4.1

Strategy and Policy Committee Minutes - 25 June 2024

Resolved

That the Strategy and Policy Committee:

1          Confirms the Strategy and Policy Committee Minutes - 25 June 2024 as a true and correct record.

McDonald/Macmillan

CARRIED

5.1

Operating Environment

Presented by:     Namouta Poutasi – General Manager, Strategy and Science

Stephen Lamb - Natural Resources Policy Manager

Key Points

·           The current operating environment was changing; where there were central government announcements, Bay of Plenty Regional Council Toi Moana (BOPRC) would need more detail to understand implications. 

·           Regarding the recent release of the Cabinet Paper: Local Government Forward Work Programme, what the proposed changes might mean for BOPRC e.g. removal of the four well beings and changes to core services needed further discussion and consideration.

In Response to Questions

·           Staff would be waiting for clear central government direction before presenting any policy recommendations/decisions to Councillors.

·           No criteria/guidance had yet been provided from central government for the “nice to haves”.

·           It was expected that the removal of the four well beings would be included in an amendment bill to the Local Government Act 2002 (LGA) at some point in the future.  It was uncertain how this might play out in terms of consultation.

·           Review of Significant Natural Areas (SNAs) as part of the National Policy Statement for Indigenous Biodiversity (NPSIB) – staff would review the new direction and identify potential implications for BOPRC, liaise with the rest of the regional sector, and then come back to Councillors with submission options of either submit as BOPRC or support a regional sector submission. 

·           Amendments to New Zealand Coastal Policy Statement (NZCPS) –whether/how BOPRC submitted to this would follow the same process as for the review of SNAs.

·           Natural hazard information disclosure – limited legal liability for local authorities meant that if this information was disclosed in Land Information Memorandum Reports (LIMs), there would be no legal come back to BOPRC.

·           It was not yet known if a core service would relate to income or rating.

·           It was not anticipated that there would be a national consenting framework.

·           It was anticipated that the Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA) reform would be significant.

Key Points - Members

·           Needed to continue with informal strategic conversations regarding the central government’s “back to basics” local government work programme.

·           Needed to have clear understanding of what BOPRC believed was a core service and what was not.

·           Needed to be thinking ahead about how BOPRC responded to changes from central government and when.

·           Central government direction regarding core business/removal of the four well beings would not change the values for how we lived - “my people, my culture, my place”.

·           Needed to be focused and strategic with the wording/language used around how BOPRC met government expectations, to better ensure support/funding from central government.

·           There was hope that the local government sector would get the opportunity to provide input.

·           Concern expressed that the Regional and City Deals would be focussed on economic growth and productivity, but the mandate did not feature or include sustainability.

·           Concern/queried the appetite for a Regional Deal.

Resolved

That the Strategy and Policy Committee:

1          Receives the report, Operating Environment.

Thompson/White

CARRIED

5.2

Freshwater Policy Programme:  What's best for the Bay of Plenty

Presentation:      Freshwater Policy Programme - What is best for the Bay of Plenty?: Objective ID A4770096 ⇨  

Presented by:     Namouta Poutasi – General Manager, Strategy and Science

Stephen Lamb – Natural Resources Policy Manager

Nicki Green – Principal Advisor, Policy and Planning

Ella Tennant – Consents Manager

Rob Donald – Science Manager

Kataraina O’Brien – General Manager, Strategic Engagement

Chris Ingle – General Manager, Integrated Catchments

Fiona McTavish – Chief Executive

Key Points

·           Recapped the plan change “why”, and provided on the ground reasons for progressing, including well known regional freshwater issues e.g. degradation in the region’s lakes and estuaries, simplify and clarify On-site Effluent Treatment (OSET) plan and rules, 600 pre RMA consents due to expire in 2026, best use of significant investment to date, more efficient water allocation, more up to date data/science to use, High Court Plan Change 9 (PC9) commitment, to deliver a more efficient, streamlined plan, and to maintain momentum.

·           Provided timeline of project milestones and decisions since it began in 2012.

·           Outlined the options available for progressing the project and presented the assessment of those options.

·            Staff recommendation was for Option 1(a) - to progress, retaining the opportunity of notifying the whole plan change in September 2025 (although this would need to be specifically considered after feedback on the Draft and Discussion Document), with the ability to pivot in response to any national direction change.

·           Outlined the engagement approach – in general, and for farming, and engagement options for both.

·           Proposed an informal Councillor working group to provide advice during development of the farming discussion document and engagement.

In Response to Questions

·            Putting a case to central government for a legislative extension regarding roll over of pre-RMA water take consents had not been explored.  There would be disadvantages for the region’s growth if an extension to the pre-RMA water take consents was implemented as it would mean that paper allocation (where an old consent was held but not used) was not addressed and would prevent other applicants gaining water take consents.

·            Significant changes for municipal wastewater discharge consents had been signalled by central government and more information on this was expected within the next two months.  It was anticipated that the changes would be something entirely new and may simplify the consenting process for municipal wastewater discharge consents.

·            Option 1(a) was the best and most efficient and effective utilisation of investment to date – over $1.7 million in community and tangata whenua engagement over the past three years, and $2.8 million investment in science (including modelling costs) over the last four years.

·            There had been limited information about the likely nature of upcoming changes to the National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management (NPSFM).   It was anticipated that some of the attributes that had been problematic in the current version would be revisited, and the way Te Mana o Te Wai would be amended or changed.  It was also anticipated that renewable energy generation, national infrastructure and farming would be important, and more enabling pathways for the freshwater sustainability would be considered.

·            Option 1(a) had been designed to enable a pivot – could adapt and amend once it was understood what was being proposed. 

·            If Option 1(b) was progressed, it would be difficult to complete required consultation on draft plan change text for farming in time to notify in September 2025.

·            A regional sector approach had been taken in order to coordinate the Freshwater Hearings when they needed to happen.  BOPRC was on the list for notification in September 2025 and it was understood that Freshwater Commissioners would be available at that time for hearings.

·            Water quality improvements would not be achieved in lower lying areas i.e. Kaituna or Rangitāiki, without also addressing the diffuse losses from farming, so at some point those farming provisions would need to be considered and included in the plan change to achieve contaminants reduction.

·            BOPRC had aligned its farming definition with the definition used in the RMA for Freshwater Farm Plans so as to integrate seamlessly with that national approach.  The definition would be included in the draft discussion document so would be transparent and clear.  An error had been noted in the agenda report where it stated that flower growing was excluded from the definition, but was actually specifically included in the RMA definition.

·            There was still value in going out to the farming community with the options BOPRC had come to, and their pros and cons.  Policy direction might change how BOPRC progressed, but the issues of water quality and what to do about it was unlikely to change.  A more “real”, detailed discussion document for the farming sector outlining what the changes would mean for them would elicit feedback, including from their technical advisors, on what they think could be done better – the question being “If not this, then what?” for a regulatory tool.

·           Under Option 2, notification was likely to occur in late 2026 at the earliest, to allow time for new Councillors to be briefed, and would need to occur prior to December 2027.

Comment from the Chief Executive

There was confidence BOPRC could progress with the information to hand on where central government was heading.  They had signalled that they wanted to undertake this work as quickly as possible as certainty was very important for communities, especially for farmers.  BOPRC was not alone in this, many other regional councils were facing the same position. The feedback received through engagement/consultation would inform the plan change as the process moved forward and whether or not BOPRC notified the plan change, and when.  The process could be stopped and started based on what was happening in terms of central government NPSFM direction and BOPRC could adapt and pivot as required.  The engagement was needed to see what would work for this region.  The clear focus for this regional plan change was what was best for the Bay of Plenty.

Key Points - Members

·           Preference was expressed by some that BOPRC should wait for clear direction from central government to avoid the possibly of having to do things twice with the new RMA or NPSFM. 

·           There was concern that the best, most up to date science had not been used for the measurement of water quality and quantity.

·           Option 1(a) - progress and pivot, provided the opportunity to proceed with some of the challenges BOPRC was facing e.g. water degradation, 2026 consents expiring etc, whilst still engaging with the farming sector on a way forward and being able to adapt and pivot to central government direction.

·           Acknowledged it was going to be challenging but doing nothing or waiting had a higher level of risk.  Confident BOPRC could navigate its way through this carefully.

11.07am – Cr Campbell withdrew from the meeting.

·           Needed to stay the course and continue to do what BOPRC was doing, whilst acknowledging the tensions and trade-offs that needed to occur within the region between ecological/environmental and economic outcomes.

·           Some support expressed for Option 1(a) – progress and pivot.

·            There had been push back from the farming community at recent Rivers and Drainage Advisory Forums in terms of the rules and regulations coming towards them.  Considered there was a need to wait until there was certainty from central government. 

·            Some support expressed for Option 2.

·            Some support expressed for Option 1(b) as a compromise between Option 1(a) and Option 2.

Moved

That the Strategy and Policy Committee:

1        Receives the report, Freshwater Policy Programme:  What's best for the Bay of Plenty;

2        Agrees to progress Option 1(a) progress and pivot, which includes:

(a)  Targeted release of the draft Regional Policy Statement change 7 (Freshwater) and draft Regional Natural resources Plan change 19 (Freshwater) for feedback in November and December 2024, excluding farming land use provisions from the draft plan change;

(b)  Targeted release of a discussion document about the options for farming/primary sector land use provisions at the same time;

(c)  Retaining the opportunity of notifying the whole proposed RPS and RNRP change in September 2025;

(d)  Endorses staff preparing for the potential need to pivot to align with any new national direction.

3        Agrees that staff regularly update this committee on emerging national direction so that Council can consider further changes to this programme to ensure it remains fit for purpose and a cost effective approach is maintained;

4        Agrees to staff facilitating an informal Councillor working group to provide advice during development of the farming discussion document and engagement; and

5        Endorses the approach to engagement (Section 3.3) during the targeted stakeholder feedback period.

Macmillan/Iti

An Amendment was then moved.

11.11am – Cr Campbell entered the meeting.

Moved

That the Strategy and Policy Committee:

1        Substitutes Option 1(a) for Option 2 - Defer release of whole plan change.  Aim to release the whole draft plan change in September 2025, subject to clarifying implications of changing national freshwater policy.  Place decision about notification date on hold, for the new Council to make after local government elections in 2025.

Shirley/Winters

A division was called:

For           Chairman Leeder and Crs Scott, Shirley, Von Dadelszen, and Winters

Against    Crs Campbell, Crosby, Iti, Macmillan, McDonald, Nees, Thompson, Thurston and White

The motion was LOST

A further Amendment was then moved.

Moved

That the Strategy and Policy Committee:

1        Receives the report, Freshwater Policy Programme:  What's best for the Bay of Plenty;

2        Option 1(b): Hold back release of draft farming/primary sector land use provisions until February 2025, after the Freshwater Farm Plan regulations are gazetted, and place notification date decision on hold until next year.

(a)  Targeted release of the draft Regional Policy Statement change 7 (Freshwater) and draft Regional Natural resources Plan change 19 (Freshwater) for feedback in November and December 2024, excluding farming land use provisions from the draft plan change;

3          Agrees that staff regularly update this committee on emerging national direction so that Council can consider further changes to this programme to ensure it remains fit for purpose and a cost effective approach is maintained;

4        Agrees to staff facilitating an informal Councillor working group to provide advice during development of the farming discussion document and engagement; and

5        Endorses the approach to engagement (Section 3.3) during the targeted stakeholder feedback period.

von Dadelszen/Winters

A division was called:

For           Chairman Leeder and Crs Scott, Shirley, Von Dadelszen, and Winters

Against    Crs Campbell, Crosby, Iti, Macmillan, McDonald, Nees, Thompson, Thurston and White

The motion was LOST

The original motion was then put.

Resolved

That the Strategy and Policy Committee:

1        Receives the report, Freshwater Policy Programme:  What's best for the Bay of Plenty;

2          Agrees to progress Option 1(a) progress and pivot, which includes:

(a)   Targeted release of the draft Regional Policy Statement change 7 (Freshwater) and draft Regional Natural resources Plan change 19 (Freshwater) for feedback in November and December 2024, excluding farming land use provisions from the draft plan change;

(b)  Targeted release of a discussion document about the options for farming/primary sector land use provisions at the same time;

(c)   Retaining the opportunity of notifying the whole proposed RPS and RNRP change in September 2025;

(d)  Endorses staff preparing for the potential need to pivot to align with any new national direction.

3          Agrees that staff regularly update this committee on emerging national direction so that Council can consider further changes to this programme to ensure it remains fit for purpose and a cost effective approach is maintained;

4          Agrees to staff facilitating an informal Councillor working group to provide advice during development of the farming discussion document and engagement; and

5          Endorses the approach to engagement (Section 3.3) during the targeted stakeholder feedback period.

Macmillan/Iti

A division was called:

For           Crs Campbell, Crosby, Iti, Macmillan, McDonald, Nees, Scott, Thompson, Thurston and White

Against   Chairman Leeder and Crs Shirley, Von Dadelszen, and Winters

The motion was carried

5.3

Plan Change 11 Geothermal: Draft for consultation

Presentation:      PC 11 Geothermal: Objective ID A4770099 ⇨  

Presented by:     Freya Camburn - Senior Policy Analyst

Elsa Weir – Senior Planner Freya Camburn

Penny Doorman - Programme Leader Geothermal

12.08pm – Crs Shirley and Iti entered the meeting.

12.10pm – Chairman Leeder entered the meeting.

Key Points

·           The release of the Plan Change 11 (PC11) draft was a significant milestone for BOPRC and the critical next step in a key project. It articulated BOPRC’s geothermal management approach and enabled feedback from the community on this prior to notification of a proposed plan.

·           If approved for release, outlined the next steps with key timeframes.

In Response to Questions

·           The draft plan change to the Regional Natural Resources Plan (RNRP) going out for consultation with an additional management group would be inconsistent with the Regional Policy Statement (RPS) and require a minor amendment to the RPS if this approach was carried through to notification of a proposed plan.  As this was a draft being released any inconsistency was not legally problematic.  The draft was not a requirement but was good practice and provided an opportunity to test BOPRC’s management intent.

·           BOPRC’s Geothermal Team were working closely with the Freshwater Team to achieve an integrated approach. 

·           The RPS required that Geothermal System Management Plans (SMPs) were developed for Rotorua, Tauranga and Kawerau as a minimum.  The SMPs were an operational document and were not intended to contain regulatory policies or rules; it provided operational guidance and assisted  with the implementation of a regional plan.  SMPs were developed before the plan changes. 

·           The draft Tauranga Geothermal SMP was an important step to engage with the Tauranga community about how BOPRC managed the low temperature geothermal system e.g. how BOPRC might consider takes and re-injection, which would then inform and provide some of the evidence base for the freshwater plan change provisions.

·           The Tauranga Geothermal SMP was not engaging on specific freshwater rules and provisions.  This would be made clear in the engagement documentation. 

·           Reference to specific freshwater policies in the geothermal plan change would also be removed to avoid confusion.

·           There was risk in delaying the consultation on the draft plan change and Tauranga Geothermal SMP and going out at same time as freshwater; geothermal could get lost in the mix.  Staff would continue to liaise and work closely with the Freshwater team to ensure referencing/messaging was consistent.

·           Tauranga geothermal had a small targeted community of interest.

·           Engagement offers to iwi/hapū on Tauranga geothermal had little uptake to date.  It was hoped that engagement would pick up with the release of the draft Tauranga Geothermal SMP for consultation.

·           The draft document would be reviewed by a document specialist and internally reviewed before it went out for consultation.

12.28pm – Chairman Leeder .withdrew from the meeting.

12.32pm – Chairman Leeder entered the meeting

Key Points - Members

·           Suggested the need to slow down and wait until freshwater provisions were out first.

·           Considered that the Rotorua Geothermal SMP could not be compared with the Tauranga Geothermal SMP as they were completely different.

·           Staff were encouraged to connect with Māori Land Trusts who actually owned the land in the geothermal area, rather than iwi/hapū.

·           Endorsed the need to communicate with Māori Land Trusts e.g. Taheke 8C, a critical barometer for how geothermal was used from an energy development point of view as it had been going for a long time and was a proven field, and offered to assist with making those connections for this consultation process.

·           Acknowledged the work that had been undertaken over the years and congratulated staff on reaching this milestone.

Resolved

That the Strategy and Policy Committee:

1          Receives the report, Plan Change 11 Geothermal: Draft for consultation;

2          Approves the release of Plan Change 11 Geothermal: Draft for consultation; and

3          Delegates to the General Manager, Strategy and Science the authority to approve any minor changes, including grammatical and formatting, to the Draft Plan Change 11 Geothermal prior to its release for consultation.

Macmillan/Crosby

CARRIED

5.4

Tauranga Geothermal System Management Plan

Presentation:      Tauranga System Management Plan: Objective ID A4770386 ⇨  

Presented by:     Penny Doorman - Programme Leader Geothermal

Freya Camburn - Senior Policy Analyst

Georgia Thompson - Planner

Key Points

·           Provided overview of the work undertaken to date on the draft Tauranga Geothermal SMP.

·           The draft Tauranga Geothermal SMP was an operational document and was not intended to contain regulatory policies or rules but would inform the freshwater provisions going forward.

·           Outlined the form and structure of the draft Tauranga Geothermal SMP and the broad approach taken (similar to the approach taken for the Rotorua Geothermal SMP).

·           The draft Tauranga Geothermal SMP would be supported by specific guidelines to assist consent applicants and BOPRC consents staff.

·           It was critical that tangata whenua views and guidance were obtained to better understand what mauri looked like for tangata whenua in Tauranga Moana.

·           Outlined the next steps and associated timeframes.

In Response to Questions

·           There were 130 consents in the affected area and staff would be liaising directly with all of them.

·           All geothermal takes were consented (over 30 degrees).  There were permitted standards for non-geothermal takes (under 30 degrees).  Looking at more compliance on takes that sat close to, or were marginally below the 30 degrees threshold.

·           Regarding the proposed requirement for treatment and filtration of discharges for takes that were used for bathing, the draft Tauranga Geothermal SMP was seeking feedback on preferred discharge options, including treatment through filtration of bathed in water.  The differences to Rotorua were noted, where the draft Tauranga Geothermal SMP promoted a move from discharging bathed in water to the sewer to treating and re-injecting it.  The provisions for dealing with bathed in freshwater followed permitted activity standards and these may also be appropriate for geothermal takes as well. 

·           The different rules for geothermal water takes, as opposed to the freshwater water take provisions, may need to be considered for the draft Tauranga Geothermal SMP e.g. permitted activities for low temperature geothermal, and would be dependent of the temperature of the water and the scale of the take.

·           Suggested that an alternative name be considered for the Tauranga Geothermal SMP as the majority of the bores were actually in the Western Bay of Plenty.  This would be considered and could be included as a question in the consultation document.

·           Separate consents would be required for putting down a bore and a geothermal water take.  The possibility of a package deal would be investigated.

Key Points - Members

·           Needed to include geothermal in the title consistently.

Resolved

That the Strategy and Policy Committee:

1          Receives the report, Draft Tauranga Geothermal System Management Plan;

2          Approves the release of the Draft Tauranga System Management Plan for community engagement; and

3          Delegates to the General Manager, Strategy and Science the authority to approve any minor changes, including grammatical and formatting, to the Draft Tauranga System Management Plan prior to its release for consultation.

Thompson/Macmillan

CARRIED

5.5

Climate Change Action Plan 2024-26 Adoption

Presentation:      Climate Change Action Plan Adoption: Objective ID A4770097 ⇨  

Presented by:     Jane Palmer – Senior Planner Climate Change

Nic Newman – Climate Change Programme Manager

Key Points

·           Provided background for the journey to date.

·           Outlined the changes made, in particular the inclusion of a fifth goal.

·           Provided two options for the presentation of Goal Five.

In Response to Questions

·            The following suggestions were made and would be considered by staff:

-      Action 5 - should also include Goal Five. 

-      Action 9, third bullet point - include private sector.

-      Goal Five – for consistency, suggested changing goal statement to “Economic Transition is enabled”, and then bullet point underneath it.

-      “Likely climate change impacts for the Bay of Plenty” graphic – for better alignment, have both air temperature and sea level rise projection dates go to 2090.  Should also include and highlight big storm effects.

·            Central government had delayed reporting back on the review of the Adaptation Plan Framework until October 2024.  When released, staff would take a stop and reflect moment to consider any changes.

·            The proposed removal of the four well beings from the LGA would not require a change to the Action Plan Introduction statement.

Key Points - Members

·           Supported the second option for the presentation of Goal Five.

·           Suggested that there would be opportunities for Councillors to assist with engaging with the community around supporting citizen science initiatives.

·           It was important that sea level rise and big storm effects were connected together.

Resolved

That the Strategy and Policy Committee:

1          Receives the report, Climate Change Action Plan 2024-26 Adoption;

2          Confirms the amended presentation of the new Goal 5;

3          Approves the revised Climate Change Action Plan 2024-26; and

4          Delegates to the Chief Executive the ability to make minor editorial changes to the Climate Change Action Plan before publication.

Thompson/Macmillan

CARRIED

5.6

Regional Waste Strategy - endorsement of cross-regional approach

Presented by:     Namouta Poutasi - General Manager, Strategy and Science

In Response to Questions

·           Only one Council had not yet responded; it was not that they were not interested, they just needed time to consider whether they would support the cross-regional waste strategy. 

·           End of life tyres (proposal made to Mayoral Forum) – what this would cover was still being scoped, and was dependent of whether central government funding was received.

·           Estimated total cost of $200,000 – Territorial Authorities (TAs) contributing $150,000, central government funding $50,000 (application already submitted).

Key Points - Members

·           It was important that the strategy had private sector input, as what was left after the three Rs principles (Reduce, Reuse, and Recycle) had been applied, was generally managed by the private sector through contracts.

Resolved

That the Strategy and Policy Committee:

1          Receives the report, Regional Waste Strategy – endorsement of cross-regional approach;

2          Endorses the preferred option to progress a Central North Island waste strategy, in partnership with Waikato Regional Council and others;

3          Notes that staff will explore development of a cross-regional waste strategy with Waikato Regional Council and other council partners should central government co-funding not be secured for a Central North Island strategy;

4          Approves that funding allocated through Long Term Plan 2024-2034 for development of a Bay of Plenty regional waste strategy be redirected towards development of a Central North Island (or cross-regional) waste strategy; and

5          Approves that funding allocated through Long Term Plan 2024-2034 for implementation of a Bay of Plenty regional waste strategy be redirected towards implementation of a Bay of Plenty action plan resulting from the completed Central North Island (or cross-regional) waste strategy.

Winters/Nees

CARRIED

5.7

Eastern Bay of Plenty Spatial Plan – Governance and Engagement

Tabled Document:  Tabled Document – Draft engagement material for Our Places – Eastern By of Plenty Spatial Plan: Objective ID A4768829 ⇨  

Presented by:     Adam Fort – Principal Adviser Strategic Planning

Vaughan Payne – Independent Chair of Project Leadership Group and Project Governance Group (via Zoom)

Ben Petch – Project Manager (via Zoom)

Key Points

·           Noted the tabled item – Key messages and draft engagement proposal for Our Places – Eastern Bay of Plenty Spatial Plan.  Any feedback from Councillors was welcomed; to be emailed directly to Adam Fort – Principal Adviser Strategic Planning.

In Response to Questions

·           Acknowledged the complexity of the governance structure which currently had 11 components to it, including four Councils (BOPRC, Whakatāne District Council (WDC), KDC, and ODC), Iwi Boards, and key partners (Friends of the project, Government Agency Technical Advisors, and other external groups as required). 

·           The structure would be kept under review and could be streamlined further in future iterations if required.

Key Points – Members

·           It was pleasing to see that the three Mayors (WDC, KDC, and ODC) were now on board.

Resolved

That the Strategy and Policy Committee:

1          Receives the report, Eastern Bay of Plenty Spatial Plan - Governance and Engagement;

2          Approves the updated terms of reference for the Eastern Bay of Plenty Spatial Plan Project Governance Group;

3          Notes the proposed timeline for the Eastern Bay of Penty Spatial Plan project and the approach to engagement; and

4          Delegates to the General Manager, Strategy and Science to approve subsequent minor editorial changes to the terms of reference for the Eastern Bay of Plenty Spatial Plan Project Governance Group.

5.       Receives the tabled document – Our Places – Eastern Bay of Plenty Spatial Plan draft engagement proposal.

Campbell/Iti

CARRIED

5.8

Hearings Subcommittee recommendations on submissions on Dangerous Dams, Earthquake-prone Dams and Flood-prone Dams Policy 2024

Presentation:      Hearings Subcommittee recommendations - Dangerous, Earthquake-prone and Flood-prone Dams Policy 2024: Objective ID A4770100 ⇨  

Presented by:     Stephen Lamb - Natural Resources Policy Manager

Arsalan Karim – Planner

Kathy Thiel Lardon – Environmental Engineering Team Leader

Key Points

·           BOPRC’s Dangerous Dams Policy 2006 (adopted by BOPRC in 2007) required review due to the Building (Dam Safety) Regulations 2002 which came into effect in May 2024. 

·           Outlined the changes that needed to be made to the regulatory framework of the existing policy.

·           The draft policy was adopted for public consultation at the Strategy and Policy Committee meeting of 25 June 2024.

·           Public consultation was undertaken from 26 June 2024 to 29 July 2024.

·           Two submissions had been received; none wanting to be heard.

·           Provided overview of the outcome of the 14 August 2024 Hearings Sub-Committee deliberations (one major and two minor amendments to the proposed policy) and resulting recommendations.

In Response to Questions

·            Compliance staff would be issued with the appropriate warrants under Building Act.

·           Whilst there were large dams in the region, none had yet been classified as dangerous.

Resolved

That the Strategy and Policy Committee:

1          Receives the report, Hearings subcommittee recommendations on submissions on Dangerous Dams, Earthquake-prone Dams and Flood-prone Dams Policy 2024;

2          Confirms the minutes of the Dams Policy Hearings Subcommittee of 14 August as a true and correct record (Attachment 2);

3          Adopts the proposed ‘Bay of Plenty Regional Council Policy on Dangerous Dams, Earthquake-prone Dams and Flood-prone Dams 2024’;

4          Notes once adopted the ‘Bay of Plenty Regional Council Policy on Dangerous Dams, Earthquake-prone Dams and Flood-prone Dams 2024’ will replace the existing Dangerous Dams Policy 2006, which no longer meets legislative requirements;

5          Delegates to the General Manager, Strategy and Science the authority to approve any minor changes, including grammatical and formatting, to the Policy on Dangerous Dams, Earthquake-Prone Dams and Flood prone Dams 2024; and

6          Notes the ‘Bay of Plenty Regional Council Policy on Dangerous Dams, Earthquake-prone Dams and Flood-prone Dams 2024’ will become operative on Friday 27 September 2024.

Scott/Crosby

CARRIED