plan.

A key challenge for the TSP project has been to obtain tangata whenua representation on the project.

3.4 Community Engagement

From its inception, UFTI sought to take a co-design approach to the development of key aspects of the Programme Business Case, —programme design and programme business case. The TSP projects will be taken through the Regional Land Transport Plan and Council Long Term Plans for funding allocation and further consultation and engagement with the community.

3.5 Financial Implications

Council has committed to providing staff and consultant resources to the TSP project and taking a lead role on the Public Transport component. This work has been accommodated within our current work programme.

The costs of implementation of the UFTI programme will be split between local and central government. Under current funding models the bulk of the expenditure would come from the National Land Transport Fund, rates and farebox recovery. Based on the rough order capital and operational costs and if current funding processes were followed, approximately 54% of the estimated costs are operational mainly due to the significant increase in public transport services, and 46% are for the capital expenditure. Of the total programme costs, approximately 65% fall to central government through Waka Kotahi and KiwiRail; with the remaining 35% split between Bay of Plenty Regional Council, Tauranga City Council, and Western Bay of Plenty District Council.

The preferred option for UFTI will include additional investment in bus services. This is currently modelled as cumulative increases of $2.3 million each year for the next 40 years over the current baselines i.e. $2.3 million, $4.6 million, $6.9 million etc. TSP is implementing UFTI. The actual amount of increase in any given year will be refined based on population and patronage growth will be a factor for consideration in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031, including consideration of funding sources.

4. Next Steps

The TSP project team will continue to work with partner agencies to refine the TSP projects for the Regional Land Transport Plan and Council Long Term Plans for funding allocation and further consultation and engagement with the community.

The PT components will be presented to the Public Transport Committee (PTC) for endorsement on 27 August 2020 and submitted to the Regional Land Transport Plan in mid-September 2002.

Attachments

Attachment 1 - Structures to Deliver UFTI July 2020 ⇩



Report To:	Strategy and Policy Committee
Meeting Date:	11 August 2020
Report Writer:	Lisa Power, Senior Planner
Report Authoriser:	Namouta Poutasi, General Manager, Strategy & Science
Purpose:	This report details how the Biosecurity Act 1993 requirements for RPMP development have been met and presents staff recommendations on the submissions received on the proposed RPMP.

Regional Pest Management Plan

Executive Summary

The Regional Pest Management Plan (RPMP) is the key policy document that sets out how pests in our region will be managed. The existing RPMP no longer meets legislative requirements and the pest management landscape in our region.

The proposed RPMP was notified in September 2018 and 56 submissions were received. Since then staff have been working through, understanding and resolving submission points with submitters. The process has taken longer than expected due to a reprioritisation of work programmes due to national direction coming from central government.

Staff recommendations are set out in supporting document titled Proposed Regional Pest Management Plan Staff Recommendations (‘staff report’). The staff report shows how each submission point has been considered and reflects direction provided by Councillors at the Council workshop last November. A redline strikeout version of the RPMP is provided as a supporting document titled Amended Regional Pest Management Plan and shows how staff recommendations would look if approved by Council. Key aspects of these recommendations have been legally reviewed.

The RPMP has been developed in accordance with the Biosecurity Act 1993. This Act requires a number of steps Council must take in developing a RPMP. This report and the decision making documentation attached to this report aligns with these requirements.

Staff now seek approval of the staff recommendations on submissions and recommends to Council to adopt the Proposed Regional Pest Management Plan.

Recommendations

That the Strategy and Policy Committee:

1 Receives the report, Regional Pest Management Plan.

2 Approves the Bay of Plenty Regional Council as the management agency under section 73 of the Biosecurity Act 1993.

3 Is satisfied requirements of section 73 and section 74 of the Biosecurity Act 1993 have been complied with.

4 Approves staff recommendations on submissions received on the Proposed Regional Pest Management Plan and recommends they be adopted by Bay of Plenty Regional Council.

1. Introduction

The Biosecurity Act 1993 requires regional councils to ‘provide regional leadership in pest management’. The existing RPMP for the Bay of Plenty 2011-2016 sets out how pests would be managed in the Bay of Plenty region. As previously reported to Council, this existing plan no longer meets legislative requirements and no longer reflects the pest management landscape in our region. Attachment One: Council Decisions details Council decisions made up to this point that support development of the proposed RPMP.

Recent legislative amendments require every pest specified in an RPMP to be subject to one or more of the following programmes:

Exclusion - prevent the establishment of a pest, which is present in New Zealand but not yet established in an area or region

Eradication - reduce the infestation level of a pest to zero levels over the lifetime of the plan

Progressive Containment - contain or reduce the geographic distribution of a pest over the lifetime of the plan

Sustained control - ongoing control of a pest to reduce its impacts on values and spread to other properties

Protecting values in places (Site-led) - a pest that is capable of causing damage to a place is excluded or eradicated from that place, or is contained, reduced or controlled within the place to an extent that protects the values of that place.

Central to the development of this RPMP is consideration of what pests to include, what level of management is required (for example which pest programme a pest should sit within) and who is responsible for their management. These decisions are guided by cost benefit analyses, national policy direction criteria, available funding, the ability to manage the pests and community appetite for these pests to be managed.

1.1 Legislative Framework

The Biosecurity Act 1993 (sections 70 to 75) requires specific steps to be undertaken before a RPMP can come into effect. At each step Council must carefully consider and be ‘satisfied’ of each matter and this must be clearly documented. Attachment Two: RPMP Development Steps summarises the decision points (including completed and pending) required to ‘make’ the next RPMP and shows how the requirements of sections 70, 71 and 72 have already been complied with.

This report documents how sections 73 and 74 requirements have been complied with through Attachment Three: Meeting the Requirements of the Biosecurity Act.

Under section 75 recommendations of this Committee will be reported to the full Council who will then make the final decision on adopting the plan.

1.2 Alignment with Strategic Framework

A Healthy Environment

We develop and implement regional plans and policy to protect our natural environment.

1.2.1 Community Well-beings Assessment

Dominant Well-Beings Affected

þ Environmental

þ Cultural

þ Social

þ Economic

The RPMP provides descriptions of individual pests along with the adverse effects to be managed. It identifies whether each pest has an effect on environmental, production or public values. This strongly correlates to the four well-beings and has been at the forefront of decision-making when considering which pests to include in the RPMP and what level of management is required.

2. Summary of Submissions

The proposed RPMP was publicly notified on 25 September 2018 with submissions closing on 6 November 2018 (late submissions were accepted). A total of 56 submissions were received including submissions in support and submissions requesting amendments. Submissions are available on the Council’s website.

Hearings are not compulsory under the Biosecurity Act 1993 and in accordance with the consultation and engagement plan approved by Council on 6 September 2018, no formal hearings were held. As an alternative, staff contacted each submitter by phone or email to offer the opportunity to discuss their submission. Meetings were held with those submitters who wanted to discuss their submission in more detail.

Staff have previously reported the common themes of submissions to Councillors (Regional Direction and Delivery Committee meeting, 11 December 2018 and Council workshop, 13 November 2019).

To recap, there was a public perception that Council was stepping back from its duty and managing or requiring management of fewer pests. Other key submission themes included:

• include additional pests in the RPMP such as pathogens, plant, animal and marine pests;

• concern that pests listed in the proposed RPMP Appendix 1 were not subject to RPMP provisions, such as the generic rules;

• general support for marine pest rules;

• requests to include ‘good neighbour’ and ‘site-led’ rules;

• mixed support for geographically split programmes, for example pests belonging to different programmes in different parts of the region;

• requests for programme changes (in most cases submitters wanted a higher level of pest management intervention)

• high interest in woolly nightshade, ginger, pampas, wild kiwifruit and wallabies;

• questions about Councils’ role in managing some pests that are subject to other regulations

• request for an additional rule to ensure boats entering lakes are clean.

Each submission point is considered through the staff report.

3. Staff recommendations

The staff report demonstrates how all issues raised through submissions have been considered.

The staff report acknowledges submission points in support as ‘comment noted’. Where submissions points have been accepted or accepted in part, changes have been made to the RPMP. Unfortunately the database used to compile the staff report has limited formatting capability and staff were unable to italicise or use redline/strikeout to show recommended amendments to the RPMP.

In summary, of the 371 submission points made staff recommended:

- 37% be accepted or accepted in part;

- 28% be acknowledged as being in support of the RPMP; and

- 35% be rejected.

3.1 Key changes following Council workshop

The direction provided at the Council workshop last November is reflected in staff recommendations which are summarised in the table below.

Council Direction	RPMP Reference	Staff Comment
Include in the RPMP: - Marshwort (Exclusion), Climbing Asparagus and Reed Sweet Grass (Sustained Control). Exclude all other pests requested for inclusion by submitters.	Table 1 Section 6.1 Exclusion Programme and Section 6.4 Sustained Control	Cost benefit analyses were carried out on all the species that submitters requested be added to the RPMP. Staff agree with Council direction that these three species are the only pests that support inclusion. In most cases the costs to manage these pests outweigh benefits or there is another lead agency with responsibility to manage the pest.
Add species to the “Advisory” pest list and leave site-led biodiversity programmes to operate outside the RPMP framework.	Page 1 Appendix 1: Advisory Pests Table 1	Council may address management of additional pests through its site led approach to protect high value biodiversity sites and will continue to provide advice on their management. Text has been added to this effect. The title has changed from Non-RPMP pests to Advisory pests as a result of submissions. 10 species have been added to Appendix 1. Climbing Asparagus was previously in Appendix 1 but is now included as a pest.
Retain notified pest programmes for specific pests including woolly nightshade, wallabies, wild ginger and freshwater plant programmes.	Table 1 Sections 6.1 – 6.4 All Pest management programmes	Woolly nightshade, wallabies and wild ginger are high profile pests and over the years the region’s community has urged Council to do more to manage these pests. Changes to the pest management programmes for these pests have not been supported by cost benefit assessments or Council workshops. A submission requested that freshwater plants require a lower level of management due to current levels of investment, risk of re-infestation through lake users and achievability of long term objectives. The notified programmes for these pests reflect cost benefit results.
Change the pest fish programme to ensure pest fish are progressively contained or eradicated where they exist and are excluded from waterways where they do not already exist.	Table 1 Sections 6.1 Exclusion, 6.2 Eradication and 6.3 Progressive Containment Maps 2, 15, 16, 17 and 18	This change reflects submissions received on pest fish (except submission from Fish and Game, see section 5.2 of this report)
Change the proposed programme changes for wild kiwifruit to progressive containment across the region rather than a sub-regional split of progressive containment and sustained control.	Table 1 Section 6.3 Progressive Containment	This change can only be supported as Kiwifruit Vine Health (KVH) have committed extra funding to support a higher level of management. Staff are progressing an MOU with KVH to formalise this agreement. Amendments reflect the removal of wild kiwifruit as a ‘sustained control’ pest.
Add additional wilding conifer species into the progressive containment programme.	Table 1 Sections 6.3 Progressive Containment and 6.4 Sustained Control	Scots pine, Dwarf mountain pine, Mountain pine and European larch have been added to the progressive containment programme. These four species have little commercial value and so requiring their removal will have minimal commercial impact to the occupier. The other wilding conifer species still have commercial value so there will potentially be ongoing seed sources from production forestry that need to be managed in perpetuity. The true distribution of both production stands and wilding issues is unknown as is the cost to manage them. Without investment from central government Council is unlikely to be resourced to meet RPMP progressive containment objectives. Pest descriptions (externally peer reviewed) have been added for each conifer species.
To exclude good neighbour rules in the RPMP	Section 5.4 Rules	Instead of good neighbour rules, boundary control is addressed through the RPMP sustained control rules. These rules support an ‘equal effort’ principle, for example if a land owner is actively managing a pest on their boundary, so should the adjoining landowner. Current MOUs also support boundary control of pests.
Not to introduce a new ‘clean boat rule’ and instead support: - a staff proposal for a summer trial and; - better education and enforcement action to raise compliance levels.	Section 6.5 Generic Rules Rule 7	This has been a hot issue for submitters. Following the summer trial, staff recommend inclusion of a self-certification clause being added to the existing rule to encourage good practice. It would only apply at boat ramps with self-certification checkpoints - this being a future operational goal as there are currently none.

Council Direction

RPMP Reference

Staff Comment

Include in the RPMP:

- Marshwort (Exclusion), Climbing Asparagus and Reed Sweet Grass (Sustained Control).

Exclude all other pests requested for inclusion by submitters.

Table 1

Section 6.1 Exclusion Programme and Section 6.4 Sustained Control

Cost benefit analyses were carried out on all the species that submitters requested be added to the RPMP.

Staff agree with Council direction that these three species are the only pests that support inclusion. In most cases the costs to manage these pests outweigh benefits or there is another lead agency with responsibility to manage the pest.

Add species to the “Advisory” pest list and leave site-led biodiversity programmes to operate outside the RPMP framework.

Page 1

Appendix 1: Advisory Pests

Table 1

Council may address management of additional pests through its site led approach to protect high value biodiversity sites and will continue to provide advice on their management. Text has been added to this effect.

The title has changed from Non-RPMP pests to Advisory pests as a result of submissions. 10 species have been added to Appendix 1.

Climbing Asparagus was previously in Appendix 1 but is now included as a pest.

Retain notified pest programmes for specific pests including woolly nightshade, wallabies, wild ginger and freshwater plant programmes.

Table 1

Sections 6.1 – 6.4 All Pest management programmes

Woolly nightshade, wallabies and wild ginger are high profile pests and over the years the region’s community has urged Council to do more to manage these pests. Changes to the pest management programmes for these pests have not been supported by cost benefit assessments or Council workshops.

A submission requested that freshwater plants require a lower level of management due to current levels of investment, risk of re-infestation through lake users and achievability of long term objectives. The notified programmes for these pests reflect cost benefit results.

Change the pest fish programme to ensure pest fish are progressively contained or eradicated where they exist and are excluded from waterways where they do not already exist.

Table 1

Sections 6.1 Exclusion, 6.2 Eradication and 6.3 Progressive Containment

Maps 2, 15, 16, 17 and 18

This change reflects submissions received on pest fish (except submission from Fish and Game, see section 5.2 of this report)

Change the proposed programme changes for wild kiwifruit to progressive containment across the region rather than a sub-regional split of progressive containment and sustained control.

Table 1

Section 6.3 Progressive Containment

This change can only be supported as Kiwifruit Vine Health (KVH) have committed extra funding to support a higher level of management. Staff are progressing an MOU with KVH to formalise this agreement.

Amendments reflect the removal of wild kiwifruit as a ‘sustained control’ pest.

Add additional wilding conifer species into the progressive containment programme.

Table 1

Sections 6.3 Progressive Containment and 6.4 Sustained Control

Scots pine, Dwarf mountain pine, Mountain pine and European larch have been added to the progressive containment programme. These four species have little commercial value and so requiring their removal will have minimal commercial impact to the occupier.

The other wilding conifer species still have commercial value so there will potentially be ongoing seed sources from production forestry that need to be managed in perpetuity. The true distribution of both production stands and wilding issues is unknown as is the cost to manage them. Without investment from central government Council is unlikely to be resourced to meet RPMP progressive containment objectives.

Pest descriptions (externally peer reviewed) have been added for each conifer species.

To exclude good neighbour rules in the RPMP

Section 5.4 Rules

Instead of good neighbour rules, boundary control is addressed through the RPMP sustained control rules. These rules support an ‘equal effort’ principle, for example if a land owner is actively managing a pest on their boundary, so should the adjoining landowner. Current MOUs also support boundary control of pests.

Not to introduce a new ‘clean boat rule’ and instead support:

- a staff proposal for a summer trial and;

- better education and enforcement action to raise compliance levels.

Section 6.5 Generic Rules Rule 7

This has been a hot issue for submitters. Following the summer trial, staff recommend inclusion of a self-certification clause being added to the existing rule to encourage good practice. It would only apply at boat ramps with self-certification checkpoints - this being a future operational goal as there are currently none.

In addition to direction provided in the Table above, Councillors noted there are a number of key players in pest control and it is not always clear who does what. Councillors requested a diagram to clearly show the responsibilities of BOPRC and other key agencies. The diagram below shows the key players in pest management.

Additional text has been added to the RPMP to acknowledge other BOPRC activities that contribute to pest management (page 1, RPMP). Explanatory text outlining BOPRC’s relationships with other pest management agencies and managers of Crown land has also been strengthened (page 16, RPMP).

3.2 Other key changes to the RPMP as a result of submissions

Pest fish

Fish and Game have opposed the inclusion of trench and perch in the RPMP on the basis these species are classified as sports fish and are protected by the Conservation Act 1987. Fish and Game considers that inclusion in the RPMP is inconsistent with the Conservation Act 1987 and Freshwater Fisheries Regulations 1983.

This was a contentious issue and it carries with it a risk of appeal should these pests be included.

To address Fish and Game concerns regarding conflict with the Conservation Act 1987, staff have added text to the RPMP which acknowledges various legislation and regulations apply to the management of sports fish and that the rules in the RPMP are subject to the Conservation Act 1987 and Freshwater Fisheries Regulations 1983. (Section 2.2.5 and Tables 5 and 7, RPMP). Definitions of perch and trench have also been added to clarify these fish will only be subject to RPMP management provisions where their presence is due to a breach of the Conservation Act 1987 and Freshwater Fisheries Regulations 1983.

Staff have had ongoing discussions with Fish and Game and are now confident these changes address Fish and Game concerns.

Links with other pest management policy or initiatives

Concern was raised through the submission process that removing pests from the existing RPMP will remove the requirement for landowners to manage them under existing permitted activities, protection covenants or consent conditions. This has been clarified in the RPMP under Unwanted Organisms (page 22, RPMP).

Submitters queried how Council would manage pests not listed in the RPMP as they were not deemed a pest and/ or the extent of spread was unknown at the time of RPMP development. Text has been added to explain that Council retains an ability to manage small scale eradication or control programmes for unwanted organisms which are not listed in the RPMP (page 22, RPMP).

The RPMP has been updated to include references to National Pest Management Plans in operation or currently being developed (page 12-13, RPMP).

3.3 Changes to the pest management landscape since notification

Funding

The allocation of costs has been updated to reflect recent funding decisions. See Table 14: Allocation of costs for each programme (page 77, RPMP).

Council considered funding implications at its workshop on 13 November 2019. While the current budget of $2.3M would be adequate to move the region towards the pest management outcomes of the RPMP, it was agreed that level of funding was inadequate to deliver a RPMP that incorporates the staff recommendations arising from the submission process.

Council supported an option that provides additional funding to support increased effort on wallabies, freshwater pest compliance, capability-building for Maori land owners including initial control work (on problematic Maori land), community initiatives and a stronger focus on improving compliance along property boundaries in Western Bay of Plenty.

This direction on funding and resourcing levels will guide RPMP planning and operational decisions and the next Long Term Plan and is reflected in the 2020/21 Annual Plan.

Pest Management Agreements

The proposed RPMP allowed for pest management agreements whereby an occupier and BOPRC can negotiate a process to remove progressive containment pests. Staff have added this provision to Rules 4 and 5 that manage sustained control pests. Instances where a written agreement might be a better approach to manage a given pest are the same whether the pest sits within a progressive containment or a sustained control programme.

Pest status

Staff recommend that water poppy be changed from an exclusion to eradication programme as it is now known that there is a site in this region.

3.4 Minor changes

For ease of navigation, there have been minor changes made to the format of the RPMP. Some of these changes were suggested through submissions and others through plan user experiences. The RPMP development overview has been removed from the RPMP as the document nears an operative status.

Staff have committed through submission responses that interactive maps (that clarify what programmes apply to individual properties) and current MOUs with pest management stakeholders will be made available on the BOPRC’s website.

The supporting document that accompanied the proposed RPMP at notification, Regional Pest Management Plan for the Bay of Plenty Region: Meeting the Biosecurity Act requirements will also be updated to reflect recent funding changes to manage wild kiwifruit. Additional cost benefit analyses undertaken as a result of consultation will be added as an addendum to this supporting document.

4. Considerations

4.1 Risks and Mitigations

Staff consider there are two foreseeable risks associated with ‘making’ the RPMP operative:

1. New pest incursions or an unexpected pest spread which may make the RPMP outdated.

Staff comment: This risk is mitigated through increased surveillance. In the case of new pest incursions there are provisions to manage new pests through Biosecurity Act 1993 provisions. Pest spread will also become evident through Council surveillance and monitoring programmes.

2. Appeals on Council decisions made on submissions

Staff comment: The risk of submitters appealing decisions on the RPMP has been mitigated through ongoing conversations with submitters. In some cases there have been a number of meetings to reach an agreed approach. The draft plan was subject to an internal legal review prior to consultation and both internal and external legal advice was obtained on the areas considered to be of most risk of appeal, including in particular the inclusion of sports fish in the programmes. The approach and wording in the amended version of the proposed plan reflects and is consistent with that legal advice.

4.2 Climate Change

It is generally acknowledged that climate change is a contributing factor to pest incursions and spread. It is difficult to quantify the extent of this though.

The Biosecurity Act 1993 does not require that climate change is considered in the RPMP policy development process. This may change through the current Biosecurity Act reform.

4.3 Implications for Māori

Working with Māori is an important part of any policy development process. The strategic direction within the RPMP supports Māori pest management objectives. Staff are committed to building on and furthering pest management relationships with Māori.

There is an increasing desire by Māori to be actively involved in pest eradication. Our partnership with Te Arawa Lakes Trust is a leading example of working with iwi to manage pests. We have also supported Iwi-led initiatives exploring the management of Asian paddle crabs in Tauranga Moana.

Pest management is at the forefront of Council’s work with Māori across the region to better utilise Māori land and interests.

4.4 Community Engagement

Consultation and community engagement has been a significant part of RPMP development and Council has had to confirm it has satisfied legislative requirements with regards to consultation (See section 3.1 of this report).

4.5 Financial Implications

There are no material unbudgeted financial implications and this fits within the allocated budget.

5. Next Steps

As shown in Attachment Two: RPMP Development Steps, ‘making’ the next RPMP is nearing its final steps. Under section 75 of the Biosecurity Act 1993 recommendations of this Committee will be reported to the full Council who will then make the final decision on adopting the plan.

Once Council is satisfied content and requirements of the RPMP comply with the Biosecurity Act 1993, all submitters will receive Council’s reasons for accepting or rejecting submissions. Council must also give public notice of decisions on the RPMP.

Submitters can appeal decisions to the Environment Court within 15 days of that public notice. The Biosecurity Act 1993 outlines the steps that must be taken if appeals are received. Staff would report back to this committee in this instance.

An operational plan to support implementation of the next RPMP must then be developed within three months of the commencement of the RPMP (Section 100B, Biosecurity Act 1993). In anticipation of the RPMP being approved development of BOPRC’s operational plan has started.

Attachments

Attachment 1 - Council Decisions ⇩

Attachment 2 - RPMP Development Steps ⇩

Attachment 3 - Meeting the Requirements of the Biosecurity Act ⇩

Supporting Document 1 - Proposed Regional Pest Management Plan Staff Recommendations ⇩

Supporting Document 2 - Amended Regional Pest Management Plan ⇩



Report To:	Strategy and Policy Committee
Meeting Date:	11 August 2020
Report Writer:	Nassah Rolleston-Steed, Principal Advisor, Policy & Planning
Report Authoriser:	Namouta Poutasi, General Manager, Strategy & Science
Purpose:	Present feedback from Te Maru o Kaituna members and seek approval to commence broader community, iwi/hapū and stakeholder consultation.

Draft Proposed Change 5 (Kaituna River) to the Bay of Plenty Regional Policy Statement

Executive Summary

At the Strategy and Policy Committee workshop on Tuesday 5 May staff were given informal endorsement to commence consultation with Te Maru o Kaituna River Authority. Staff subsequently reported a draft version of Proposed Change 5 (Kaituna River) to the RPS to the Friday 29 May Te Maru o Kaituna meeting. At that meeting Te Maru o Kaituna members agreed to commission an external consultant to provide independent advice on Proposed Change 5. David Marshall was appointed as an independent advisor and presented his findings to Te Maru members at a workshop held on Friday 26 June.

This report presents staff recommendations made in response to feedback obtained from Te Maru o Kaituna members at and following their 26 June workshop. Other minor recommendations are made in response to issues arising during development of the Section 32 report.

There is an expectation Council will act in accordance with the Treaty of Waitangi principles of ‘good faith’ and ‘partnership’ by continuing to progress Proposed Change 5 without delay. The project was scheduled for funding in Council’s Long-Term Plan to progress this change in the 2017/18 and 2018/19 financial years. Te Maru o Kaituna needed time to develop Kaituna He Taonga Tuku Iho (Kaituna River Document) which came into effect 1 August 2018 and the following Te Tini a Tuna (Kaituna River Action Plan) which was finalised early 2020. Te Maru o Kaituna prioritised the action plan before the development of the Regional Policy Statement change.

Staff are seeking Committee approval to commence broader community, iwi/hapū and stakeholder consultation from 18 August to 16 October 2020. Staff propose providing opportunity to Te Maru o Kaituna members to consider and comment on community feedback received at their 27 November 2020 hui. Feedback received will be reported to the 17 December Council meeting. Depending on the nature of feedback received, staff foreshadow seeking Committee approval to commence the schedule 1 submissions process in early 2021.

Implementing the NPSFM is an ongoing priority for the Freshwater Futures Programme. There remains uncertainty about the final wording of the NPSFM. Despite this staff continue to work collaboratively to ensure Proposed Change 5 provisions are phrased appropriately to ensure it doesn’t cause subsequent misalignment with the NPSFM and integrates, as far as reasonably practicable, with the Freshwater Futures Programme.

Recommendations

That the Strategy and Policy Committee:

1 Receives the report, Draft Proposed Change 5 (Kaituna River) to the Bay of Plenty Regional Policy Statement.

2 Approves staff recommendations in response to Te Maru o Kaituna members requested amendments resulting from the 27 June 2020 workshop and their Independent Advisor contained in sections 2.1 and 2.2 of this report.

3 Approves Draft Proposed Change 5 (Kaituna River) to the Regional Policy Statement (included as Appendix 1) for community and stakeholder consultation.

4 Approves staff presenting comments received to Te Maru o Kaituna members at their 27 November 2020 meeting.

5 Notes staff propose seeking Regional Council approval to notify Proposed Change 5 for submission at the 17 December 2020 meeting.

1. Introduction

At the Strategy and Policy Committee workshop on Tuesday 5 May staff were given informal endorsement to commence consultation with Te Maru o Kaituna River Authority. Staff presented draft Proposed Change 5 (Kaituna River) to the Bay of Plenty Regional Policy Statement (RPS) to the Te Maru o Kaituna meeting on Friday 29 May. At that meeting Te Maru o Kaituna members agreed to schedule a workshop in late June and commission a consultant to provide independent advice on Proposed Change 5.

At the 26 June Te Maru o Kaituna workshop independent advisor, David Marshall, presented his findings which concludes ‘Proposed Change 5 appropriately recognises and provides for the vision, objectives and desired outcomes of Kaituna he taonga tuku iho – a treasure handed down to the extent that it relates to achieving the purpose of the Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA) for the Kaituna River.’

Te Maru members discussed parts of the draft policy framework in detail, including Mr Marshall’s recommendations and have made a number of further recommendations which are addressed below.

1.1 Legislative Framework

Section 123 of the Tapuika Claims Settlement Act 2014 compels Bay of Plenty Regional Council to recognise and provide for the vision, objectives and desired outcomes of the Kaituna River Document in the RPS and the Regional Natural Resources Plan (RNRP). Section 123 states:

Effect on Resource Management Act 1991 planning documents

‘(1) In preparing or amending a regional policy statement, regional plan, or district plan, a local authority must recognise and provide for the vision, objectives, and desired outcomes of the Kaituna River document.

(2) The local authority must comply with subsection (1) each time that it prepares or changes its regional policy statement, regional plan, or district plan.

(3) Until the obligation under subsection (1) is complied with, where a local authority is considering an application for a resource consent to authorise an activity to be undertaken within the catchment of the Kaituna River, the local authority must have regard to the Kaituna River document.

(4) To avoid doubt,—

· (a) the obligations under subsections (1) to (3) apply only to the extent that the contents of the Kaituna River document relate to the resource management issues of the region or district; and

· (b) the obligations under subsection (1) apply only to the extent that recognising and providing for the vision, objectives, and desired outcomes of the Kaituna River document is the most appropriate way to achieve the purpose of the Resource Management Act 1991 in relation to the Kaituna River.

(5) In this section, a reference to a plan or a policy statement includes a reference to a proposed plan or a proposed policy statement.’

Council is required to amend the RPS to recognise the Kaituna River Document the next time a relevant RPS change will affect the Kaituna River catchment. Until this occurs, councils considering resource consents to authorise activities within the Kaituna River catchment must have regard to the Kaituna River Document.

The requirement to ‘recognise and provide for’ is a stronger legislative directive than to ‘have particular regard to’ the Kaituna River Document. The Ngāti Manawa and Ngāti Whare Treaty Settlement Acts 2012 included the same requirement.

1.2 Alignment with Strategic Framework

A Healthy Environment	We develop and implement regional plans and policy to protect our natural environment.
Freshwater for Life	We collaborate with others to maintain and improve our water resource for future generations.
Safe and Resilient Communities	We work with communities and others to consider long term views of natural hazard risks through our regional plans and policies.
A Vibrant Region	We work with and connect the right people to create a prosperous region and economy.
The Way We Work	We honour our obligations to Māori.

Proposed Change 5 (Kaituna River) to the RPS directly contributes to the Healthy Environment, Freshwater for Life and Vibrant Region Community Outcomes in the Council’s Long Term Plan 2018-2028.

1.2.1 Community Well-beings Assessment

Dominant Well-Beings Affected

þ Environmental

High - Positive

þ Cultural

High - Positive

þ Social

Medium - Positive

þ Economic

Low - Positive

Proposed Change 5 (Kaituna River) will have a high positive impact on environmental and cultural well-being. The environmental, social, cultural and economic impacts of Proposed Change 5 have been analysed as part of the section 32 analysis. The draft section 32 policy evaluation will continue to be refined and developed as further options are identified through broader community, iwi/hapū and stakeholder consultation.

2. Feedback on Draft Proposed Change 5

2.1 Independent Advisor

Te Maru o Kaituna members commissioned independent planning advice from David Marshall on Draft Proposed Change 5. Mr Marshall’s findings were presented at the 26 June Te Maru o Kaituna workshop. Mr Marshall’s report concludes Proposed Change 5:

· Appropriately amends the RPS as the RMA instrument to which regional and district plans must give effect to:

· Strongly reflects the intent and wording of Kaituna, he taonga tuku iho in introducing new objectives, policies and methods to the RPS;

· Appropriately amends and includes existing policies and methods within the RPS to address the new objectives;

· Provides effective monitored mechanisms for implementation; and

· Addresses the resource management issues within the catchment in order to achieve the purpose of the RMA.

Mr Marshall makes one recommended amendment to Policy KR 5B(a) to delete the word ‘consented’. It is unclear what the policy means by the use of the term ‘consented activities’ although it is acknowledged these words originate from the Kaituna River Document. Te Maru members supported this recommendation. Staff concur as paragraph (a) would be limited only to existing consented activities which significantly narrows its application.

In summary, staff recommend amending Policy KR 5B(a) by deleting the word ‘consented’ to read as follows:

Policy KR 5B: Enhancing the mauri of the Kaituna River through improved land management practices

Enhance the mauri of the Kaituna River by ensuring rural production, commercial and industrial activities minimise nutrient losses by implementing best management practices including:

(a) Ensuring ~~consented~~ activities are managed to maintain or enhance the River’s ecological and cultural health;

(b) Promoting industry incentives and leadership; and

(c) Promoting the integration of kaitiakitanga and rangatiratanga into land use management, river access and cultural heritage protection in specified locations.

Explanation ….

2.2 Te Maru o Kaituna Feedback

The following sections summarise amendments sought by Te Maru o Kaituna members at their 26 June workshop and staff recommendations made in response.

2.2.1 Protection and Proposed Change 5 Objectives 40 and 42

Te Maru o Kaituna members discussed why the word ‘protected’ was not carried over from Objective 1 in the Kaituna River Document to its equivalent Objective 40 in the Proposed Change 5 to the RPS. Iwi members felt strongly the word ‘protect’ should form part of Objective 40. Similarly Te Maru o Kaituna iwi members have requested Objective 42 include the word ‘protect’ consistent with its equivalent Objective 4 in the Kaituna River Document.

Staff anticipate the NPSFM 2020 (yet to be gazetted) will set a hierarchy of obligations in which the wellbeing of water bodies must be provided for first, then the essential human needs to people and then other values and uses. Use of a “protect policy” for all tangata whenua and recreational values would be inconsistent with this.

As currently drafted both Objectives 40 and 42 instead use the term ‘provided for’ and ‘provide for’ respectively. In terms of Objective 40, which addresses Māori culture and traditions, the proposed wording aligns with section 6(e) of the Act. It is a matter of national importance to recognise and provide for the relationship of Māori and that of the culture and traditions with their ancestral lands, waahi tapu, sites and other taonga. To this end, the word ‘provide for’ is considered appropriate in an RMA context.

It should be noted that Objectives 45 and 46 both retain use of the term ‘protection’ consistent with the intent of wording in their equivalent Objectives 7 and 8 in the Kaituna River Document. Objective 45 relates to the protection of indigenous vegetation and habitats. In the context of the RMA section 6(c) also uses the term protection in association with indigenous ecosystems. Protection is therefore considered appropriate in this context.

Objective 46 concerns Te Maru o Kaituna collaborating iwi and the wider community to enable environmental, economic, social, educational and cultural aspirations for the restoration, protection and enhancement of the Kaituna River. The desired outcomes linked to Objective 8 of the Kaituna River Document revolve around enabling economic development opportunities and recreational activities. Use of the word protection is also considered appropriate in this context.

In summary, staff recommend not amending Objectives 40 and 42 to include ‘protect’.

2.2.2 Te Mana o te Wai and Objectives 40 and 41

Te Maru o Kaituna members discussed the NPSFM Te Mana o te Wai framework. Following discussion and debate Te Maru o Kaituna members agreed to seek Strategy and Policy Committee approval of the following amendments to Objectives 40 and 41:

Objective 40

The traditional and contemporary relationships that iwi and hapū have with the Kaituna River are recognised and provided for and protected in accordance with Te Mana o te Wai.

Objective 41

Water quality and the mauri of the water in the Kaituna River and its tributaries is restored to a healthy state which meets agreed standards including Te Mana o te Wai.

At the earlier Strategy and Policy Committee workshop on 5 May 2020 Councillors also queried whether Proposed Change 5 should include provision for the NPSFM Te Mana o te Wai framework. Staff’s position then and now remains unchanged. The Kaituna River Document forms the basis for ‘recognising and providing for the vision, objectives and desired outcomes’ in Proposed Change 5. Given the Kaituna River Document is silent on Te Mana o te Wai legally there is no basis for embedding it into Proposed Change 5.

At the time of preparing this report there remains uncertainty about the details of how the NPSFM Te Mana o te Wai requirements will change and need to be given effect to by the RPS and Regional Natural Resources Plan (RNRP). Cabinet papers and central government’s summary of decisions endorse strengthening and clarifying Te Mana o te Wai as the basis for the new NPS-FM by requiring freshwater management to prioritise the health and well-being of water bodies, then the essential needs of people, and then social, economic and cultural wellbeing. If the Committee are resolute that Proposed Change 5 should provide for Te Mana o te Wai staff recommend exercising caution until there is certainty in terms of the NPSFM requirements and the interface with other RPS objectives and policies for Te Mana o te Wai that may be required.

Until such time there is potential to confuse ‘recognising and providing for the Kaituna River Document’ with implementing the ‘NPSFM’ which are entirely different processes. Referencing Te Mana o te Wai in Proposed Change 5 could risk watering down the mana of the Kaituna River Document to wherever associated community discussion and implementation lands at the region wide or catchment level.

In the meantime an alternative option could involve developing additional wording within the introductory Kaituna River section 2.12.3. This could involve strengthening the connection to the hierarchy of Te Mana o te Wai obligations to clarify the priority should be to the health and well-being of Kaituna River itself over other uses. By way of example the following paragraph could be inserted after the fifth paragraph:

Te Maru of Kaituna strongly support recognising “Te Mana o te Wai - the mana of the water”, by providing for the fundamental value of water and the importance of prioritising the health and wellbeing of water before providing for human needs and wants. In doing so the hierarchy of obligations is to water bodies first, then peoples’ essential needs and finally for other uses.

Again caution should be exercised as we are still awaiting the final gazetted NPSFM and the above text would need to be reviewed to ensure consistency with it.

In summary, staff recommend retaining Objectives 40 and 42 unchanged. If the Committee support making provision for Te Mana o te Wai staff recommend inserting the suggested paragraph above into the introductory section 2.12.3.

2.2.3 Policy KR 1B

Te Maru o Kaituna members have requested amending paragraph (d) of Policy KR 1B to replace ‘Exchange of’ with ‘Develop share and apply traditional knowledge’ to read:

Policy KR 1B: Recognise and provide for traditional and contemporary iwi and hapū relationships with Kaituna River

Recognise and provide for traditional and contemporary iwi and hapū relationships with the Kaituna River through the:

(a) Provision of tangata whenua access to sites of cultural significance

(b) Establishment of pou and other appropriate cultural markers

(d) Development, sharing and application of traditional knowledge, ~~Exchange of~~ environmental research and monitoring information; and

(e) Recognition of iwi and hapū resource management plans in the management of land uses, river access and cultural heritage protection.

Staff consider the proposed amendments better clarify the intent of the policy and support the requested amendment.

In summary, staff recommend amending paragraph (d) of Policy KR 1B by replacing ‘Exchange of’ with ‘Develop, share and apply traditional knowledge,’.

2.3 Internal Staff Feedback

As part of the process of preparing the section 32 evaluation a number of information requests were made to various internal specialist staff. For example request was made with respect to the quality of information Regional Council holds on the extent of wetlands, aquatic ecosystems and riparian margins in the Kaituna River catchment. The primary purpose is to ensure there is or will be sufficient information available to evaluate achievement of proposed objectives when a review is required to be undertaken. In responding to this request Science staff have suggested amending draft Objective 45 to clarify its intent. Following further discussions staff recommend amending Objective 45 to read:

Objective 45

The restoration, protection and enhancement of Kaituna River’s wetlands, aquatic and riparian ecosystems ~~health and habitats~~ that support indigenous ~~vegetation and~~ species.

Use of term “ecosystem health” implies there are specific metrics to calculate this. While this is correct for invertebrate communities (the MCI score), fish communities (the Fish_IBI score), and wetlands (the Wetland Condition Index), there is no specific metrics to measure the “health” of riparian systems. Furthermore there is the challenge of deciding how to define a “successful” enhancement. In theory this could be achieved by setting a defined numerical objective to evaluate whether any enhancement activities have their desired effect. More recently ecological models have been created predicting MCI scores in the absence of human activity. So it may be possibly to define a desired state as some percentage deviation from this defined reference state. The Fish_IBI score could also be used to set defined numerical objectives, as this score inherently ranks sites by assessing what fish are present at a specific site with what fish are predicted to be present at that elevation and distance to sea.

Despite these suggested amendments the ability to robustly and accurately measure achievement of Objective 45 will always be challenging as it relies on better science and understanding the cause and effect linkages of condition state changes of certain indigenous species.

In summary, staff recommend amending Objective 45 as set out above to better clarify its intent and evaluation.

2.4 Section 32 evaluation report

Regional Council is required by Clause 5 of Schedule 1 to the RMA to approve the Section 32 evaluation and make the report publicly available when Proposed Change 5 is publicly notified. The section 32 evaluation sets out the background to the preparation of Proposed Change 5. It reports the evaluation of Proposed Change 5 as required by section 32 of the RMA. It is this report that Council, must have particular regard to when deciding whether to proceed with and publicly notify Proposed Change 5.

Draft Proposed Change 5 is being assessed in accordance with section 32 of the RMA, including an evaluation of options to the change and their costs and benefits. A draft Section 32 Evaluation report has been prepared and is being continually refined through the policy development process.

As part of the due diligence process the section 32 evaluation report and Proposed Change 5 will be legally reviewed prior to seeking Council approval to notify for public submissions.

3. Considerations

3.1 Risks and Mitigations

There are no significant risks associated with Proposed Change 5. Regional Council must progress the change to meet its obligations under the Tapuika Claims Settlement Act 2014. There is an expectation Council will act in accordance with the Treaty of Waitangi principles of ‘good faith’ and ‘partnership’ by continuing to progress Proposed Change 5 without delay. Legal due diligence will occur during November to ensure the contents are legally sound and defensible. This report seeks Committee approval of revised project timeframes and process as set out in part 4 ‘Next Steps’. Proposed Change 5 is tracking behind schedule. Council’s Long-Term Plan committed funding to progress this change in the 2017/18 and 2018/19 financial years. The project timeframes approved on 30 October 2018 foreshadowed the schedule 1 submission process commencing in October 2019. Te Maru o Kaituna needed time to develop Kaituna He Taonga Tuku Iho (Kaituna River Document) which came into effect 1 August 2018 and the following Te Tini a Tuna (Kaituna River Action Plan) which was finalised early 2020. Te Maru o Kaituna prioritised the action plan before the development of the Regional Policy Statement change. Other risks concerning NPSFM mis-alignment can be carefully managed until there is certainty concerning its content and policy direction.

3.2 Climate Change

Proposed Change 5 seeks to recognise and provide for the vision, objectives and desired outcomes of Kaituna, he taonga tuku iho. Its contents and scope is therefore constrained by the Kaituna River Document which doesn’t specifically mention climate change implications. Regardless, the existing RPS provisions, in addition to those in Proposed Change 5, will continue to apply to the Kaituna River Catchment. To that end, RPS Policy NH 11B ‘Providing for climate change’ and Policy IR 2B ‘Having regard to the likely effects of climate change’ will continue to apply to the Kaituna River and its tributaries.

3.3 Implications for Māori

Proposed Change 5 (Kaituna River) is the second RPS treaty co-governance change. It has significant implications for Tapuika iwi in particular as it gives effect to their treaty settlement legislation and strategic cultural aspirations. It also has cultural significance to other Te Maru o Kaituna iwi members namely Ngāti Pikiao, Ngāti Whakaue, Waitaha and Ngāti Rangiwewehi. Kaituna is considered a tupuna and is revered as a living entity.

Statutory acknowledgements exist along the Kaituna River and its tributaries that recognises the mana of and particularly the cultural, spiritual, historical and traditional associations Waitaha, Tapuika and Ngāti Rangiwewehi have in relation to these specified areas. There are also numerous sites of significance to Māori within and adjacent the Kaituna River and its tributaries many of which are described in rich detail in iwi and hapū resource management plans and the aforementioned statutory acknowledgements.

Proposed Change 5 is intended to enshrine the vision, objectives and desired outcomes of the Kaituna River Document within the RPS. Iwi and hapū have high aspirations in terms of the practical effect of Proposed Change 5. District and regional plans will need to give effect to, and resource consents decision making processes will need to have regard to, the Regional Policy Statement policy framework.

3.4 Community Engagement

CONSULT

Whakauiuia

To obtain input or feedback from affected communities about our analysis, alternatives, and /or proposed decisions.

RPS Policy IR 4B ‘Using consultation in the identification and resolution of resource management issues’ seeks to encourage timely exchange, consideration of, and response to, relevant information by all parties with an interest in the resolution of a resource management issue by:

a) Consulting as widely as practicable in the preparation, implementation and review of policy statements and plans;

b) Consulting all potentially affected parties and interest groups in the planning, implementation and review of councils’ own operational activities in relation to the use, development and protection of natural and physical resources; and

c) Encouraging all parties undertaking resource use, development and protection activities to consult with others who may be affected.

To give effect to Policy IR 4B a project plan and communications and engagement plan was prepared and approved by management. The project involves five stages being:

1. Project plan and communications and engagement plan

2. Prepare Draft Proposed Change 5 policy framework

3. Draft Proposed Change 5 consultation

4. Finalise Proposed Change 5; and

5. Council approves Proposed Change 5.

To date engagement on Proposed Change 5 has been limited to internal Toi Moana staff and reporting/workshopping with the Strategy and Policy Committee and Te Maru o Kaituna members. Subject to the Committee endorsing the staff recommendations herein, including the revised Proposed Change 5 policy framework, updated project timeframes, and process proposed herewith, staff will move to Stage 3 of the project. This will involve commencing external consultation including with persons who commented on the Kaituna River document.

The project plan and communication and engagement plan covers all steps up until the point of public notification. Both plans were previously reported to the 18 February 2020 Strategy and Policy Committee meeting. After public notification the process under Schedule 1 to the Resource Management Act 1991 takes effect. The Schedule 1 process includes submissions, further submissions, hearings, deliberations, Council decisions and any appeals.

Change 3 (Rangitāiki River) to the RPS took just over three years from initial project planning and policy drafting to making it operative. Proposed Change 5 officially kicked off at the beginning of 2020 and should involve a similar timeframe.

3.5 Financial Implications

There are no material unbudgeted financial implications and this fits within the allocated budget. The cost of developing Proposed Change 5 is budgeted in the Long Term Plan 2018-2028 within the Regional Planning activity. Work to date has involved staff time preparing the project plan and communications/engagement plan and draft policy framework, carrying out internal staff consultation, reporting to and workshopping with the Strategy and Policy Committee and Te Maru o Kaituna members. The 2020/21 budget for the overall RPS programme is $221,301. There are no material unbudgeted financial implications and Proposed Change 5 fits within the allocated budget.

4. Next Steps

Subject to the Committee’s approval staff propose opening Draft Proposed Change 5 up for broader community, iwi/hapū and stakeholder consultation during August through to mid-October. Persons/groups who commented on the draft Kaituna River Document will be invited to comment on the draft policy framework.

Staff propose reporting feedback received to the Te Maru o Kaituna meeting on the 27 November. Staff will then report up to the Council meeting on the 17 December seeking approval to notify Proposed Change 5 for public submissions.

Subject to Council approval the formal Schedule 1 submissions process will be initiated at the beginning of February 2021. A tentative revised timeframe is provided below.

Timeframe	Action
18 August 2020	Persons who commented on the Kaituna River Document, iwi and hapu are invited to provide comment on Proposed Change 5.
18 August – 16 October 2020	Broader iwi, stakeholder and community consultation
27 November	Regional Council staff report to Te Maru o Kaituna members feedback received during consultation
17 December 2020	Council consider: 1. consultation feedback 2. staff recommendations in response to feedback 3. revised Proposed Change 5 policy framework 4. section 32 evaluation 5. legal review Council approve Proposed Change 5 for public notification for submissions
2 February 2021	Formal notification of Proposed Change 5 Schedule 1 submissions process commences.

Attachments

Attachment 1 - Draft Proposed Change 5 (Kaituna River) to the Bay of Plenty Regional Policy Statement ⇩



Report To:	Strategy and Policy Committee
Meeting Date:	11 August 2020
Report Writer:	Santiago Bermeo, Senior Planner and Sandra Barns, Economist
Report Authoriser:	Namouta Poutasi, General Manager, Strategy & Science
Purpose:	Outline a proposal to use voluntary targeted rates for energy efficiency, and seek your general feedback on this other potential initiatives to reduce regional emissions.

Transitioning to lower emissions and energy efficiency

Executive Summary

One of BOPRC’s Strategic Priorities is to facilitate a transition to a low-emissions economy in the Bay of Plenty or, in other words, to reduce regional emissions.

StatsNZ estimates that in 2018, the Bay of Plenty region emitted 3.35m tonnes of CO₂-equivalents (gross), 12% more than it did in 2007. A proportion of regional emissions are due to electricity use, given that not all electricity delivered through the national grid is generated from renewable sources, particularly during peak demand.

This paper outlines and seeks your feedback on a proposal for possible inclusion in the Long Term Plan 2021-31 (LTP). The proposal is to use small-scale loans (via voluntary targeted rates) to encourage householders to adopt a range of energy efficiency initiatives (i.e. solar power generation, solar hot water, insulation and/or clean home heating). This would effectively be an extension of the successful Rotorua Hot Swaps Programme aimed at insulation and clean home heating to improve air quality. It is anticipated that this proposal would result in other social and economic benefits, in addition to emission reductions. As part of LTP development, this would be considered against other potential initiatives to fund. The proposal is set out in more detail in Appendix 1.

In addition, staff seek your initial feedback on a range of other potential initiatives listed in Appendix 2 to further help in the transition to lower emissions.

Both of these topics are presented here as think pieces and, subject to your feedback, staff would develop initiatives in more detail for consideration within the LTP. The first opportunity for Councillors to consider this in that context is at the LTP workshop on 12 August 2020.

Recommendations

That the Strategy and Policy Committee:

1 Receives the report, Transitioning to lower emissions and energy efficiency.

2 Notes, and provides feedback on, the proposed use of voluntary targeted rates to encourage energy efficiency.

3 Notes, and provides feedback on, other potential initiatives that staff could consider in more detail.

4 Notes that, subject to your feedback, these initiatives would be developed in more detail and considered against other initiatives and priorities during the development of the Long Term Plan 2021-31.

1. Introduction

On 25 June 2020, the Strategy & Policy Committee approved a new strategic framework and direction, which includes, among others, a new priority to facilitate a transition to a low-emissions economy. This is consistent with national efforts to reduce emissions under the Climate Change Response (Zero Carbon) Amendment Act 2019 (‘the Zero Carbon Act’), and in turn global efforts to limit average temperate increases to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels under the Paris Agreement.

While there is no universal definition for a low-emissions economy, BOPRC’s working definition is an economy in which net greenhouse gas emissions are continually decreasing, consistent with the transition to a carbon-neutral economy by 2050. In turn, a carbon-neutral economy is defined in the Zero Carbon Act as net zero emissions of carbon dioxide (CO₂) and nitrous oxide (N₂0), and biogenic methane (CH₄) emissions between 24% and 47% lower than their 2017 baseline level.

StatsNZ recently released estimates of regional emissions. Figure 1 and Figure 2 summarise these estimates for the Bay of Plenty.

Figure 1 –Regional gross emission estimates for the Bay of Plenty by industry, 2018 (StatsNZ)

Figure 2 - Regional gross emission estimates for the Bay of Plenty by source, 2007-2018 (StatsNZ)

The estimate for 2018 of 3.35m tonnes of CO₂-equivalents shows that the Bay of Plenty is the 10^th largest regional emitter, accounting for 4.3% of national emissions. This is equivalent to 11 tonnes emitted per person. In comparison, the Bay of Plenty generates 5.6% of the national GDP0F0F^{^[1]}

However, Bay of Plenty’s emissions increased by 12% between 2007 and 2018, the largest increase of the five regions where emissions actually increased over that period. Big drivers behind that increase were economic and population growth, which for the Bay of Plenty were also among the highest rates in the country over that period.

The proposal and initiatives presented in this paper are possible strategies to reduce regional emissions, particularly those associated with energy use.

1.1 Alignment with Strategic Framework

A Healthy Environment	We develop and implement regional plans and policy to protect our natural environment.
A Vibrant Region	We work with and connect the right people to create a prosperous region and economy.
The Way We Work	We continually seek opportunities to innovate and improve.

As described above, this proposal would directly support the strategic priority to help facilitate a transition to a low-emissions economy. It may also support the strategic priority to help the region recover from COVID-19 while delivering lasting well-being benefits for the community, by generating employment and economic activity, and improving health outcomes.

It is widely recognised that the recovery from COVID-19 presents a great opportunity to address longstanding environmental issues, and to make significant progress in the transition to a low-emissions, circular and fairer economy.

1.1.1 Community Well-beings Assessment

Dominant Well-Beings Affected

þ Environmental

Medium - Positive

¨ Cultural

þ Social

Medium - Positive

þ Economic

Low - Positive

The proposed initiatives would help the region to reduce its emissions, in support of national obligations under the Zero Carbon Act. Furthermore, the proposed energy efficiency initiatives would have additional benefits in terms of improving air quality, significantly enhancing health outcomes and potentially creating additional employment and economic activity.

2. Proposal

2.1 Voluntary targeted rate for energy efficiency initiatives

BOPRC uses small-scale loans (via a voluntary targeted rates [VTRs] mechanism) in the successful Hot Swaps Programme in Rotorua. The aim of the Programme, which has been in place for 10 years, is to encourage house-owners (including landlords) to insulate their homes and replace inefficient wood burners with efficient heating alternatives. The Programme has resulted in more than 2,000 inefficient wood burners and open fires being replaced with more efficient alternatives. The programme has provided over $5 million worth of preferential-interest loans, repaid through VTRs.

It is estimated that emissions amounting to more than 3,500 tonnes of CO₂ equivalents per year would have been avoided as a result of the Programme1F1F^{^[2]} Other significant benefits include improved air quality and health outcomes in the Rotorua area. This is a successful example of impact investment.

The proposal (set out in more detail in Appendix 1) is to effectively extend the application of this model beyond the Rotorua area, and to cover some or all of the following energy efficiency initiatives:

§ solar generation

§ solar hot water

§ home insulation

§ clean home heating

These initiatives either directly contribute to electricity generation, or provide an indirect benefit by increasing electricity use efficiency. The appended discussion paper describes the benefits and costs of each of the four initiatives evaluated, including their potential to reduce emissions.

The use of VTRs for this purpose is an innovative approach with wide applicability to encourage behaviour change. Other Councils (including ECan and HBRC) also have similar schemes to that proposed. HBRC also uses VTRs for other purposes including emergency preparedness by funding household water storage.

Staff seek your initial feedback on this proposal, noting it will be considered along with other priorities and initiatives in the context of developing the LTP 2021-31.

2.2 Other potential initiatives

Appendix 2 lists a non-exclusive range of other possible initiatives for how BOPRC could assist in this transition. Some of these initiatives – and the scope for wider consideration of Council’s functions - will be discussed in more detail at the 12 August 2020 LTP workshop (e.g. Public Transport and Urban Form, Regional Recovery, Climate Change). Others are only identified here as potential opportunities, and no detailed analysis of them has been carried out to date.

While currently there are no specific national or international obligations, regarding circularity in resource use (or to transition to a “circular economy”2F2F^{^[3]}), it is widely recognised that this will be increasingly necessary to reduce emissions and to achieve multiple other outcomes (e.g. reduce biodiversity loss).

The key to increasing circularity in resource use is finding value in waste, or in designing waste out of production3F3F^{^[4]} This would be very much industry and even business-specific. This highlights that there are no silver bullets or ‘one-size-fits-all’ solutions to reducing emissions, waste and resource use. Consequently, it may be necessary to test a range of ideas, such those listed in Appendix 2, in more detail.

Bearing this in mind, many of the ideas listed in Appendix 2 will initially require feasibility studies or industry-led exploration of such solutions. The X-Labs Circular Economy Workshops could be a cost-effective way for willing businesses to do this in a facilitated way, with BOPRC support. An initial set of workshops could effectively be a pilot for rolling out this approach more broadly.

Staff would welcome your feedback on which initiatives warrant further investigation for possible inclusion in the LTP 2021-31.

3. Considerations

3.1 Risks and Mitigations

Risks and mitigations would be considered in more detail as proposals are developed further, subject to your initial feedback. However, please refer to Appendix 1 for the analysis carried out to date in relation to VTRs.

The main risk with innovative ideas is failure to meet intended outcomes or inefficient use of resources. The VTR model has already proven to be successful in the Hot Swaps Programme and other regions that are using it. Lessons learned from these experiences would be applied. In relation to other potential initiatives, it is acknowledged these will require significant due diligence and feasibility assessment before they can be progressed.

3.2 Climate Change

Mitigation			Adaptation
Reduce GHG emissions	Produce GHG emissions	Sequester carbon	Anticipate climate change impacts	Respond to climate change impacts
☒	☐	☐	☒	☐

The main aim of this proposal is to reduce GHG emissions. By increasing self-sufficiency in local generating capacity, the option to increase solar power generation can also be considered a form of adaptation (e.g. to climate-related hazards that may affect the national grid).

Please refer to the relevant analysis in Appendix 1 for more detailed estimates of emission reductions.

3.3 Implications for Māori

Crtl + click for Guideline material.

Please refer to the relevant analysis in Appendix 1 for more detail.

As noted therein, Māori generally have poorer health outcomes related to poor household heating and insulation. The proposed energy efficiency initiatives for efficient heating and insulation would make it easier for Māori householders to address these issues. Furthermore, there is the option to target the proposal in more deprived areas of the region, such as Papakāinga for example.

In terms of other potential initiatives to assist in the transition to low emissions, it is widely recognised that the transition must be fair and equitable. Inclusion of Māori in the transition, and the implementation of any initiatives that are eventually taken forward, would be critical to ensure fairness and equity.

3.4 Community Engagement

Consider identifying in the report:

CONSULT

Whakauiuia

To obtain input or feedback from affected communities about our analysis, alternatives, and /or proposed decisions.

This paper has not been informed by community consultation to date. However, subject to your feedback, this will be considered as part of developing the LTP so community consultation on initiatives would occur as part of that process.

Staff are also cognisant of other community and stakeholder initiatives that may be complementary. This includes, for example, the Bay of Connections Transitions Plan. Staff would engage with specific stakeholders in the development of the initiatives to avoid duplication of effort.

3.5 Financial Implications

Please refer to the relevant analysis in Appendix 1 for more detail.

At this stage, the proposal does not have any financial implications. Further development and investigation of the initiatives suggested here can be conducted within existing budgets, subject to your feedback, to feed into LTP development.

The financial implications of any initiatives that are eventually progressed will be considered in more detail in the context of the LTP 2021-31. As described in Appendix 1, VTRs are cost neutral, although there are some administration costs involved.

4. Next Steps

Subject to your feedback, staff would develop in more detail the proposal to use VTRs to encourage uptake of energy efficiency initiatives, for consideration within the LTP 2021-31. Likewise, subject to your feedback, staff would consider other potential initiatives in more detail for the same purpose.

Councillors will also have an opportunity to discuss these and other initiatives at LTP workshops in August, October and November 2020. Subject to any initial feedback, later workshops will provide opportunities for Councillors to consider more developed concrete options and approve final proposals for consultation. This is summarised in the timeline below.

Attachments

Attachment 1 - Small scale loans for energy efficiency: voluntary targeted rates ⇩

Attachment 2 - Possible initiatives to assist in the transition to a low-emissions and circular economy ⇩



Report To:	Strategy and Policy Committee
Meeting Date:	11 August 2020
Report Writer:	Helen Creagh, Rotorua Catchments Manager
Report Authoriser:	Chris Ingle, General Manager, Integrated Catchments
Purpose:	To provide a summary of the refreshed approach that will be used for reporting water quality within the Rotorua Te Arawa Lakes.

Lake Water Quality Reporting Update

Executive Summary

This report responds to a request of Councillors at the wrap-up of the Regional Direction and Delivery Committee last triennium, and now an ongoing action of the Monitoring and Operations Committee.

The request was for a Councillor briefing (via the Strategy and Policy Committee) relating to Lake Trophic Level Indices (TLI’s) and science in new triennium. Specifically, Councillors sought a refresh of the approach to reporting water quality within the Rotorua Te Arawa lakes, accounting for climate change considerations and better reporting on all of the observed characteristics of lake water quality, rather than just those related to the TLI.

This report summarises the refreshed approach developed by staff, which will be used in the 2019-2020 Annual Report currently being prepared for the Rotorua Te Arawa Lakes Strategy Group and due for presentation to the Minister (in accordance with the Deed of Funding for the Rotorua Te Arawa Lakes Programme) in October this year.

Recommendations

That the Strategy and Policy Committee:

1 Receives the report, Lake Water Quality Reporting Update.

1. Introduction

At the Regional Direction and Delivery Committee at the end of last triennium, Councillors requested staff review the way that lake water quality results are reported and brief Councillors on their findings. This request has remained an open action for staff on the Monitoring and Operations Committee action register. This report outlines the findings of staff.

The Trophic Level Index (TLI) is a best practice science measure for lake water quality, used across New Zealand. It is an index that reflects a combination of four water quality parameters: Nitrogen (TN), Phosphorus (TP), Visual Clarity (secchi disk depth) and algal content (Chlorophyll A). The trophic level of a lake provides a measure of the nutrient status of that body of water, which can change over time due to land and catchment management and other variables (eg climatic changes).

1.1 Legislative Framework

Council is required to collect and present water quality information as part of our obligations under the Resource Management Act, to understand the state of our environment so that we may carry out our statutory roles.

The changes outlined in this report will ensure that we adapt our reporting to account for improved understanding and for better communication of lake water quality. The changes continue to meet our obligations but ensure our commitment to adaption to new information and understanding.

1.2 Alignment with Strategic Framework

A Healthy Environment	Our environmental monitoring is transparently communicated to our communities.
Freshwater for Life	Good decision making is supported through improving knowledge of our water resources.
Safe and Resilient Communities	We provide systems and information to increase understanding of natural hazard risks and climate change impacts.
A Vibrant Region	We contribute to delivering integrated planning and growth management strategies especially for sustainable urban management.
The Way We Work	We use robust information, science and technology.

1.2.1 Community Well-beings Assessment

Dominant Well-Beings Affected

¨ Environmental

Low - Positive

¨ Cultural

Low - Positive

¨ Social

Low - Positive

¨ Economic

Low - Positive

2. Outline of Adapted Reporting Approach

Council members would like to see an update to the way that lake water quality results are reported. There is a concern that often the Trophic Level Index (TLI) reported doesn’t match up to the experience of the lake user or the observed quality of the lake water, e.g. the TLI may be below target but measures such as abundance of koura and water clarity are favourable.

Staff are proposing to make changes to the annual reporting that will provide a broader, more comprehensive picture of the health of each lake. The annual lake water quality reporting is due in September this year, as part of the Rotorua Te Arawa Lakes Programme Annual Report and these results will be presented to Council shortly, along with the Annual Report for the Programme. The changes that staff are working on for this new reporting are as follows:

1. A review of laboratory and analytical processes for lake water quality samples has identified changes that need to be made, particularly to measurements of total phosphorous and the influence on results for lakes with naturally high arsenic from geothermal sources, e.g. Lake Tarawera. The resulting improvements to the laboratory measurements will mean that there is likely to be an improved TLI on Lake Tarawera moving forward (and possibly Rotomahana). Staff are also working on updating previous years TLI’s to reflect this improved analysis and make the data consistent.

2. The TLI will be reported within the margin of error. The TLI has previously been presented as an annual average and each TLI result has a margin of error. Where the error bands span the target lake TLI then this result should be reported as meeting the TLI. In the past where the annual average TLI exceeded the target but the error band spanned the target, this was incorrectly reported as not meeting the TLI.

3. To assist in separating very poor quality lakes from good quality, without the simple pass/fail of the TLI approach, each of the four parts of the TLI will be separately reported, using a visual traffic light style format. The traffic light levels will be based on the NPS-FM water quality bands, and will indicate high or low water quality for each parameter.

4. A more holistic “lake health” report will be included, including reporting on cyano-bacteria monitoring, SPI (submerged plant index) and koura and kakahi monitoring. These are all measures of lake health that that the Regional Council collects and they provide a broad picture of the lake health from different ecological perspectives, that are important to the community.

3. Considerations

3.1 Risks and Mitigations

There are not considered to be any relevant risks and mitigations in updating our reporting approach.

As part of our ongoing commitment to adaptive management, the reporting can also have further additions and changes over time to better meet the requirements of Council and the Programme partnership as required.

3.2 Climate Change

The Water Quality Technical Advisory Group (WQTAG) has completed a Statement on Climate Change, Lakes and Water resources in the Rotorua region. The statement is a summary of a longer paper that will be published by Professor David Hamilton (Griffith University) to support it, available in the near future.

The statement notes that increases in atmospheric CO₂ are responsible for changes in the climate, including rising temperatures and rainfall timing and distribution. This is likely to result in higher intensity rainfall, with associated effects. Communities will need to consider how they adapt in response.

The reality for our lakes is that meeting target TLI measures of water quality will be more challenging and the statement is recommending an approach to anticipatory actions necessary to meet TLI targets in the future. Ongoing adaption by the Programme is necessary to respond to climate change, including the way we collect and report on lake water quality.

3.3 Implications for Māori

The proposed changes to the water quality reporting are focussed on improving the communication of all aspects of lake water quality health important to our community. Critical to this improvement is ensuring the reporting of Mātauranga measures. Koura and kakahi biomass are now proposed to be included in the reporting. The reporting will be added to and adjusted over time as our understanding changes and improves.

3.4 Community Engagement

INFORM

Whakamōhio

To provide affected communities with balanced and objective information to assist them in understanding the problems, alternatives and/or solutions.

The purpose of the lake water science programme is to inform the community of the water quality of our lakes and how that changes over time.

3.5 Financial Implications

There are no material unbudgeted financial implications and this work fits within the allocated budget.

4. Next Steps

The updated approach to lake water quality reporting will be included in the 2019-2020 Annual Report for the Rotorua Te Arawa Lakes Programme. The Annual Report is due to be presented to the Rotorua Te Arawa Lakes Strategy Group in September for approval before it is submitted to the Crown as part of the Deed of Funding for the Lakes. The Annual Report will also be presented to Council.

[1] These estimates are lower than AECOM’s 2015/16 regional carbon footprint estimate of 4m tonnes gross emissions (6m tonnes net emissions due to significant forestry felling that year) due to a number of methodological differences. For example, AECOM’s estimate includes emissions associated with electricity consumed in the region but generated elsewhere, while StatsNZ’s estimate does not include these emissions. There are other significant methodological differences for other emitting sectors too. StatsNZ methodology is consistent with NZ’s GHG inventory used for reporting national emissions under the international climate change framework.

[2] It is inherently difficult to estimate GHG emissions from heating due to the range of variables (e.g. weather, insulation, house size, heating behaviour, fuel type and quality, etc.). Nonetheless, this estimate is based on Hot Swap Programme registry data, average fuel use for home heating in Rotorua reported by Wilton (2005), the Ministry for the Environment’s Measuring Emissions: A Guide for Organisations – 2019 Interactive Workbook and the Running Costs Calculator on EECA’s Energywise website.

[3] A “circular economy” refers to an economy in which “products are designed to last longer, materials are kept in productive uses for as long as possible, and volumes of waste disposed are reduced” (MfE, 2019). This is in contrast to a more “linear” economy in which the flow of resources is more akin to take-make-dispose.

While there are many parallels between the concepts of low-emissions and circular economies, they are not synonyms nor necessarily always consistent with each other. In some cases, recycling or repurposing waste may actually increase emissions. Likewise, certain initiatives to reduce emissions may ultimately result in increased waste. For instance, uncertainties about the battery life of electric vehicles and their replacement costs present risks of future increased waste of vehicles and batteries, unless repurposing opportunities are realised.

[4] A number of studies have highlighted that finding value in waste, or in designing waste out, could result in significant economic benefits too (including employment and GDP growth), which would also support BOPRC’s strategic priority to assist the region to recover from COVID-19.

Chairperson	Cr Paula Thompson
Deputy Chairperson	Cr Stuart Crosby
Members	All Councillors
Quorum	Seven members, consisting of half the number of members
Meeting frequency	Six weekly rotation between committee meetings and strategic sessions