BE PART OF THE CHANGE YOU WANT TO SEE Mā tātou te … · A new home for our artistic and creative...

1

Consultation document for the 2018-2028 Long Term Plan | Te Mahere Roa

Mā tātou te ara ki tua e para

BE PART OF THE CHANGE YOU WANT TO SEE

CONTAINS IMPORTANT INFO THAT IMPACTS YOUR RATES

2

LET’S MAKE A PLAN

In the world of local government, it’s called a long term plan or LTP for short. And we can’t

get it right without your input. That’s why, when we started our planning for this LTP in May

and June last year, we turned to iwi, our stakeholders and ratepayers like you.

We asked for insights and ideas on our seven strategic priorities. We also asked if there was

anything we had missed.

All up, about 1800 people from the Waikato shared their insights, ideas and priorities for the future

of our region. The feedback was remarkably consistent, with the three top priorities being managing

fresh water, positively influencing land use choices and shaping the development of the region. These

insights helped our councillors identify the significant areas they think we need to invest in.

One area we’ll be continuing to invest in is our flood protection infrastructure. This existing infrastructure,

which includes assets like floodgates, pump stations and stopbanks, is part of a whole river and flood

protection system designed to minimise flood risk. The problem we’ve got is that most of the assets will

reach the end of their life in the next 50 years. We also know that some will struggle to cope with expected

changing environment and climate conditions, so will need to be replaced sooner, and with bigger pumps.

Given that 76 per cent of the Waikato region benefits from our flood assets we can’t afford to have them fail.

That means we have to get underway with maintenance and replacement work. As we do, we’ll also need to

ensure new environmental performance and health and safety standards are met.

Ultimately, our flood assets will perform even better than they do now, but the cost of achieving this is likely to be

more than we have put aside for this work through our depreciation reserves. Inevitably, this means more costs for

ratepayers, especially those who benefit the most from flood assets in the Lower Waikato, Piako and Waihou areas.

ME WHAI MAHERE TĀTOU

It’s time for us to look forward and make a detailed plan of what needs to be done in the next 10 years.

A PLAN THAT:• tackles the big issues the region’s going to face

• is realistic about cost and what ratepayers can afford

• continues to build on work we’ve been doing with our partners and communities

• strikes a balance between what we are required to do by legislation and what’s important to you

• supports a sustainable future for our region – where our environment, economy and communities thrive.

3

YOU DECIDEKEI A KOE TE WHAKATAU

OUR PROPOSALS AFFECTED RATEPAYERS PAGE

1 Use of investment fund returns Maintain the rates subsidy, reducing funding for regional development

All14

2 Funding depreciation of our assetsChanging how we pay for our flood protection assets

Lower Waikato and Waihou Piako catchments 15

3 Pest managementTackling high risk plant and animal pests

All18

4Catchment rates for new worksSoil conservation, erosion prevention and stream protection works to protect land and water

All (varies depending on your catchment) 20

5Community Facilities FrameworkA new framework for assessing who should contribute to funding regional sports, recreation, cultural and arts facilities

All

23

6 Regional theatreA new home for our artistic and creative communities

All excluding Hamilton City24

7 Regional services fundFunding for volunteer emergency services

All26

8 Hamilton to Auckland passenger rail serviceImproving transport connections

Hamilton City28

To help reduce the impact on ratepayers we’re

planning to fund the work by borrowing externally. The

advantages and disadvantages of doing this are set out

on page 12. However, there are two main reasons why

we think this is the best option:

1. We’ll be able to keep our investment fund diversified

rather than tying it all up in infrastructure.

2. It ensures that future generations, who will also

benefit from these assets, contribute to the cost.

In June our councillors will make a final decision on the work Waikato Regional Council will focus on over the next 10 years and how it will be paid for. Before they do, they want to know what you think about our proposals.

Each proposal, including what it will cost, how it will be funded and the impact it will have on rates, is set out in this document.

Through this LTP process we’ll also be talking to

affected consent holders about how we recover the

costs of the information gathering and research

work we do to monitor the impacts consent holder

activities have on the region’s natural resources.

We will also be talking to affected ratepayers about

options for additional flood protection at Tauhei

and a boundary adjustment in Matangi.

We’re also proposing to address the affordability of rates increases

by spreading the funding of costs over a longer period of time.

This means we wouldn’t fully fund the depreciation of our assets

in the first two years of the LTP. If we do this, our budget won’t

be balanced in years 1 and 2, meaning revenue will be less than

expenditure. However, we believe it’s the prudent thing to do.

Before jumping ahead to our proposals, please take a few minutes

to read pages 8-12. It’s important information that will help you

understand all the increases we’re facing and the financial strategy

we’ve got in place to minimise the impact as much as possible.

Not all of these proposals will apply to everyone, so it’s important you find out

how your rates will be affected.

waikatoregion.govt.nz/ratescalculator 0800 800 401

4

THE HEART OF WHAT WE DOTE PŪTAKE O A TĀTOU MAHI KATOA

At Waikato Regional Council our vision for the region is to care locally, compete globally. It’s all about having a sustainable future where we are resilient to changes and can take advantage of global opportunities.

PARTNERSHIPSForge and strengthen

partnerships to achieve

positive outcomes for

the region

FRESH WATERManage fresh water

more effectively to

maximise regional

benefit

SUPPORT COMMUNITY

ACTIONSupport communities to take

action on agreed outcomes

REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT

Shape the development of

the region so it enhances

our quality of life

5

On the ground, it’s all about achieving our three

long term outcomes for our rohe (the Waikato):

• a healthy environment

• a strong economy

• vibrant communities.

But we know we can’t achieve these things on

our own. That’s why we’re committed to working

in partnership with others: iwi, businesses,

industry groups, central and local government,

tertiary education and research providers,

economic development agencies and you – the

people of the Waikato.

LAND USE CHOICES

Positively influence future

land use choices to ensure

long term sustainability

COASTAL AND MARINE AREASEnhance the values of

the region’s coasts and

marine areas

RISK AND RESILIENCE

Increase communities’

understanding of risks and

resilience to change

“Ki te kotahi te kaakaho ka whati, ki te kaapuia

e kore e whati.”When reeds stand alone they are vulnerable, but together they are

unbreakable.

- Kiingi Taawhiao

6

TAUPODISTRICT

WAIPADISTRICT

SOUTHWAIKATODISTRICT

HAURAKIDISTRICT

WAITOMODISTRICT

WAIKATODISTRICT

OTOROHANGADISTRICT

THAMES-COROMANDEL

DISTRICT

MATAMATA-PIAKO

DISTRICT

ROTORUADISTRICT

Our business as usual work will continue as well.

That’s things like:

creating the conditions for growth in communities

advising landowners on soil conservation, erosion prevention, and stream and wetland protection

total mobility services for people with disabilities

making sure people enjoy our waterways safely

response and recovery when disaster strikes

coordinating civil defence across the region

protecting our native plants and animals

working with communities and others to improve the health of our harbours

stabilising stream banks and removing blockages from waterways

regulating the use of natural resources via consents and monitoring

monitoring river and rainfall levels

24 hour pollution response service

managing plant and animal pests

running flood control schemes

understanding natural hazards

environmental monitoring

community funding

funding for roading

bus services

road safety.

10 TAU KUA TAHA 10 TAU KI TUA

A FEW HIGHLIGHTS FROM THE LAST 10 YEARS

Reduced the amount of nitrogen

discharged into Lake Taupō,

protecting this national taonga.

Brought tūī and other iconic

birds such as kererū and bellbirds back

to Hamilton.

Cleaned up New Zealand’s most contaminated site,

the abandoned Tui Mine on Mt Te

Aroha.

Helped landowners plant over 1.5 million

native plants and beachcare groups

plant 500,000.

Co-created MarineMate,

giving boaties local info in the

palm of their hand.

Responded to more than 14,000 calls

about possible pollution.

Almost $7 million to community groups working to protect

and restore our region’s biodiversity

Ruben’s road safety lessons

helped 32,000 children, in one year alone, stay

safe on our roads.

New spend 2018/19

Business as usual spend 2018/19

Helped secure over $2 billion from the

Government to build the Waikato Expressway and other key roads. Started a

regional development

fund to support key economic

initiatives.

Started using biocontrol to help fight pest plants.

Healthy Rivers/Wai Ora – a major plan change to make the Waipā

and Waikato rivers swimmable and safe for food gathering along their

entire length.

In year 1 of this LTP we’re proposing to spend close to $8 million on new projects, works and services. But that doesn’t mean we’re taking our eye off existing big issues like improving water quality.

7

PUBLIC TRANSPORT• Improve our Hamilton urban bus routes in

response to growth.

• An interim rail solution to improve transport

connections between Hamilton and Auckland,

subject to a significant government contribution.

INTEGRATED CATCHMENT MANAGEMENT• Increase in staff and funding across each

catchment to meet the increasing demand for

our services.

• Develop and trial a fish passage improvement

programme (using investment fund returns).

• More investment into managing new pests in

the region.

• $1.4 million over four years to Maungatautari

Ecological Island Trust to maintain its 47km

predator proof fence, and to carry out pest

surveillance and pest incursion responses.

FLOOD PROTECTION AND CONTROL WORKS• Additional staff to check floodgates and

pumps are working, respond to flood events,

and undertake drain cleaning.

• Additional staff to support scheduling of

maintenance work on flood assets.

• Replace our barge, which is used for channel

maintenance work.

RESOURCE USE• Implement the Healthy Rivers/Wai Ora plan

change to improve water quality in the Waipā

and Waikato rivers over 80 years, including

achieving a 10 per cent improvement in the

first 10 years.

A small portion of the Healthy Rivers project also sits in the integrated catchment management and science and strategy groups of activities.

COMMUNITY AND SERVICES• Increase the number of

schools involved in the

Enviroschools programme,

and establish new initiatives

focused on Māori medium

and secondary schools, as

well as youth.

• Construct more stock truck

effluent disposal sites to get

more effluent off the roads.

HAZARDS• Build three new flood

warning network sites.

This will help increase

community resilience

in a flood event.

• Replace the Tararu

tide gauge in the Firth

of Thames (starting in

2023/24).

EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT• Increase training courses for stakeholders,

partner agencies, industry and key private sector

members to improve our response capability.

• Improve provision of real time information and

consistent communication across the region.

• Operational and staff increases in response to

demand.

SCIENCE AND STRATEGY• Soil mapping for setting nitrogen reference

points and developing farm plans.

• Peat soils monitoring to help us plan for

potential impacts and raise awareness about

peat subsidence.

• Upgrade our spatial database so we can meet

the demand for our data, and create new apps

and interactive solutions for communities.

• Increase the frequency of E.coli surveillance

monitoring in some locations for swimmability.

• Implement the Sea Change – Tai Timu Tai Pari

recommendations developed to safeguard the

Hauraki Gulf Marine Park.

• Scope the implementation of our freshwater

strategy to ensure the best use of the region’s

water now and into the future.

• Finalise the Healthy Rivers/Wai Ora plan change.

WHERE THE INCREASE IN RATES

WOULD GO ($000)

A FEW OF THE PROJECTS, WORKS AND SERVICES WE’RE PROPOSING TO INVEST INYEAR 1 2018/19

8

CHANGING COMMUNITY NEEDSWe’re all about empowering you and your community to take action

where possible – giving you the information, skills, funding/materials

and opportunities to work together to reach desired outcomes. Over

time, community expectations have increased. While that’s a great

position to be in, all activities and resources – including staff time –

must be paid for.

TECHNOLOGY AND INFORMATIONAligned with the rise in community expectations, people want

us to be flexible, responsive and agile. They also want easy

access to our data and information, and that requires an

investment in technology, our processes and systems.

CENTRAL GOVERNMENTAmendments to legislation like the resource management

and health and safety acts provide stronger national

direction, but complying takes extra resources and that

comes at a cost. Central government’s also been clear

about work it expects all councils to focus on like

reporting on the suitability of rivers and lakes for

recreation (swimmability). This is also adding to

the cost of our services.

Our council has had a strong focus on delivering more at minimal extra cost to ratepayers. However, in the three years since our last LTP, demands on our budgets – some of which are out of our control – have increased.

DOING BUSINESS IS GETTING MORE EXPENSIVE

SUSTAINABILITY OF OUR FLOOD INFRASTRUCTUREThe biggest demand is the hefty cost of maintaining and replacing our flood

protection infrastructure to ensure it’s sustainable in the long term. For

more on this, see the next page.

KEI TE PIKI HAERE TE UTU WHAKAHAERE OHANGA

9

When our flood protection assets were

originally built, central government

contributed significant funding, but local

ratepayers now fund these.

Given the level of financial support

needed to maintain these assets into

the future, and the role they play

in protecting nationally significant

infrastructure, we believe the question

of who should pay is not just a local

conversation. This is something we’ll be

talking to central government about.

In the meantime, we’re planning to

spend $117 million over the next 10

years on flood protection, land drainage

and river management assets. It’s work

we have to do to ensure people and

property are protected to the flood

design levels we’ve promised, and that

environmental standards are met. So our

focus in this LTP has been on finding a

way to make that work more affordable.

How we’re planning to ease the cost of maintaining and replacing flood infrastructure

• Take on external borrowing to

fund investment in our flood

protection assets. Read more on

page 12.

• Spread the funding of

depreciation over the first three

years of the LTP in the Lower

Waikato and Waihou Piako

catchments (the two areas facing

the biggest cost increases). Read

the proposal on page 15.

Flooding is the Waikato region’s most frequent and

widespread natural hazard. On your behalf we look after

$496 million worth of assets – floodgates, pump stations

and stopbanks – to protect homes and farms, as well as

roads, rail and electricity infrastructure from flooding.

Our infrastructure strategy has identified a number of

significant issues impacting on these assets over the next

50 years. Unfortunately, they all point to one thing – more

investment to ensure our flood defences don’t fail us.

One issue is age. Most of our flood assets are between

40 and 60 years old and will reach the end of their life

in the next 50 years. That said, we may have to replace

them even sooner because they simply weren’t built to

withstand the changing environment and climate. For

example, droughts and floods, coastal inundation, high

water tables in some areas and land subsidence in others,

are all more likely.

Urban landscapes are ever expanding too, and that means

increased stormwater run off and subsequent flooding

and stream bank erosion. So in addition to construction

costs, which have gone up, bigger pumps will also be

needed to deal with the higher volumes of water flow.

When replacing our flood pumps we also have to think

about the impact they have on native aquatic ecology,

stream banks and the health of waterways. We know

some of our assets no longer measure up, so we won’t be

replacing like for like, and that will come at a cost.

The first step, however, is a three year research and

development programme to improve fish passage. This

includes a strategy and implementation plan. Because

this work will benefit people across the region, as well as

future generations, it will be funded through investment

fund returns.

Our first priority is to prevent risks to people and property

by discouraging development in high-risk areas. Where

development has already occurred, it’s our job to make

sure people moving into that area understand the risks

of flooding and costs involved in reducing those risks. We

also have more stringent health and safety requirements

to comply with, to protect our staff and anyone in the

community who may interact with our assets.

More detail about these and other impacts

are in our infrastructure strategy.

waikatoregion.govt.nz/infrastructure-

strategy

THE BIGGEST COST DRIVERSHORING UP THE SUSTAINABILITY OF OUR FLOOD INFRASTRUCTURE

For more on rates affordability, read our financial strategy on the next page.

10

BALANCING INCREASING COSTS WITH AFFORDABILITY

Our financial strategy sets out how we’re going to balance the increases we’re facing against providing the works and services we need to deliver, and what our communities can afford to pay.

It also sets limits on rates revenue and rates increases. This ensures our financial sustainability and gives you some certainty about what you can expect to pay over the next 10 years.

TAUTATIA NGĀ PIKINGA UTU ME TE ĀHEINGA UTU

OUR KEY PRINCIPLES

• Rates affordability

• Financial risk management

• Maintaining a diversified investment strategy

RATES AFFORDABILITY

We need to ensure the rates we charge are as fair and equitable as possible.

While it isn’t easy, we try to achieve this by:

• prioritising our work

• having a robust revenue and financing policy that targets the costs to

those who cause or benefit from the work undertaken.

In this LTP we’re also proposing to cap the level of funding we set aside

for the Regional Development Fund to retain the current level of rates

subsidy provided by returns from our investment fund. For more on this,

see Proposal 1 on page 14.

The huge costs involved in maintaining and replacing our flood

protection infrastructure, as discussed in the previous section,

means some ratepayers are facing significant increases in some of

their targeted rates. To manage these impacts we’re proposing to

smooth targeted rates revenue for some areas over the first three

years of this plan. For more on this, see Proposal 2 on page 15.

11

-4%

-2%

0%

2%

4%

6%

8%

10%

12%

14%

Increase in targeted rates revenue from current ratepayersIncrease in all property rates revenue from current ratepayers

2027/282026/272025/262024/252023/242022/232021/222020/212019/202018/19

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

Targeted ratesGeneral rates

2027/282026/272025/262024/252023/242022/232021/222020/212019/202018/19

RATES REVENUEOver the term of this plan, our rates revenue is

projected to increase from $84.545 million this

year to $126.917 million in 2027/28.

Overall, we’re aiming to limit the total increase in

rates revenue from current ratepayers to no more

than 9 per cent in any year.

RATES REVENUE AS A PERCENTAGE OF TOTAL REVENUE

INCREASE IN RATES REVENUE FROM CURRENT RATEPAYERS

WHAT ARE TARGETED RATES?

Targeted rates are used to fund specific activities and may not apply to all ratepayers. Examples include our funding for catchment works, flood protection and public transport.

Rates revenue makes up about 70 per cent of

the revenue we need to deliver our services.

The expected increases in our targeted

rates over the term of this LTP mean the

proportion of our revenue from rates paid by

all ratepayers drops slightly from 37 per cent

in 2018/19 to 34 per cent in 2027/28.

Increases will be higher in the first three years because of the

work that needs to be done on our flood protection assets.

Reductions in the general rate in the later years of this LTP

reflect reducing costs for our resource management policy

review work. Currently no provision has been made to

implement new policies as the costs are unknown.

12

A NEW BORROWING PROGRAMMEA key change we’re proposing in this LTP is to borrow externally.

To date, we’ve used internal borrowing – using funds

held as part of the investment fund – to meet the costs of

infrastructure, new works and other projects with long term

regional benefits. We currently have no external debt.

Borrowing externally is a significant shift for our council, but

we believe it’s the best thing to do. Here’s why.

• Increasing the level of internal borrowing we take from the

investment fund will reduce our ability to have a diversified

asset mix within the fund. This is contrary to one of the key

objectives of our financial strategy.

• Increasing our internal borrowing programme may result

in some inequity between ratepayers, particularly between

those paying general rates and those paying targeted rates.

By separately managing our investment fund and external

borrowing, we can ensure the returns from these funds are

used for the benefit of all ratepayers.

• An external borrowing programme tied to our flood

protection infrastructure assets will allow us to better match

funding needs over the lives of these assets. This will help

make the cost of this work more affordable for the targeted

ratepayers who will fund the majority of the costs.

• Our advisors have told us that, in the current market,

external borrowing can be sourced more cheaply than

internal borrowing.

Over the term of this plan, we expect our external borrowing

programme would reach a maximum of $50 million, which is

well below our net debt limit of 100 per cent of total revenue.

For our external borrowing, we’re proposing to take part in

the Local Government Funding Agency (LGFA) Scheme. This

scheme, used by 54 councils across the country, is able to

raise debt on behalf of local authorities on terms that are more

favourable than if they raised the debt directly. We believe

the benefits of lower borrowing costs outweigh any costs and

risks associated with the scheme. A discussion of these costs

and benefits is set out in a statement of proposal which can be

found on waikatoregion.govt.nz/ltp-fwd10. Alternatively, you

can call 0800 800 401 to request a copy.

FINANCIAL RISK MANAGEMENTWe provide a range of core services to our community,

and need to ensure key areas of our business have funds

available to continue. It’s especially important that we

have funding to carry out disaster recovery work and

that we have a buffer against potential cost and revenue

variations regarding public transport services.

INVESTMENT STRATEGYWe hold an investment fund which originated from the

sale proceeds of shares in the Port of Tauranga and Ports

of Auckland in the early 1990s. We work hard to ensure

this fund is carefully managed and balances risk and

return.

In the last LTP, we proposed that the level of rates

subsidy reduce from $2.3 million to half of that

progressively over five years to allow us to set up the

Regional Development Fund. The purpose of this fund is

to support regionally significant projects which promote

regional economic development and are achieved in a

way that also enhance environmental, social and cultural

outcomes.

The investment fund returns are transferred to

reserves and used to support regional development

projects. We’ve assumed a project will be funded every

three years, and based on this we expect to have an

unbalanced budget in years 3 and 6.

In this plan, we’re proposing to cap the contribution to

that fund to $1.5 million each year. This means the rates

subsidy will also remain at current levels ($1.9 million a

year), rather than reducing to the level indicated in 2012

($1.36 million). Doing this is a key part of ensuring rates

affordability.

This does, of course, mean that the amount of money

available for regional development will be less. In 2015

we were planning to have put aside $18.9 million for

regional development by 2025. That will now reduce to

$14.8 million over the same period.

13

PROPOSALS TO REDUCE THE IMPACT OF RATE INCREASESME PĒHEA E WHAKAMĀMĀ I TE TAUMAHA O NGĀ PIKINGA RĒTI

• Use of investment fund returns

• Funding depreciation of our assets

YOU DECIDE SEE PAGE 37 TO HAVE YOUR SAY

PREFERRED OPTION

USE OF INVESTMENT FUND RETURNS

Our investment fund had a value of $99.2 million at the end of

December 2017.

Generated from the sale of our shares in the ports of Tauranga and

Auckland in the early 1990s, returns from this fund are used to:

1. inflation proof the fund to maintain the capital base

2. keep rates down via a rates subsidy

3. build up the council’s Regional Development Fund which

allows us to contribute to significant one off projects that

have regional benefit.

Three years ago, following consultation with the community,

we agreed to reduce the rates subsidy provided through the

investment fund returns. This meant the rates subsidy would

decrease over a period of five years from $2.36 million to $1.36

million, with a corresponding increase in the amount of returns to

be used for regional development funding. The aim was to have

set aside $18.9 million by 2025.

PROPOSAL 1 | MAROHI 1

WHAKAMAHI PŪTEA HAUMI

• Rates revenue would need to increase to make up for the

reduction in investment income subsidy.

• Funds available for regional development would be more.

Impact on levels of service: Nil

Total cost: $250,000 in year 1

$500,000 in year 2

Impact on rates:

Increase of $0.20 cents per $100,000 capital value in year 1

Increase of $0.40 cents per $100,000 capital value in year 2

• Rates revenue would be subsidised by the rates subsidy.

• Funds available for regional development would be

capped.


Total cost: No cost

Impact on rates: Nil

OPTION 1Status quo – continue to reduce the rates

subsidy over the next two years

OPTION 2Hold rates subsidy at

the current level

We’re now proposing to not continue the remaining two years. This

will mean the rates subsidy stays at the same level as the 2017/18

year, a total of $1.86 million. The current subsidy equates to $1.50

per $100,000 capital value for each property. If we continue with

reducing the subsidy it will be $1.10 per $100,000 capital value.

If we retain the rates subsidy at the current level then less money will

be available for regional development – $14.8 million compared to

the $18.9 million we originally planned for.

What do you think about holding the rates subsidy at the current level?

WE NEED YOUR FEEDBACK BY MONDAY, 16 APRIL 2018 AT 4PM 15

PREFERRED OPTION

FUNDING DEPRECIATION OF OUR ASSETS

One option to help reduce the rate

increase is to not fully fund depreciation

of our assets for the first two years of this

LTP.

Depreciation is the tool we use to spread

the cost of an asset over its life, which

could be up to 100 years. Spreading the

cost means all users pay for the asset over

its life, rather than the burden falling on

just those who pay rates when the asset

needs replacing.

To do this we would borrow more to

maintain our assets, and make up the

funding shortfall in year three of the

plan. There are additional costs to borrow

more, but we believe this is outweighed

by reducing the increase to affected

ratepayers in the first year.


WHAKAMAHI PŪTEA HEKENGA RAWA

0

2000

4000

6000

8000

10000

12000

14000

PiakoWaihouLower Waikato Other zones

27/2826/2725/2624/2523/2422/2321/2220/2119/2018/19

INFRASTRUCTURE RENEWALS BY ZONE ($000)

This will mean large rates increases in year 1 for some

ratepayers in Lower Waikato, Waihou and Piako catchments.


Impact on rates: Catchment rates only

Lower Waikato

2018/19 – 27%

2019/20 – 23%

2020/21 – 7%

Waihou

2018/19 – 11%

2019/20 – 9%

2020/21 – 0%

Piako

2018/19 – 24%

2019/20 – 17%

2020/21 – 4%

OPTION 1Status quo – fully fund depreciation as we go

The rates increases will be spread over three years, meaning

a lower rates increase in year 1. However, ratepayers will be

locked into increases in years 2 and 3.


Impact on rates: Catchment rates only

Lower Waikato

2018/19 – 17%

2019/20 – 25%

2020/21 – 25%

Waihou

2018/19 – 8%

2019/20 – 9%

2020/21 – 8%

Piako

2018/19 – 18%

2019/20 – 17%

2020/21 – 18%

OPTION 2Don’t fully fund depreciation

in years 1 and 2

We are only proposing to do this in the Lower Waikato and Waihou Piako catchments. If you

live in these areas, you will still see a rate increase in year 1, but it will be lower than if we

fully funded depreciation. It will also mean you’ll be locked into rates increases in years 2 and

3 so we can recover the full amount to fund the assets.

Expected spend on maintaining our current assets over the life of this plan for each zone.

What do you think about this approach?

16

• Pest management

• Catchment rates for new works

PROPOSALS TO IMPROVE OUR NATURAL ENVIRONMENTME PĒHEA E WHAKAORA I TŌ TĀTOU TAIAO

17

We remain committed to managing pests that devastate our native biodiversity, exacerbate erosion and flooding problems and eat into the profits of our primary industries.

The Waikato Regional Pest Management Plan 2014-2024 (RPMP) sets out why and how various plant and animal pests will be controlled in the Waikato region, and who is responsible for the work. But at the moment, we can’t deliver on all of the objectives in the plan. The RPMP also has some inconsistencies with changes made to the National Policy Direction for Pest Management, which sets out requirements for developing plans and programmes. So we’ll be reviewing it.

The first step in the review will involve releasing a discussion document to the community in year 3 of this LTP. The feedback we get will inform the development of the proposed plan, which will then be formally consulted on in 2021/22.

Funding has been provided in years 1-4 of the LTP to complete the review of our pest plan.

REGIONAL PEST MANAGEMENT PLAN REVIEW AROTAKE RAUTAKI WHAKAKORE KĪREAREA Ā-ROHE

STORY


PREFERRED OPTION


Pest invasions are one of the biggest threats to our region.

Livelihoods and ecosystems can be destroyed by pest

animals, plants and diseases. In recent years, we have

seen an increasing number of new pests that require our

attention: left unchecked, alligator weed will strangle

waterways and paddocks, velvetleaf will render crops

unusable, and native trees will die due to kauri dieback

and myrtle rust.

We fund our biosecurity response through a targeted rate

and are supported by an increasingly engaged community

who share our concern and work closely with us. However,

the rates revenue to fund our response to this increasingly

challenging situation has not increased for three years, and

we don’t have enough money to keep on top of the work

we are doing let alone all the additional demands.

We think it is important to put more funding towards our

biosecurity response. Without more funding, we will have

to do less.

The table on the following page outlines the high risk pests we believe need to be addressed, and how much extra it would cost to run an effective programme to control these pests. Before deciding on your preferred option, have a read.

PEST MANAGEMENT WHAKAKORE KĪREAREA

We considered funding a programme to address Canada

geese. However, council felt this wasn’t an issue that should be dealt with regionally, as this pest is a problem across the entire country. Instead, we’ll advocate for a national programme to be developed by talking to agencies like the Department of Conservation, Fish & Game and Federated Farmers, who have a national focus and interest in pests that impact on primary production and biodiversity.

We would reprioritise money to properly address our high risk pests

outlined in the table. We would also continue the work we are doing on:

• eradicating pests listed in the regional pest management plan like

Japanese knot weed, mile a minute, velvetleaf and alligator weed

• regional rook control across a range of areas

• regional goat control in high value sites e.g. Coromandel,

Whareorino and Pureora.

We would, however, have to make changes to the following

programmes to fund the management of our highest risk pests:

• reduce the number of areas where we control possums, focusing

only on those areas with the highest priority

• stop funding marine biosecurity, including our advocacy

programme and surveillance work

• stop controlling a range of established pests like woolly nightshade,

wild ginger, tutsan and ragwort and use this money for controlling

alligator weed

• put less money into progressing collaborative Predator Free 2050

projects

• decrease our support for the Kaimai Mamuku Catchments Forum

• stop all inspection and enforcement work on sustained control

pests like ragwort, gorse, privet and thistles.

Impact on rates: This option would see a rate increase of 5 per cent

($0.88 per $100,000 capital value).

This will ensure we deliver our current work programme and have the

money to properly address the high risk pests outlined in the table.

Impact on rates: The total impact of implementing all programmes

over the first three years of the LTP is $1.88 per $100,000 capital value.

OPTION 2Address high risk pests and reduce

some of our current work programme

OPTION 1Address high risk pests and maintain

our current work programme


PROPOSED LEVEL OF SERVICE TOTAL INCREASE OVER 3 YEARS

WALLABY MANAGEMENT

We’ve worked with the Bay of Plenty Regional Council and Department of Conservation to develop a

containment plan for wallabies in the Mamaku Plateau and require funding to do our part. Wallabies

currently have a limited distribution in the Waikato, but without urgent action they will be beyond our ability

to manage and impact heavily on our native and exotic vegetation.

This will cost an additional $650,000 over three years.

$0.52 per $100,000

capital value

PRIORITY PEST CONTROL AREA (PPCA) EXPANSION DUE TO CHANGE IN TB MANAGEMENT

OSPRI has been undertaking possum control to eradicate bovine tuberculosis (TB) in some areas of the

Waikato. This work has resulted in significant ecological gains. Where land is now free of bovine TB, OSPRI has

ceased its control operations. We want to continue control works to maintain the gains already made.


$0.40 per $100,000

capital value

KAURI DIEBACK

With current technologies and control tools the best way of managing kauri dieback is preventing its spread

into disease free areas. We need to manage the disease pathways by providing support to landowners,

communities and iwi to protect areas free of kauri dieback.


$0.24 per $100,000

capital value

ALLIGATOR WEED AND YELLOW FLAG IRIS

Alligator weed is a fast-growing weed that is now in several parts of the Waikato region, including Hamilton

subdivisions. To prevent the spread of this pest, which will destroy the habitat of native wildlife, we require

funding to go towards direct control.


$0.48 per $100,000

capital value

VELVETLEAF

Velvetleaf is one of the world’s worst cropping weeds, damaging arable crops by competing with them for

nutrients, space and water. We are the lead agency for managing this pest in the region and we require

additional resources to implement the region’s long term management plan to contain this pest.

We have budgeted an additional $50,000 per year from year three (2021/22).

$0.04 per $100,000

capital value

OLD MAN’S BEARD AND CLIMBING SPINDLEBERRY

We are the lead agency to manage old man’s beard and climbing spindleberry in the region. These pests

spread quickly and can devastate natural ecosystems. We want to focus control on priority sites in the Taupō

and Upper Waikato catchments at a cost of $60,000 per year.

$0.14 per $100,000

capital value

WILDING PINES

Wilding pines compete with native trees and plants for space and don’t provide the advantages that native

trees do, such as food for native birds and insects. Our priority is to manage this pest in the central North

Island plateau, and we require an additional $20,000 per year to participate in a collaborative project with the

New Zealand Defence Force, Department of Conservation, iwi, Horizons Regional Council and the Ministry for

Primary Industries.

$0.05 per $100,000

capital value

Total impact of implementing all programmes over the first three years of the LTP $1.88 per $100,000

capital value

Note: These increases will have no impact on debt.


PROPOSED LEVEL OF SERVICE

ADDITIONAL FUNDING PROPOSED

CATCHMENT RATES FOR NEW WORKS

No matter where you live – in a town, out in the country, on a

lifestyle block or by the ocean – it’s important to make good

decisions about how you use your land.

We provide landowners and community groups with advice and

funding to help them retire erosion-prone areas, fence and plant

waterways, and protect wetlands, native bush and coastal areas.

It’s all about reducing the amount of sediment and nutrients

entering our waterways and providing habitat for native plants

and animals.

In some cases, the funding we provide can be matched by

the Department of Conservation or Waikato River Authority,

ensuring greater outcomes are achieved for the region while

reducing costs to individual landowners.

There’s a high demand from landowners for these services,

which suggests there’s also a growing shift to more sustainable

land use practices. However, we aren’t collecting enough rates

to meet this demand. We also have increasing opportunities

to partner with others and co-fund projects, but right now

we don’t have the money to take advantage of most of these

opportunities. This isn’t a viable way to continue, so we propose

to increase funding and our resources.


RĒTI WHENUA FOR NGĀ HANGANGA HOU

YEAR 1 YEAR 2 YEAR 3 YEARS 4-10

LOWER WAIKATO

Additional funding would go towards meeting our existing commitment to fund

work on investigations into options for improving the health of Lake Waikare and

the Whangamarino wetland in conjunction with the Waikato District Lakes Accord.

We would also employ three new catchment officers over five years to support

landowners to undertake works based on the priorities outlined in the Waikato

Waipā River Restoration Strategy and Lower Waikato Zone Plan.

We need to review the Lower Waikato Zone Plan and have scheduled this for year

6 at a cost of $50,000.

$90,000 $467,000 $923,000 $6.9 million

UPPER WAIKATO

Additional funding to support restoration projects in the Whirinaki catchment. $56,000 $56,000 $56,000 $392,000

Catchment and harbour management plans help us prioritise where

we carry out work and at what scale. These non-statutory plans

are created in collaboration with the affected communities, and

give us a better understanding of the vision and priorities people

have for their catchments. They provide the overarching framework

and direction to guide our work in a catchment and enable us to

coordinate our work and resources with other agencies – sometimes

attracting additional funding.

We don’t have plans for all catchments and harbours across the

region, and want to focus on areas we haven’t provided a lot of

planning support for in the past. For example, west coast harbours.

We are also fast-tracking our existing programme to finalise the

last two big harbour plans for the Coromandel zone – Whitianga/

Mercury Bay and Coromandel/Manaia.

The table below outlines where we’re proposing increases for each

of the catchments, and the cost of those works. These increases

would have no impact on debt.

We’re proposing to increase targeted catchment rates to fund all the works set out in this table. What do you think?


PROPOSED LEVEL OF SERVICE

ADDITIONAL FUNDING PROPOSED

Not all of these works will apply to everyone, so it’s important you find out how your rates would be affected.

waikatoregion.govt.nz/ratescalculator 0800 800 401

YEAR 1 YEAR 2 YEAR 3 YEARS 4-10

CENTRAL WAIKATO

Additional funding for two catchment officers to support the increased demand

from landowners undertaking works. Priority would be given to areas that align

with the priorities outlined in the Waikato Waipā River Restoration Strategy and

Central Waikato Zone Plan.

We need to review the Central Waikato Zone Plan and have scheduled this for year

6 at a cost of $50,000.

$50,000 $190,852 $293,000 $3.31 million

WAIPĀ

Additional funding would go towards meeting our existing commitments in

conjunction with the Waikato River Authority.

Our catchment officers would also provide additional support to landowners to

undertake actions from the Waipā Catchment Plan, including soil conservation,

fencing and planting.

We need to review the Waipā Zone Plan and have scheduled this for year 6 at a

cost of $50,000.

$21,813 $32,719 $431,465

WAIHOU-PIAKO

The Waihou-Piako catchment doesn’t have a catchment management plan, so in

the first instance we would gather data and information to better understand the

pressures, priorities and needs of this catchment. From this, we would identify

what catchment plans are required.

We are also proposing to add an extra catchment officer in year 2 to support

landowners in this area.

$65,000 $223,000 $263,000 $1.33 million

COROMANDEL

Additional funding to fast track the completion of the Mercury Bay and Manaia

harbour and catchment management plans.*

We would also be looking to maintain the areas where we have already removed

mangroves, and continue with harbour restoration sites.

$95,000 $145,000 $110,000 $470,000

WEST COAST

Additional funding for catchment officers to support landowners to undertake

coastal enhancement works, like restoring coastal wetlands, reducing coastal

weeds and predator control work.

We need to review the West Coast Zone Plan and have scheduled this for year 4 at

a cost of $50,000.

$85,000 $100,000 $100,000 $700,000

ALL OF REGION BENEFIT

Additional funding to implement the land biodiversity programme on own land. $30,000 $30,000 $42,250 $316,000

Additional funding for a catchment planner who would work on catchment plans

with the initial focus being the west coast.*

$73,000 $93,000 $93,000 $651,000

* This is funded 100 per cent by general rates.

22

• Community Facilities Framework

• Regional theatre

• Regional services fund

• Hamilton to Auckland passenger rail service

PROPOSALS TO MAXIMISE OPPORTUNITIES FOR THE WAIKATOME PĒHEA E WHAKAWHĀNUI AKE I NGĀ KŌWHIRINGA A TE KAUNIHERA Ā ROHE O WAIKATO


PREFERRED OPTION

COMMUNITY FACILITIES FRAMEWORK

Every so often, the Waikato region requires investment in a specialty

facility that will be used by a range of people across the region for

sport, recreation, arts or cultural activities. In the past, these types

of facilities were funded by ratepayers in the area where they were

built, through the local council, with inconsistent contributions from

users outside that area.

Waikato councils believe a framework should be in place to enable

them to make collective, strategic investments in new subregional

and regional community sports, recreation, arts and cultural facilities.

The Community Facilities Framework has been developed to enable

local authorities in the Waikato to collaborate and co-fund facilities.

Co-funding may, for example, involve us joining with community

funders and government departments. This collaborative approach

will be a more efficient, effective and equitable way of funding

facilities for our communities.

The framework provides clear guidelines that enable decisions about

funding of subregional and regional community facilities.


POU TARĀWAHO WĀHI HAPORI

It is anticipated all councils within the region will adopt the

framework to assess proposed facilities against it.

Through this framework, if a facility is deemed to have regional

benefits we would consider collecting rates on behalf of all councils

in the region to contribute funding towards it. The community would

be consulted on any proposals received.

The funding contribution to subregional facilities (where the benefits

are to communities of more than one council but not all) will be by

the councils serving the communities that benefit.

We want to know whether you think we have a role in funding

regional sporting, recreational, cultural and arts facilities. Adopting

the framework will show a commitment to collecting rates for these

types of facilities in the future.

You can read the full framework online at waikatoregion.govt.nz/

ltp-fwd10. Alternatively, call us on 0800 800 401 and we’ll send

you a copy.

This would mean there is no consistent framework for

assessing the benefits and contributors of proposed

subregional and regional facilities.


Impact on rates: No impact on rates or debt

Framework used to assess if a facility is regional and the

share each area should pay.

Impact on levels of service: If we adopt the framework,

there is a potential level of service increase when new

facilities are proposed.

Impact on rates: No impact on rates or debt

OPTION 1Status quo – don’t adopt the framework

OPTION 2Adopt the framework

Before we had the opportunity to ask if you think we have a role in funding community facilities, Momentum Waikato came to us with a

proposal for a new regional theatre. See the next page for more details.



Should we collect a rate for a new regional theatre in Hamilton?

After Founders Theatre closed in 2016, the community foundation

Momentum Waikato led a community driven project to build a new

theatre and creative precinct for the Waikato region. The theatre is

proposed for a site on Victoria Street on the banks of the Waikato

River, and will be a home for the community’s vibrant artistic and

creative communities.

We have assessed this proposal against the proposed Community

Facilities Framework (see page 23 for more information on this

framework) and believe it meets the criteria for being an asset that

provides regional benefit. Our assessment has been confirmed by

PricewaterhouseCoopers, who undertook an independent peer review.

The total cost of the project is estimated at $73 million, with local

government to contribute $30 million. Of local government’s

contribution, it’s intended that $25 million will come from Hamilton

City Council ratepayers.

Momentum Waikato has asked Waikato Regional Council ratepayers

(excluding Hamilton City) to contribute $5 million towards building

the theatre. Rating would start in 2019/20. They have also asked us

to contribute a further $300,000 every year (starting 2020/21, the

proposed opening year of the theatre) towards an asset maintenance

reserve fund. This contribution would be reviewed every three

years as part of council’s long term planning process to ensure

the conditions and performance measures for the fund are being

satisfactorily met.

The asset maintenance reserve fund would only be used for major

upgrades that ensure the preservation of the facility and would not

be used towards the everyday running of the theatre. It’s proposed

that Hamilton City Council contributes $1.1 million per year towards

the asset maintenance fund.

On the next page we’ve provided an option for funding the building

of the theatre (the capital component) as well as contributing

towards the asset maintenance reserve fund, or funding the capital

component only. We believe that it would be prudent to contribute

to maintaining this facility to avoid its deterioration and keep

equipment up to modern standards.

If we were to fund this facility we would borrow the money to meet

our contribution to the construction of the theatre. We would then

collect repayments (including principal and interest) from ratepayers

over 20 years. This spreads the cost of the initial investment so that

future ratepayers, who will use the facility, also contribute.

REGIONAL THEATRE WHARE TAPERE Ā-ROHE

If you decide that you want us to contribute to the facility there are

two options for how we could split the contribution amongst regional

ratepayers.

1. Use a differential rate based on an assessment of those that

would receive benefit from the facility and where they are

located, and also those people who live in close proximity to the

proposed facility.

2. Split the $5 million contribution from the region evenly across

all regional ratepayers outside Hamilton City. In other words,

ratepayers who are close to the facility and those who are further

away would pay the same.

Our assessment has identified primary and secondary beneficiaries

of the proposed theatre. Those who we believe to be primary

beneficiaries outside of Hamilton include Waikato, Waipā and

Matamata-Piako ratepayers. Secondary beneficiaries include all other

regional ratepayers – Thames-Coromandel, Hauraki, Ōtorohanga,

Waitomo, South Waikato, Taupō and the portion of Rotorua in our

region.

Based on this, our preferred option is that of our $5 million

contribution, $4.5 million would come from the three primary

beneficiaries outside Hamilton – Waikato, Waipā and Matamata Piako

ratepayers – with $0.5 million coming from the remainder of our

ratepayers.

Once the theatre is complete, ownership and maintenance will be

the responsibility of the yet to be established Waikato Regional

Property Trust. The operations will be run by the Waikato Regional

Theatre Operating Company, which will seek ongoing funding and

sponsorship.

The final concept design for the theatre still needs to be completed

by Momentum Waikato. There are a number of outstanding issues on

which we, and Hamilton City Council, need to be satisfied with before

providing funding. These include confirming:

• the site is structurally sound

• there is adequate parking for people attending performances

• there is good access for production related vehicles

• Momentum Waikato has committed funding in place to complete

the project.

We want to know if you support funding the theatre, assuming all our outstanding issues are resolved.


PR

EFER

RED

OP

TIO

N

• $5 million collected

from the region to fund

the capital component.

• $300,000 per year

collected from the region

towards the ongoing

asset maintenance

reserve fund.

Split beneficiaries

Primary beneficiaries

would pay $10.26 per

property per year.

Secondary beneficiaries

would pay $0.93 per

property per year.

Status quo – don’t provide any funding for a regional theatre


from the region to fund

the capital component.

• $300,000 per year

collected from the region

towards the ongoing

asset maintenance

reserve fund.

Flat rate

All regional ratepayers

would pay $5.12 per

property per year.


from the region to

fund the capital

component.

Split beneficiaries

Primary beneficiaries

would pay $5.54 per

property per year.

Secondary beneficiaries

would pay $0.50 per

property per year.


from the region to

fund the capital

component.

Flat rate

All regional ratepayers

would pay $2.76 per

property per year.

OPTION 1

OPTION 2 OPTION 3 OPTION 4 OPTION 5

Note: All of these options exclude Hamilton City ratepayers as they will pay for this facility through their Hamilton City Council rates.

Hamilton City Council: Supportive of our preferred option.

Hauraki District Council: Supportive of our preferred option.

Matamata-Piako District Council: Supportive of funding the

capital component (option 5). However:

• would like to see the cost spread evenly across the region

• does not support putting funding towards the asset maintenance

reserve fund.

Otorohanga District Council: Supportive of our preferred option.

South Waikato District Council: Not supportive of a regional

theatre paid for by all ratepayers in the region (option 1).

Thames-Coromandel District Council: Supportive of our

preferred option, with the exception that the asset maintenance

reserve funding of $300,000 per year is only collected for three years.

Waikato District Council: Supportive of our preferred option,

however, would like to see the old Franklin district portion of

Waikato district rated as a secondary beneficiary rather than a

primary beneficiary.

Note: Our council considered this option and decided to go with existing

local council boundaries because splitting them would add complexity.

Waipa District Council: Supportive of funding the capital

component and would like to see thorough consultation with

ratepayers in regard to the ongoing asset maintenance reserve fund.

Taupo District Council: No formal feedback provided.

Rotorua District Council: No formal feedback provided.

Waitomo District Council: No formal feedback provided.

These options would result in an increased level of service being provided. The capital component would be funded by council borrowing.

We asked other councils in the region what they thought about the proposal for us to collect a rate from their ratepayers

to fund the theatre. Here’s a summary of what they had to say.


PREFERRED OPTION

REGIONAL SERVICES FUND

Volunteer emergency services save lives in our communities.

Two years ago we agreed to collect a rate on behalf of other councils

to fund these services in the Waikato region. We currently distribute

$630,000 (GST excluded) of funding, which is $3.74 per property, to

the following emergency services:


PŪTEA RATONGA Ā-ROHE

After seeking input and feedback from local councils in the region

and the current recipients of the fund, we’re suggesting the following

two changes:

• Include Land Search and Rescue (LandSAR) as a beneficiary of the

fund. LandSAR has trained and skilled volunteers who work with

authorities such as NZ Police or the Rescue Coordination Centre

to look for lost, missing or injured people. There are nine local

groups across the region: Whitianga (Kuaotunu), Tairua-Pauanui-

Whangamata, Thames, Paeroa, Waihi, Hamilton, Waitomo (Te

Kūiti), Taupō and Tūrangi. The council’s suggestion includes a

funding contribution of $40,200 per year to address a funding

shortfall for the equipment and training costs of the nine local

groups we have in the Waikato region.

• An additional funding contribution of $25,000 per year to cover

two regional lifeguards working two to three hours either side of

low tide cycles at Hot Water Beach, seven days a week. Surf Life

Saving New Zealand has reported unprecedented increases in

visitors to the Cathedral Cove/Hot Water Beach area during the

‘shoulder season’ (October to December and April to June).

Impact on levels of service:

No change

Total contribution:

$630,000

Impact on rates:

$3.74 per property


Increase

Total contribution:

$670,500

Impact on rates:

$3.98 per property

Increase of $0.24


Increase

Total contribution:

$695,500

Impact on rates:

$4.13 per property

Increase of $0.39

OPTION 1Status quo – maintain current funding levels

OPTION 2Add LandSAR as a

beneficiary

OPTION 3Add LandSAR as a

beneficiary, and increase the funding to Surf Life

Saving services

$354,600

$175,400

$50,000

$50,000

TO SURF LIFE SAVING PER YEAR

TO COASTGUARD PER YEAR

TO PHILIPS SEARCH AND RESCUE TRUST PER YEAR

TO COROMANDEL RESCUE HELICOPTER TRUST PER YEAR

27

The public transport we provide currently carries over 4 million passengers every year in the Waikato region, but growth in and around Hamilton is putting pressure on transport networks so we need to think seriously about congestion.

While Hamilton City Council manages the roading infrastructure, we are responsible for public transport. So we work closely with the city council and NZ Transport Agency on all transport issues.

Hamilton can no longer build its way out of the congestion that road users are facing. We need to look to more sustainable choices of transport to ensure people can still get around, and that the transport networks are safe, responsive, sustainable and integrated.

Hamilton City Council has developed Access Hamilton. This long term strategy states they want a significant shift in the number of people travelling by private car to alternative modes of transport.

However, we need a plan on how to get people where they want to go via alternative and more sustainable modes of transport.

Together with the city council and transport agency, we’re preparing a mass transit plan. It will take a one-network approach to moving people in and around the city over the next 30 years, and will cover roads, public transport, walking and cycling.

We don’t yet know exactly what the plan will include. However, we’re expecting to have to make some significant investments in public transport from year 4 of the LTP to:

• make travel on our public transport network easier

• achieve increases in patronage

• help manage traffic congestion.

Hamilton City Council has also included indicative funding in its 10-Year Plan 2018-2028 to fund new public transport priority infrastructure identified in the mass transit plan.

Over the first three years of the LTP we’ve budgeted an additional $2.7 million to provide for increased services into growing parts of the city and to address bus travel time reliability issues caused by increasing congestion.

EASING HAMILTON’S GROWING CONGESTIONKIA WHAKANGĀWARI AKE TE OPURU HUARAHI

STORY


There is a need to improve transport connections between Hamilton

and Auckland, especially given the increasing number of commuters

along this corridor.

Hamilton City Council has asked us to rate Hamilton City ratepayers

for a two year trial of a passenger rail service between Hamilton and

Auckland.

The Minister for Transport has indicated that a revised draft of

the Government Policy Statement is expected to be completed in

early 2018, giving public transport greater priority and expanding

the public transport system to support interregional commuting,

and also increasing the use of rail to enable efficient passenger

transport. It is the minister’s priority to work on a service between

Hamilton and Auckland.

We currently fund other forms of public transport in Hamilton, like

buses, through a targeted public transport rate, fares from customers

and a 51 per cent subsidy from the NZ Transport Agency which

supports their aim of reducing congestion on the roading network.

HAMILTON TO AUCKLAND PASSENGER RAIL SERVICE


RATONGA TEREINA MAI I KIRIKIRIROA KI TĀMAKI MAKAURAU

In conjunction with Hamilton City Council, we conducted a customer

demand survey to see whether there is demand for the service. The

results show that with the proposed fare, journey time and service

timetable there is a sufficient level of demand for the trial service.

The survey results also show there is a much higher level of demand

for a service that has faster travel times. This is something the business

case for a long term solution will take into account.

The exact timing for the start of this proposal is contingent on a number

of issues being resolved. However, we have budgeted $4 million in total

costs in year 1 of the LTP and $8 million each year thereafter. This is

based on the assumption that this service would start midway through

the year. We are seeking a minimum government contribution of 75 per

cent of the total cost less fare revenue with the balance funded by rates.

This proposal only impacts on Hamilton City ratepayers, and under

option 2 (our council’s preferred option) would see the majority of

ratepayers paying less than $30 per year towards the service. For an

indication of how this would impact on your rates, see the graph below.

Under option 3, all Hamilton City ratepayers would pay a minimum of $20 and an additional portion based on the capital value of their

property. For an indication of how this option would impact on your rates, see the graph below.

$0

$20

$40

$60

$80

$100

$120

$140

$160

$25

$0

$10

$20

$30

$40

$50

$60

$70

$26.98

RATING IMPACTS PER CAPITAL VALUE BASIS FOR RATING WITH A $20 UNIFORM RATE

RATING IMPACTS PER CAPITAL VALUE BASIS FOR RATING

AV

ERA

GE

RA

TE IM

PAC

T $

AVERAGE RATE INCREASE PER CAPITAL VALUE RANGE

AVERAGE RATE INCREASE PER CAPITAL VALUE RANGE

AV

ERA

GE

RA

TE IM

PAC

T $

0-100K 100-200K 200-250K 250-300K 300-350K 350-400K 400-450K 450-500K 500-600K 600-750K 750K-1M 1-2M 2-2.5M 2.5M + HCC CV range

$3 $10 $14 $16 $19 $22 $25 $28 $32 $39 $50 $78 $129 $147 Option 1 (full cv)

0-100K 100-200K 200-250K 250-300K 300-350K 350-400K 400-450K 450-500K 500-600K 600-750K 750K-1M 1-2M 2-2.5M 2.5M + HCC CV range

$20.80 $22.80 $23.82 $24.59 $25.38 $26.19 $26.98 $27.81 $29.03 $30.93 $33.97 $41.73 $56.19 $61.03 Option 3 (CV+$20 UR)


PREFERRED OPTION

Hamilton City Council is committed to this proposal and has already

bought land near The Base in Te Rapa to provide a park and ride

service. It has also allowed for funding in its draft 10-Year Plan to

establish a rail station at The Base. Waikato District Council has

indicated that they will support this proposal if it receives significant

government funding. However, due to financial constraints they have

not proposed any funding towards the service or infrastructure in

their long term plan.**

There are still a number of important issues that need to be worked

through before we will commit to funding this proposal. Most

significant is confirmation of central government funding for the

proposal of no less than 75 per cent of the cost, less fare revenue.

We also do not want to buy or pay for the refurbishment of required

passenger carriages.

We are working on confirming these aspects of the proposal, and will

have the answers in time to make decisions in our long term plan. In

the meantime, we want to know what you think.

Do you support the idea of having a passenger rail service between Hamilton and Auckland and the council rating Hamilton ratepayers for the service?

• Current system will continue

with no passenger rail service

between the two cities.

• Loss of opportunity to take up

central government support

for the proposal.

Impact on levels of service: No

change

Total cost: Nil

Impact on rates: Nil

• Improved linkages between

Hamilton and Auckland.

• Taking up the opportunity to

support the Government’s priority

for a passenger rail service.

• Will come at an additional cost

to Hamilton ratepayers. Higher

valued properties will contribute

more.

Impact on levels of service: Increase

Total cost: $8 million per annum

before NZ Transport Agency subsidy.

Impact on rates: $6.45 per $100,000

of capital value*

• Improved linkages between Hamilton

and Auckland.

• Taking up the opportunity to support

the Government’s priority for a

passenger rail service.

• Will come at an additional cost to

Hamilton ratepayers.

• Lower valued properties will contribute

more than option 2.

Impact on levels of service: Increase

Total cost: $8 million per annum before

NZ Transport Agency subsidy.

Impact on rates: Uniform charge of $20

plus $2.24 per $100,000 of capital value*

OPTION 1Status quo – no trial

passenger rail service

OPTION 2Implement an interim rail service between Hamilton and Auckland with rating based on capital value of

the property

OPTION 3Implement an interim rail

service between Hamilton and Auckland with rating based on a minimum $20 uniform charge

component and then capital value of the property

HOW THE SERVICE WOULD WORK

For the two year trial period, two return services a day

would leave from the Hamilton train station in Frankton

at 6am and 6.40am, arriving at the Papakura train station

in Auckland, where connections could be made to the

wider rail network within Auckland. Confirming the

number of stops and their location within the Waikato

district is dependent on what station infrastructure is

available and the impacts of travel time. The return

services would leave Papakura between 5pm and 6pm.

• The trains from Hamilton to Papakura would have

air-conditioning, heating, wi-fi and toilets.

• Hamilton to Papakura is estimated to take 1 hour and

30 minutes.

• Hamilton to Britomart is estimated to take 2 hours

and 30 minutes, including waiting for the transfer in

Papakura.

• The cost of a one way fare from Hamilton to Britomart

is proposed to be $16.10.

** Correction: Waikato District Council have included funding of $511,000 in their draft Long Term Plan for the upgrade of the Tuakau rail platform in 2020.* Capped at $2.5 million of capital value.

30

WE’LL ALSO BE TALKING TO PEOPLE AFFECTED BY...KA KŌRERO HOKI MĀTOU KI NGĀ TĀNGATA E PĀNGIA ANA E TE...

WATER USER CHARGES AND INFORMATION GATHERING FEESREITI TANGO WAI ME NGĀ UTU WHAKAEMI MŌHIOHIO

Over the last year a working party made up of representatives from a range of sectors

has looked at the way we charge to recover the costs of the information gathering

and research work we do in response to consent holders using the region’s water

resources.

Based on the working party’s recommendations we’re proposing to make the

following changes to these charges.

• A minimum charge of $65 paid by all water users irrespective of the

volume used.

• A charge per cubic metre for any volume used over and above the

minimum.

We’ll be writing to all affected resource consent holders to get their

feedback on the proposed change.

We’ve also looked at the way our other science and research costs are

funded. Overall, our costs to monitor the region’s natural resources

are increasing. The reasons why we need to do some of our work

have also changed since these charges were last reviewed in detail

in 2012.

The proposed changes to these charges vary across different

types of resource consents, so we’ll be writing to all affected

resource consent holders to explain the changes and to seek

their feedback.

31

TAUHEI FLOOD PROTECTION SCHEME

MATANGI BOUNDARY ADJUSTMENT

HANGANGA AHURU WAIPUHE KI TAUHEI

PANONITANGA KI TE ROHE TAUĀRAI I MATANGI

We’ve been working to find an affordable way to reduce

flooding of land adjacent to the upper Tauhei Stream.

Following consultation in the 2017/18 Annual Plan,

we agreed to maintain support for the Tauhei flood

control project, prepare the design for the works and

implement stage 1 to a maximum of $1.6 million.

It was also agreed that we would consult Tauhei

ratepayers on concept designs for stages 2 and 3

through the 2018-2028 Long Term Plan.

Over the past 12 months we’ve taken a good look at

the Tauhei and Mangatea catchments and used the

information we’ve gathered to develop concept designs

to achieve 5-10 and 10 year average recurrence interval

(ARI) flood protection. A 10-year ARI flood is one that

has a 10 per cent chance of occurring in any given year.

We presented four design options to about 20 people

who attended a community meeting on Monday,

19 February. Based on the feedback provided at the

meeting, we’ve developed a fifth option which

we’re also consulting on.

Due to the financial impact the proposals will have on

landowners in the catchments, we’re contacting them

directly with all the information they need so they can

let us know what option they want us to go ahead with.

A request has been made to transfer a small area of land around Taplin Road from the

Hautapu Drainage District to Matangi Drainage District. The Waikato Central Drainage

Advisory Subcommittee, which has members who represent these districts (and others

in the central area), supports this transfer.

This issue is specific to the landowners who would change drainage districts, and a

letter will be sent to each of them about this adjustment.

FUNDING POLICY

Funding for this work would be consistent with the Project Watershed Funding Policy.

Under this policy, the share from people who get direct benefit from the work is assessed to be 50 per cent of the total cost.

There would be different levels of contribution from ratepayers in the Lower Waikato Scheme and also all regional ratepayers via the regional rate. Collectively, these ratepayers would contribute the other 50 per cent of the cost.

To help make the costs more manageable for people, we’re asking landowners for feedback on making payments over either 20 or 30 years.

However, it should be noted that while increasing the payback period to 30 years decreases the annual cost and may make repayments more affordable, it would increase the total cost paid over the life of the loan.

32

$350,000 capital value

$500,000capital value

$2,000,000capital value


Current ($) Proposed ($) Current ($) Proposed ($) Current ($) Proposed ($) Current ($) Proposed ($)

HAMILTON CITY COUNCIL

All property rates 219.15 223.77 271.93 276.15 447.84 450.75 799.68 799.94

Public transport 94.49 112.00 134.98 160.00 269.96 320.00 539.92 640.00

Catchment 18.39 22.38 26.27 31.98 52.53 63.95 105.06 127.90

Total estimated rates 332.02 358.15 433.17 468.12 770.33 834.70 1,444.66 1,567.84

HAURAKI DISTRICT COUNCIL


Catchment 45.36 47.87 64.81 68.38 129.61 136.76 259.22 273.52

Other targeted rates (2ha +) 65.42 68.72


MATAMATA-PIAKO DISTRICT COUNCIL


Catchment 45.36 47.87 64.81 68.38 129.61 136.76 259.22 273.52



OTOROHANGA DISTRICT COUNCIL


Catchment 41.84 47.76 59.77 68.23 119.53 136.45 239.06 272.90

Other targeted rates (2ha +) 63.12 66.32 65.42 68.72

Total estimated rates 240.75 260.33 302.77 328.38 572.66 621.53 988.49 1,077.59

ROTORUA DISTRICT COUNCIL REVALUED


Catchment 32.36 37.54 46.23 53.63 92.46 107.25 184.92 214.50


Total estimated rates 224.62 237.46 279.74 295.71 463.48 489.88 896.36 946.92

HOW YOUR RATES WOULD CHANGE

This table provides an indication of rating impacts across a sample of properties. Additional targeted rates may apply depending on where your property is located. See the full proposed rates for your property. waikatoregion.govt.nz/ratescalculator

NGĀ PANONITANGA KI ĀU RĒTI

33

$350,000 capital value

$500,000capital value



The actual rates charged to an individual property vary depending on its

location, size, value and the services it receives. Revaluations also impact

on the distribution of rates between ratepayers.

In some cases, we provide rates relief through rates remissions and

postponement. You can find these proposed policies on our website:

waikatoregion.govt.nz/ltp-fwd10.

You can let us know what you think of these policies as part of the feedback you provide on any of our proposals.

Current ($) Proposed ($) Current ($) Proposed ($) Current ($) Proposed ($) Current ($) Proposed ($)

SOUTH WAIKATO DISTRICT COUNCIL


Catchment 29.16 31.20 41.66 44.58 83.32 89.15 166.64 178.30


Total estimated rates 242.90 245.62 305.86 307.36 515.71 513.17 1,000.82 993.50

TAUPO DISTRICT COUNCIL


Catchment 36.08 39.04 51.55 55.78 103.09 111.55 206.18 223.10



THAMES-COROMANDEL DISTRICT COUNCIL REVALUED


Catchment 43.40 45.74 49.31 51.93 69.00 72.58 108.38 51.93


Total estimated rates 230.67 245.69 275.70 294.06 425.76 455.28 791.32 846.46

WAIKATO DISTRICT COUNCIL REVALUED


Catchment 48.54 58.36 69.34 83.38 138.68 166.75 277.37 333.50



WAIPA DISTRICT COUNCIL


Catchment 42.42 48.32 60.61 69.03 121.21 138.05 242.42 276.10



WAITOMO DISTRICT COUNCIL


Catchment 48.32 55.18 69.04 78.83 138.07 157.65 276.14 315.30



34

Independent auditor’s report on Waikato Regional Council’s Consultation Document for its proposed 2018-28 Long-Term Plan

I am the Auditor-General’s appointed auditor for Waikato Regional Council (the Council). Section 93C of the Local Government Act 2002 (the Act) requires an audit report on the Council’s consultation document. We have done the work for this report using the staff and resources of Audit New Zealand. We completed our report on 13 March 2018.

Opinion

In my opinion:

the consultation document provides an effective basis for public participation in the Council’s decisions about the proposed content of its 2018-28 long-term plan, because it:

fairly represents the matters proposed for inclusion in the long-term plan; and

identifies and explains the main issues and choices facing the Council and region, and the consequences of those choices; and

the information and assumptions underlying the information in the consultation document are reasonable.

Basis of opinion

We carried out our work in accordance with the International Standard on Assurance Engagements (New Zealand) 3000 (Revised): Assurance Engagements Other Than Audits or Reviews of Historical Financial Information. In meeting the requirements of this standard, we took into account particular elements of the Auditor-General’s Auditing Standards and the International Standard on Assurance Engagements 3400: The Examination of Prospective Financial Information that were consistent with those requirements.

We assessed the evidence the Council has to support the information and disclosures in the consultation document. To select appropriate procedures, we assessed the risk of material misstatement and the Council’s systems and processes applying to the preparation of the consultation document.

We did not evaluate the security and controls over the publication of the consultation document.

35

Responsibilities of the Council and auditor

The Council is responsible for:

meeting all legal requirements relating to its procedures, decisions, consultation, disclosures, and other actions associated with preparing and publishing the consultation document and long-term plan, whether in printed or electronic form;

having systems and processes in place to provide the supporting information and analysis the Council needs to be able to prepare a consultation document and long-term plan that meet the purposes set out in the Act; and

ensuring that any forecast financial information being presented has been prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting practice in New Zealand.

I am responsible for reporting on the consultation document, as required by section 93C of the Act. I do not express an opinion on the merits of any policy content of the consultation document.

Independence

In carrying out our work, we complied with the Auditor-General’s:

independence and other ethical requirements, which incorporate the independence and ethical requirements of Professional and Ethical Standard 1 (Revised); and

quality control requirements, which incorporate the quality control requirements of Professional and Ethical Standard 3 (Amended).

Other than our work in carrying out all legally required external audits, we have no relationship with or interests in the Council.

David Walker Audit New Zealand On behalf of the Auditor-General, Auckland, New Zealand

36

28 May-1 June 2018Councillors make their decisions

Councillors will meet to discuss the feedback and make

final decisions on the 2018-2028 Long Term Plan.

16 March 2018Consultation begins

Give us your feedback online. Go to waikatoregion.govt.nz/ltp-fwd10.

26 June 20182018-2028 Long Term Plan adopted

The final plan will be adopted at the council meeting. A copy will

then be available online at waikatoregion.govt.nz/ltp-fwd10.

16 April 2018Consultation ends at 4pm

Please make sure your feedback is received by the close-off time and date.

7-11 May 2018Present your feedback to councillors

Meeting details, including agendas, will be available online at waikatoregion.govt.nz/agendas.

If you are not presenting, you are welcome to come along and listen to the presentations.

WHAT’S HAPPENING AND WHEN

Jane HennebryHamilton

021 229 8591

Bob SimcockHamilton

021 991 071

Barry QuayleHamilton

027 493 1349

Russ RimmingtonHamilton

027 671 1434

Fred LichtwarkWaikato

021 194 1469

Jennie HaymanWaikato

022 626 6126

Stu Husband Waihou

027 233 0030

Hugh Vercoe Waihou

027 490 4406

Kathy White Taupō-Rotorua

021 676 947

Dal MinogueThames-Coromandel

021 729 870 or 07 866 2204

Stu KneeboneWaipā King Country

021 943 055

Alan LivingstonChairpersonWaipā King Country027 572 0060

Tipa MahutaDeputy ChairpersonNgā Hau e Whā021 919 398

Kataraina HodgeNgā Tai ki Uta

027 450 8905

CONTACT YOUR COUNCILLORS

HE AHA, KĪ HEA RĀNEI NGĀ MAHI

WHAKAPĀ ATU KI Ō KAIKAUNIHERA

37

It’s important that our councillors know what you think about the proposals outlined in this consultation document. This is your chance to influence their decision making.

We need your feedback by 4pm on Monday, 16 April 2018.

Provide feedback online at waikatoregion.govt.nz/ltp-fwd10

HOW YOU CAN GIVE US YOUR FEEDBACK

Your details

Title (please circle): Dr Mr Mrs Miss Ms Other (please specify):

First name: Surname:

Organisation/group submitting (if applicable):

Email (please print):

Address (full address, including rural delivery):

Postcode:

Phone (day time): Mobile:

You are invited to speak to council about your feedback from 7-11 May 2018. If you/your group would like to present please

indicate here: Yes No

Deliver to:

Waikato Regional Council

Hamilton Office 401 Grey Street

Paeroa Office 13 Opatito Road

Taupō Office Paora Hapi & Titiraupenga St

Whitianga Office 33-35 Albert Street

Post to:

LTP project team

Freepost 118509

Waikato Regional Council

Private Bag 3038 Waikato

Mail Centre Hamilton 3240

Email to:[email protected]

Want to submit but don’t have access to a computer or the internet?

TELL US WHAT YOU THINKHE AHA ŌU WHAKAARO

2018-2028 LONG TERM PLAN | TE MAHERE ROA

Your feedback and any information you include is considered public information and will be available in reports and documents relating to

this process, in addition to being published on our website.

Below are questions for your consideration. Please indicate by ticking the option box of your preference. A section is included for additional

comments, and if necessary you may add additional pages of feedback.

38

Proposal 1: Use of the investment fund returns page 14

Which option do you support for how we use the investment fund returns?

| Option 1 – Continue to reduce the rates subsidy over the next two years

| Option 2 – Hold the rates subsidy at the current level

Which of the following options do you support? (Please tick the option you support).

Proposal 2: Funding depreciation of our assets page 15

Which option do you support for how we fund depreciation of our assets?

| Option 1 – Fully fund depreciation as we go

| Option 2 – Don’t fully fund depreciation in year 1 and 2 of the LTP

Proposal 3: Pest management page 18

Which option do you support for how we manage pests across the region?

| Option 1 – Address high risk pests and maintain our current work programme

| Option 2 – Address high risk pests and reduce some of our current work programme

Proposal 4: Catchment rates for new works page 20

Do you support or oppose the proposal for increased works in catchment areas?

| Yes – Support the proposed increases for catchment new works

| No – Don’t support the proposed increases for catchment new works

Proposal 5: Community Facilities Framework page 23

Do you support council adopting the community facilities framework?

| Option 1 – Don’t adopt the Community Facilities Framework

| Option 2 – Adopt the Community Facilities Framework

39

Do you have any other comments?

Proposal 6: Regional theatre page 24

Should we provide funding towards a regional theatre?

| Option 1 – Don’t provide any funding for a regional theatre

| Option 2 – Contribute to the capital component and the ongoing asset maintenance reserve fund, with the cost split between primary and secondary beneficiaries

| Option 3 – Contribute to the capital component and the ongoing asset maintenance reserve fund, with the cost split evenly across the region

| Option 4 – Contribute to the capital component only with the cost split between primary and secondary beneficiaries

| Option 5 – Contribute to the capital component only with the cost split evenly across the region

Proposal 7: Regional services fund page 26

Which option do you support for how we fund emergency services?

| Option 1 – Maintain the current funding levels

| Option 2 – Add LandSAR as a beneficiary

| Option 3 – Add LandSAR as a beneficiary and increase the funding to Surf Life Saving services.

Proposal 8: Hamilton to Auckland passenger rail service page 28

Do you support having a passenger rail service between Hamilton and Auckland?

| Option 1 – No funding for a trial passenger rail service

| Option 2 – Funding towards an interim service with rating based on capital value of the property

| Option 3 – Funding towards an interim service with rating based on a minimum $20 uniform charge and then capital value of the property

Private Bag 3038Waikato Mail Centre

Hamilton 3240New Zealand

0800 800 401waikatoregion.govt.nz


WATER USER CHARGES AND INFORMATION GATHERING FEESREITI TANGO WAI ME NGĀ UTU WHAKAEMI MŌHIOHIO

Over the last year a working party made up of representatives from a range of sectors

has looked at the way we charge to recover the costs of the information gathering

and research work we do in response to consent holders using the region’s water

resources.

Based on the working party’s recommendations we’re proposing to make the

following changes to these charges.

• A minimum charge of $65 paid by all water users irrespective of the

volume used.

• A charge per cubic metre for any volume used over and above the

minimum.

We’ll be writing to all affected resource consent holders to get their

feedback on the proposed change.

We’ve also looked at the way our other science and research costs are

funded. Overall, our costs to monitor the region’s natural resources

are increasing. The reasons why we need to do some of our work

have also changed since these charges were last reviewed in detail

in 2012.

The proposed changes to these charges vary across different

types of resource consents, so we’ll be writing to all affected

resource consent holders to explain the changes and to seek

their feedback.


TAUHEI FLOOD PROTECTION SCHEMEHANGANGA AHURU WAIPUHE KI TAUHEI

We’ve been working to find an affordable way to reduce

flooding of land adjacent to the upper Tauhei Stream.

Following consultation in the 2017/18 Annual Plan,

we agreed to maintain support for the Tauhei flood

control project, prepare the design for the works and

implement stage 1 to a maximum of $1.6 million.

It was also agreed that we would consult Tauhei

ratepayers on concept designs for stages 2 and 3

through the 2018-2028 Long Term Plan.

Over the past 12 months we’ve taken a good look at

the Tauhei and Mangatea catchments and used the

information we’ve gathered to develop concept designs

to achieve 5-10 and 10 year average recurrence interval

(ARI) flood protection. A 10-year ARI flood is one that

has a 10 per cent chance of occurring in any given year.

We presented four design options to about 20 people

who attended a community meeting on Monday,

19 February. Based on the feedback provided at the

meeting, we’ve developed a fifth option which

we’re also consulting on.

Due to the financial impact the proposals will have on

landowners in the catchments, we’re contacting them

directly with all the information they need so they can

let us know what option they want us to go ahead with.

FUNDING POLICY

Funding for this work would be consistent with the Project Watershed Funding Policy.

Under this policy, the share from people who get direct benefit from the work is assessed to be 50 per cent of the total cost.

There would be different levels of contribution from ratepayers in the Lower Waikato Scheme and also all regional ratepayers via the regional rate. Collectively, these ratepayers would contribute the other 50 per cent of the cost.

To help make the costs more manageable for people, we’re asking landowners for feedback on making payments over either 20 or 30 years.

However, it should be noted that while increasing the payback period to 30 years decreases the annual cost and may make repayments more affordable, it would increase the total cost paid over the life of the loan.


MATANGI BOUNDARY ADJUSTMENT PANONITANGA KI TE ROHE TAUĀRAI I MATANGI

A request has been made to transfer a small area of land around Taplin Road from the

Hautapu Drainage District to Matangi Drainage District. The Waikato Central Drainage

Advisory Subcommittee, which has members who represent these districts (and

others in the central area), supports this transfer.

This issue is specific to the landowners who would change drainage districts, and

a letter will be sent to each of them about this adjustment.

BE PART OF THE CHANGE YOU WANT TO SEE Mā tātou te … · A new home for our artistic and creative...

Documents

Transcript of BE PART OF THE CHANGE YOU WANT TO SEE Mā tātou te … · A new home for our artistic and creative...