|
|
|
AGENDA
Audit and Risk Committee Meeting
Friday, 1 October 2021
|
|
Date:
|
Friday, 1 October 2021
|
|
Time:
|
9.30 am
|
|
Location:
|
Ngā Hau e Whā, William Fraser Building,
1 Dunorling Street, Alexandra
Due to COVID-19 restrictions and limitations of the
physical space, public access will
be available through the livestream and Microsoft Teams. The link to the livestream will be available on
the Central Otago District Council’s website.
|
|
Sanchia Jacobs
Chief Executive Officer
|
Members Ms
L Robertson (Chair), His Worship the Mayor T Cadogan, Cr N Gillespie, Cr S Jeffery,
Cr N McKinlay
In Attendance S Jacobs (Chief
Executive Officer), L Macdonald (Executive Manager - Corporate Services), J
Muir (Executive Manager - Infrastructure Services), L van der Voort (Executive
Manager - Planning and Environment), S Righarts (Chief Advisor), G McFarlane
(Business Risk and Procurement Manager), R Williams (Governance Manager)
1 Apologies
2 Public
Forum
3 Confirmation
of Minutes
Audit and Risk Committee meeting -
4 June 2021
|
Audit and Risk Committee Agenda
|
1 October 2021
|
MINUTES
OF Central Otago District Council Audit and Risk Committee
HELD IN Ngā Hau e
Whā, William Fraser Building, 1 Dunorling Street, Alexandra ON
Friday, 4 June 2021 AT
9.32 am
PRESENT: Ms
L Robertson (Chair), His Worship the Mayor T Cadogan, Cr S Jeffery,
Cr N McKinlay
IN
ATTENDANCE: Cr C Laws, L Macdonald (Executive Manager - Corporate
Services), J Muir (Executive Manager - Infrastructure Services), L van der
Voort (Executive Manager - Planning and Environment), S Righarts (Chief
Advisor), A McDowall (Finance Manager), G McFarlane (Business Risk and Procurement
Manager), A Crosbie (Senior Strategy Advisor), A Mason (Media and Marketing
Manager - Tourism Central Otago), K McCulloch (Corporate Accountant),
L Webster (Regulatory Services Manager), R Ennis (Health, Safety and
Wellbeing Advisor) and R Williams (Governance Manager)
Note: The
Mayor assumed the Chair until Ms Robertson arrived at 9.42 am.
1 Apologies
|
Committee Resolution
Moved: Cadogan
Seconded: Jeffery
That the apology from Cr N Gillespie and the apology for
lateness from Ms L Robertson be received and accepted.
Carried
|
2 Public
Forum
There was no public forum.
3 Confirmation
of Minutes
|
Committee Resolution
Moved: Jeffery
Seconded: McKinlay
That the public minutes of the Audit and Risk Committee
Meeting held on 24 February 2021 be confirmed as a true and correct record.
Carried
|
4 Declaration
of Interest
Members were reminded of their
obligations in respect of declaring any interests. There were no further
declarations of interest.
5 Reports
for Decisions
|
21.2.2 Audit
NZ and Internal Audit Update
|
|
To provide an update on the
status of the internal audit programme and any outstanding actions for
completed internal and external audits.
|
|
Committee Resolution
Moved: Cadogan
Seconded: McKinlay
That the Audit and Risk Committee receives the report.
Carried
|
Note: Ms
Robertson arrived at 9.42 am and assumed the Chair.
|
21.2.3 Sensitive
Expenditure Policy
|
|
To review and recommend to
Council the adoption of the Sensitive Expenditure Policy, the Travel Policy
and the Credit Card Policy.
During discussion the following
changes were suggested:
· The
roles and responsibilities for domestic and international travel to be
separated.
· Ensure the one up principal is reflected in the elected
members’ allowances and reimbursement policy, and that approval for
travel reflects the elected members’ allowances and reimbursement
policy.
· The
Gift and Hospitality register should be considered by the Audit and Risk
Committee annually.
· Both
accepting and declining gifts and hospitality must be recorded in the
register.
|
|
Committee Resolution
Moved: Robertson
Seconded: McKinlay
That the Audit and Risk Committee
A. Receives
the report and accepts the level of significance.
B. Recommends
to Council that they approve the amended Sensitive Expenditure Policy, the
Travel Policy and the Credit Card Policy.
Carried
|
Note: The
Mayor left the meeting at 10.02 am and returned at 10.12 am.
Note: Cr
McKinlay left the meeting at 10.46 am and returned at 10.49 am.
|
21.2.4 An
update on the preparation of the 2021-31 Long-term Plan
|
|
To provide an update on the
progress in developing the 2021-31 Long-term Plan.
During discussion a number of
suggestions and clarifications were made. It was agreed that these
would be updated before the final adoption on 30 June 2021.
|
|
Committee Resolution
Moved: Robertson
Seconded: Cadogan
That the report be received.
Carried
|
|
21.2.5 Audit
NZ Interim Report on the audit of the 2021-31 Long-term Plan Consultation
Document
|
|
To receive Audit NZ’s
Report to Council on the audit of the 2021-31 Long-term Plan Consultation
Document.
|
|
Committee Resolution
Moved: Robertson
Seconded: Cadogan
That the report be received.
Carried
|
|
21.2.6 Risk
Management Update
|
|
To consider the Risk Management
update. During discussion it was agreed that a copy of the risk
register would be provided for the next meeting, even if it was still in
draft format.
|
|
Committee Resolution
Moved: Robertson
Seconded: Jeffery
That the report be received.
Carried
|
|
21.2.7 Financial
Reserves Policy
|
|
To consider and provide feedback
on the draft Financial Reserves Policy before submitting to Council for
consideration at their 30 June meeting. A minor amendment was suggested
for inclusion in the final document.
|
|
Committee Resolution
Moved: Robertson
Seconded: Cadogan
That the Audit and Risk Committee
A. Receives
the report and accepts the level of significance.
B. Notes
the Financial Reserves Policy will be considered at the Council 30 June
meeting.
Carried
|
|
21.2.8 Fixed
Asset and Disposal Policy
|
|
To consider and provide feedback
on the draft Fixed Asset and Disposal Policy before requesting that the Chief
Executive approves this policy for council staff use. During discussion
minor amendments were suggested and it was agreed that the title of the
policy would be amended to read “Fixed Asset Management and Disposal
Policy.”
|
|
Committee Resolution
Moved: Robertson
Seconded: McKinlay
That the Audit and Risk Committee
A. Receives
the report and accepts the level of significance.
B. Notes
the draft policy, with any amendments, will be signed-off by the Chief
Executive and issued to staff for implementation.
Carried
|
|
21.2.9 Financial
Report for the period ending 31 March 2021
|
|
To consider the financial
performance for the period ending 31 March 2021. The new Finance
Manager was introduced to the Committee.
|
|
Committee Resolution
Moved: Robertson
Seconded: Cadogan
That the report be received.
Carried
|
|
21.2.10 Policy
and Strategy Register
|
|
To present an updated register
of the Council’s policies and strategies.
|
|
Committee Resolution
Moved: Robertson
Seconded: McKinlay
That the Audit and Risk Committee receive the report.
Carried
|
6 Reports
for Information
|
21.2.11 Tourism
operator compliance records
|
|
To give an overview of a known
new compliance issue and actions taken to remedy.
|
|
Committee Resolution
Moved: Robertson
Seconded: Jeffery
That the report be received.
Carried
|
|
21.2.12 Update
on progress of the Lake Dunstan Water Supply and Clyde Wastewater
Reticulation Projects
|
|
To provide an update on progress
of the Lake Dunstan Water Supply Project and the Clyde Wastewater
Reticulation Project. It was noted that the agenda had inadvertently
included the Lake Dunstan Water Supply report twice and the Clyde Wastewater
Reticulation Project report was tabled.
|
|
Committee Resolution
Moved: Robertson
Seconded: McKinlay
That the report be received.
Carried
|
|
21.2.13 Roading
Physical Works Contract (CON 05-2016-05) - Independent Audit Report
November 2020
|
|
To report on the independent
cost and overhead audit of the Roading Physical Works Contract undertaken by
Deloitte.
|
|
Committee Resolution
Moved: Robertson
Seconded: Cadogan
That the report be received.
Carried
|
|
21.2.14 Private
Swimming Pool Inspections
|
|
To consider Council’s
approach to complying with its legislative responsibility to inspect
privately-owned swimming pools under the Building Act 2004 (as amended 1
January 2017).
|
|
Committee Resolution
Moved: Robertson
Seconded: Cadogan
That the report be received.
Carried
|
|
21.2.15 Audit
and Risk Work Programme
|
|
To consider a draft work
programme for the Audit and Risk Committee.
|
|
Committee Resolution
Moved: Cadogan
Seconded: Robertson
That the report be received.
Carried
|
Note: The
Mayor left the meeting at 11.51 am and returned at 11.53am.
|
21.2.16 Health,
Safety and Wellbeing Report
|
|
To provide information on key
health and safety risks and the measures in place to mitigate those risks at
the Central Otago District Council.
|
|
Committee Resolution
Moved: Robertson
Seconded: Jeffery
That the report be received.
Carried
|
7 Chair's
Report
|
21.2.17 June
2021 Chair's Report
|
|
There was no update from the
Chair.
|
8 Members'
Reports
|
21.2.18 June
Members' Reports
|
|
There were no members’
updates.
|
9 Date
of The Next Meeting
The date of the next scheduled meeting is 1
October 2021.
10 Resolution
to Exclude the Public
|
Committee Resolution
Moved: Robertson
Seconded: Cadogan
That the public be excluded from the following parts of
the proceedings of this meeting.
The general subject matter of each matter to be considered
while the public is excluded, the reason for passing this resolution in
relation to each matter, and the specific grounds under section 48 of the
Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 for the passing
of this resolution are as follows:
|
General subject of each matter to be
considered
|
Reason for passing this resolution in
relation to each matter
|
Ground(s) under section 48 for the
passing of this resolution
|
|
Confirmation of
Non-Public
Minutes from the
Previous
Meeting
|
s7(2)(a) - the withholding
of the
information is
necessary to
protect the privacy of
natural
persons, including that
of
deceased natural
persons
s7(2)(d) - the
withholding of the
information is
necessary to avoid
prejudice to measures
protecting
the health or safety of
members
of the public
s7(2)(g) - the
withholding of the
information is
necessary to
maintain legal
professional
privilege
|
s48(1)(a)(i) - the public conduct of the relevant
part of the proceedings of the meeting would be likely to result in the disclosure
of information for which good reason for withholding would exist under
section 6 or section 7
|
|
21.2.19 - Audit New Zealand Report To
the Council on the 30 June 2020 Annual Report
|
s7(2)(i) - the withholding of the information is
necessary to enable Council to carry on, without prejudice or disadvantage,
negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiations)
|
s48(1)(a)(i) - the public conduct of the relevant
part of the proceedings of the meeting would be likely to result in the
disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding would exist
under section 6 or section 7
|
|
21.2.20 - Deloitte Report on the Cash
Handling Review
|
s7(2)(i) - the withholding of the information is
necessary to enable Council to carry on, without prejudice or disadvantage,
negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiations)
|
s48(1)(a)(i) - the public conduct of the relevant
part of the proceedings of the meeting would be likely to result in the
disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding would exist
under section 6 or section 7
|
|
21.2.21 - Infrastructure Staffing
|
s7(2)(a) - the withholding of the information is
necessary to protect the privacy of natural persons, including that of
deceased natural persons
|
s48(1)(a)(i) - the public conduct of the relevant
part of the proceedings of the meeting would be likely to result in the
disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding would exist
under section 6 or section 7
|
|
21.2.22 - Ombudsman Investigation
Outcome
|
s7(2)(a) - the withholding of the information is
necessary to protect the privacy of natural persons, including that of
deceased natural persons
|
s48(1)(a)(i) - the public conduct of the relevant
part of the proceedings of the meeting would be likely to result in the
disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding would exist
under section 6 or section 7
|
|
21.2.23 - Litigation Report
|
s7(2)(g) - the withholding of the information is
necessary to maintain legal professional privilege
|
s48(1)(a)(i) - the public conduct of the relevant
part of the proceedings of the meeting would be likely to result in the
disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding would exist
under section 6 or section 7
|
|
21.2.24 - June 2021 Confidential
Governance Report
|
s7(2)(c)(ii) - the withholding of the information
is necessary to protect information which is subject to an obligation of
confidence or which any person has been or could be compelled to provide
under the authority of any enactment, where the making available of the
information would be likely otherwise to damage the public interest
s7(2)(d) - the withholding of the information is
necessary to avoid prejudice to measures protecting the health or safety of
members of the public
|
s48(1)(a)(i) - the public conduct of the relevant
part of the proceedings of the meeting would be likely to result in the
disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding would exist
under section 6 or section 7
|
Carried
|
The public were excluded at 11.55 am and the meeting closed
at 12.48 pm.
4 Declaration
of Interest
21.3.1 Declarations
of Interest Register
Doc ID: 553231
1. Purpose
Members are reminded of the need to be vigilant to stand
aside from decision making when a conflict arises between their role as a
member and any private or other external interest they might have.
2. Attachments
Appendix 1 - Declaration of
Interests Register ⇩ 
|
Audit and Risk Committee meeting
|
1 October 2021
|
|
Name
|
Member’s
Declared Interests
|
Spouse/Partner’s
Declared Interests
|
Council
Appointments
|
|
Tim Cadogan
|
Alexandra
Musical Society (member)
Otago Chamber of Commerce Central Otago Advisory Group member
Dunstan Golf Club (member)
Alexandra Squash Club (member)
|
Two Paddocks
(employee)
Blossom Festival Committee member
FarmFresh (Family member sells for this entity)
|
Airport
Reference Group
Maniototo Curling International Inc
Eden Hore Steering Group
Tourism Central Otago Advisory Board Ministerial Working Group on Responsible
Camping
LGNZ Governance and Strategy Group
|
|
Neil
Gillespie
|
Contact
Energy (Specialist - Community Relations and Environment)
Clyde & Districts Emergency Rescue Trust (Secretary and Trustee)
Cromwell Volunteer Fire Brigade (Deputy Chief Fire Officer)
Cromwell Bowling Club (patron)
Otago Local Advisory Committee - Fire Emergency New Zealand
|
|
Lowburn Hall
Committee
Tarras Community Plan Group
Tarras Hall Committee
|
|
Stephen
Jeffery
|
G & S
Smith family Trust (Trustee)
K & EM Bennett’s family Trust (Trustee)
Roxburgh Gorge Trail Charitable Trust (Chair)
Roxburgh and District Medical Services Trust (Trustee)
Central Otago Clutha Trails Ltd (Director)
Teviot Prospects (Trustee)
Teviot Valley Community Development Scheme Governance Group
Central Otago Queenstown Network Trust
|
|
|
|
Nigel
McKinlay
|
Transition
To Work Trust (Board member)
Gate 22 Vineyard Ltd (Director)
Everyday Gourmet (Director)
Central Otago Wine Association (member)
Long Gully Irrigation Scheme (member)
|
|
|
5 Reports
for Information
21.3.2 Insurance
Update
Doc ID: 552923
1. Purpose
To provide an overview on
the status of Central Otago District Council insurances and the New Zealand
insurance market.
|
Recommendations
That the report be received.
|
2. Discussion
A number of insurances
policies are held by Council as a result of the breadth of activities Council
is involved in. Insurance provides a form of risk management which meets the
needs of Council, across the different Council functions. Council’s portfolio
of insurances is broad, ranging from legal liability insurances, material
damages insurance, standing timber (forestry), cyber insurance, vehicle
insurance, business interruption to name some of the portfolios.
Currently Council
insurances are held through Aon NZ after going through a Local Authority Shared
Service tender process in 2020. This process reduced the 2020/21 premiums
significantly across the portfolio. The insurances portfolio is constantly
being reviewed, ensuring the best and most appropriate fit for Council, with
the best value for money being achieved.
The insurance market and
the risk environment is evolving to meet New Zealand and worldwide demands, and
the cost is often impacted by what is happening across the markets. A verbal
update on market conditions, with particular emphasis on the current trends
influencing market costs, will be presented by Aon representatives.
3. Attachments
Nil
|
Report
author:
|
Reviewed
and authorised by:
|
|
|
|
|
Gabi
McFarlane
|
Leanne
Macdonald
|
|
Risk and Procurement
Manager
|
Executive
Manager - Corporate Services
|
|
16/09/2021
|
16/09/2021
|
21.3.3 Legislative
Compliance Warrant of Fitness
Doc ID: 535564
1. Purpose
To receive the 2021 Legislative Compliance Warrant of
Fitness.
|
Recommendations
That the report be received.
|
2. Discussion
The Legislative Compliance
Warrant of Fitness is a framework to identify the key legislation with which
the Council must comply. As the body of legislation is so large, priorities for
attention have been established.
There are nearly 200
pieces of active legislation that either guide council or are relevant to a
function in some way. Many of these pieces of legislation overlap across
several parts of the organisation – some have a minor impact that is
rarely felt, others have day to day implications.
Legislative
responsibilities exist in the following capacities:
· as
an employer
· as
a landlord and owner or properties
· as
a service provider and as a commercial operator
· as
a governing body
· as
a policy maker
· as
a regulator
· and
as an enforcer.
In addition to these
functions, there are pieces of legislation, including local legislation acts,
that relate to land acquisition, transfer, and disposal.
The methodology for the
2021 Warrant of Fitness included assessing the 2020 Warrant of Fitness and
identifying any gaps or areas for further analysis then comparing that work
against local government sector guidance provided by sector body Taituarā.
The key areas identified were then taken to the various business units across
Council and discussed with the relevant managers.
The Warrant of Fitness is
attached. There are two pieces to the Legislative Compliance Warrant of
Fitness:
· A high-level
analysis of the key areas of focus and the related legislation [Attachment 1]
· A comprehensive
list of legislation compiled and categorised in relation to the differing
council functions [Attachment 2]
Areas for action
identified in the previous Warrant of Fitness
The previous 2020 Warrant
of Fitness identified two areas of potential non-compliance: a potential need
for an internal copyright policy, and the decision – informed by
discussions with Council – to review the District Plan behind statutory
timeframes.
Action has taken place in
both these areas: the Copyright Policy is now in place; and the District Plan
Review is underway, the timeframes are as follows:
Table 1 District Plan review
timeframes
|
Tasks
|
Delivery Date
|
|
Convert Planning
Maps to GIS
|
30 June 2021
|
|
Chapter review -
Industrial
|
30 June 2021
|
|
Cromwell Spatial
Plan Implementation - Industrial
Zone
|
30 June 2021
|
|
Operative Plan in
ePlan
|
30 September 2021 *
|
|
Chapter review
– Residential
|
20 December 2021
|
|
Cromwell Spatial
Plan Implementation - Residential Zones
|
20 December 2021
|
|
Chapter review –
Rural
|
20 December 2021
|
|
Heritage Building
and Tree Register update
|
31 March 2022
|
|
Designation
Schedule Update
|
31 March 2022
|
|
Chapter review –
Commercial
|
30 June 2022
|
|
Cromwell Spatial
Plan Implementation - Commercial Zones
|
30 June 2022
|
|
Naseby Dark Sky
|
30 June 2022
|
|
Heritage Precinct
Design Guidelines
|
30 June 2022
|
|
Vincent Spatial
Plan Implementation – Industrial, Residential & Commercial Zones
|
30 June 2022
|
|
Heritage Building
and Tree Register review and update (new items)
|
20 December 2022
|
|
Teviot Valley
Spatial Plan
|
20 December 2022
|
* Dependant on supplier being able to
support
2021 Review
The 2021 review has
found that Council has systems in place to ensure that, to the best of its
knowledge and abilities, relevant legislation is complied with.
Compliance
is assured in a number of ways, including but not limited to:
• Subject
matter experts who are familiar with legislation and its requirements
• External
measures including statutory timeframes and auditing processes that council
complies with
• Internal
systems and procedures to review legislation and update bylaws and policies accordingly
• Memberships
with organisations, such as Taituarā, to share information and resourcing
There are three
policies in their final stages that are relevant to ensuring compliance in
their respective areas: Privacy Policy, LGOIMA Policy, and the Child Protection
Policy.
Areas of focus for
the 2022 review
While Council complies
with legislation, there are three areas of focus suggested for the 2022 review.
These areas move beyond compliance, seeking to provide a higher degree of
transparency and oversight:
1. Processes
that capture changes to legislation
2. Further
organisational understanding of legislative responsibilities
3. Provide
further detail in key focus areas to increase transparency
3. Attachments
Appendix 1 - 2021 Legislative
Compliance WOF: Legislative Overview ⇩
Appendix 2 - 2021 Legislative
Compliance Warrant of Fitness: Focus areas ⇩ 
|
Report
author:
|
Reviewed
and authorised by:
|
|
|
|
|
Alix
Crosbie
|
Saskia
Righarts
|
|
Senior
Strategy Advisor
|
Chief
Advisor
|
|
20/09/2021
|
20/09/2021
|
|
Audit and Risk Committee meeting
|
1 October 2021
|
Legislative Compliance 2021:
Legislation relating to Central Otago District Council
Highlighted
pieces of legislation are those with a greater level of responsibility or accountability.
|
Legislation
|
Department legislation is primarily
relevant to
|
Function
|
Comments
|
|
Employer
|
Land, property, commercial, finance
|
Governing body/ policy maker
|
Regulator
|
Historic
|
|
Accident Compensation Act 2001
|
People and Culture
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Airport Authorities Act 1966
|
Planning and Environment
|
|
ü
|
|
ü
|
|
Local authorities may assist airport
authorities
|
|
Animal Welfare Act 1999
|
Planning and Environment
|
|
ü
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
Anzac Day Act 1966
|
People and Culture
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
Anzac Day is a holiday
|
|
Archives, Culture, and Heritage Reform
Act 2000
|
Information Management
|
|
ü
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
Arts Council of New Zealand Toi Aotearoa
Act 2014
|
Community
|
|
ü
|
ü
|
|
|
A local authority can be designated as a
community arts provider
|
|
Bill of Rights 1688
|
People and Culture
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
Some electoral freedoms listed - very
old and outdated piece of legislation
|
|
Biosecurity Act 1993
|
Planning and Environment
|
|
ü
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
Building Act 2004
|
Planning and Environment
|
|
ü
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
Building Research Levy Act 1969
|
Infrastructure
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
When building we may face levies under
this act
|
|
Burial and Cremation Act 1964
|
Planning and Environment
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bylaws Act 1910
|
Chief Executive
|
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
Cadastral Survey Act 2002
|
Planning and Environment, Infrastructure
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
Guidelines around surveyors for
consenting etc
|
|
Children's Act 2014
|
People and Culture
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
Employment checks on those working with
children (i.e. Swimming pools)
|
|
Citizenship Act 1977
|
People and Culture
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Citizenship (Western Samoa) Act 1982
|
People and Culture
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
People born in Western Samoa before 1949
to be considered NZ citizens
|
|
Civil and Criminal Justice Statute 1354
|
People and Culture
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
None shall be condemned without due
process of Law
|
|
Civil Aviation Act 1990
|
Planning and Environment
|
|
ü
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
Civil Defence Emergency Management Act
2002
|
Infrastructure
|
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
Climate Change Response Act 2002
|
Infrastructure, Planning and
Environment, Chief Executive
|
|
ü
|
ü
|
ü
|
|
|
|
Commerce Act 1986
|
Planning and Environment
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
|
Companies Act 1993
|
People and Culture
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
|
Conservation Act 1987
|
Planning and Environment, Infrastructure
|
|
ü
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
Consumer Guarantees Act 1993
|
Planning and Environment
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
|
Contract and Commercial Law Act 2017
|
All
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Contributory Negligence Act 1947
|
People and Culture
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Copyright Act 1994
|
Corporate Services
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
|
COVID-19 Public Health Response Act 2020
|
Chief Executive
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
COVID-19 Recovery (Fast-track
Consenting) Act 2020
|
Infrastructure
|
|
ü
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
Crimes Act 1961
|
People and Culture
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Criminal Records (Clean Slate) Act 2004
|
People and Culture
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Crown Forest Assets Act 1989
|
Planning and Environment
|
|
ü
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
Crown Grants Act 1908
|
Corporate Services
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
How land granted from crown is managed
|
|
Crown Minerals Act 1991
|
Planning and Environment
|
|
ü
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
Cultural Property (Protection in Armed
Conflict) Act 2012
|
Chief Executive
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
Police right to search artifacts if
suspected of crimes
|
|
Deaths by Accidents Compensation Act
1952
|
People and Culture
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Designs Act 1953
|
Corporate Services
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
|
Disability (United Nations Convention on
the Rights of Persons with Disabilities) Act 2008
|
People and Culture
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
Amended Local Government Act 2002
|
|
Legislation
|
Department legislation is primarily
relevant to
|
Employer
|
Land, property, commercial, finance
|
Governing body/ policy maker
|
Regulator
|
Historic
|
Comments
|
|
Disabled Persons Community Welfare Act
1975
|
People and Culture, Planning and
Environment, Infrastructure
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
Provisions for disabled employees and
tenants
|
|
Disputes Tribunal Act 1988
|
People and Culture
|
ü
|
ü
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
Dog Control Act 1996
|
Planning and Environment
|
|
|
ü
|
ü
|
|
Section 10A requires the Council to
report on its dog control policies and practises for the financial year
|
|
Domestic Violence – Victims’
Protection Act 2018
|
People and Culture
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Electoral Act 1993
|
Governance
|
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
Electricity Act 1992
|
Infrastructure, Planning and Environment
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
|
Employment Relations Act 2000
|
People and Culture
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Environment Act 1986
|
Infrastructure, Planning and Environment
|
|
ü
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
Environmental Protection Authority Act
2011
|
Infrastructure, Planning and Environment
|
|
ü
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
Epidemic Preparedness Act 2006
|
People and Culture
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
No ongoing responsibilities, provides
mechanisms for govt to make changes during pandemic
|
|
Equal Pay Act 1972
|
People and Culture
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Estate and Gift Duties Act 1968
|
People and Culture
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
|
Evidence Act 2006
|
Corporate Services
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fair Trading Act 1986
|
Corporate Services
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
|
Family Violence Act 2015
|
People and Culture
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fencing Act 1978
|
Planning and Environment
|
|
ü
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
Fencing of Swimming Pools Act 1987
|
Planning and Environment
|
|
ü
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
Finance Act (various)
|
Corporate Services
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
|
Financial Markets Conduct Act 2013
|
Corporate Services
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
|
Financial Reporting Act 2013
|
Corporate Services
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fire and Emergency NZ Act 2017
|
Planning and Environment, Infrastructure
|
|
ü
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
Flags, Emblems, and Names Protection Act
1981
|
Chief Executive
|
|
ü
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
Food Act 2014
|
Planning and Environment
|
|
ü
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
Food Safety Law Reform Act 2018
|
Planning and Environment
|
|
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
Forest and Rural Fires Act 1977
|
Planning and Environment
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forestry Encouragement Act 1962
|
Infrastructure, Planning and Environment
|
|
|
ü
|
|
|
Minister may advance money to any local
authority for the encouragement of forestry
|
|
Forestry Rights Registration Act 1983
|
Infrastructure, Planning and Environment
|
|
ü
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
Forests Act 1949
|
Planning and Environment
|
|
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
Fuel Industry Act 2020
|
Planning and Environment
|
|
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
Gambling Act 2003
|
Planning and Environment
|
|
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
Gas Act 1992
|
Planning and Environment
|
|
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
Geographical Indications (Wine and
Spirits) Registration Act 2006
|
Chief Executive
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goods and Services Tax Act 1985
|
Corporate Services
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
|
Government Roading Powers Act 1989
|
Infrastructure
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
|
Haka Ka Mate Attribution Act 2014
|
Chief Executive
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
Historical claim settlment relating to
ownership and use of the haka Ka Mate
|
|
Harassment Act 1997
|
People and Culture
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Harmful Digital Communications Act 2015
|
People and Culture
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hazardous Substances and New Organisms
Act 1996
|
People and Culture
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Health Act 1956
|
People and Culture
|
ü
|
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
Health and Safety at Work Act 2015
|
People and Culture
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Heritage New Zealand Pouhere Taonga Act
2014
|
Chief Executive
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
|
Holidays Act 2003
|
People and Culture
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Housing Accords and Special Housing
Areas Act 2013
|
Infrastructure, Planning and Environment
|
|
ü
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
Housing Act 1955
|
Planning and Environment
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
|
Housing Assets Transfer Act 1993
|
Corporate Services
|
|
|
ü
|
|
|
14.2 has provisions removing crown liability
for unpaid rates
|
|
Human Rights Act 1933
|
People and Culture
|
ü
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
Human Tissue Act 2008
|
Chief Executive
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
Applicable in relation to museum
collections and displays
|
|
Legislation
|
Department legislation is primarily
relevant to
|
Employer
|
Land, property, commercial, finance
|
Governing body/ policy maker
|
Regulator
|
Historic
|
Comments
|
|
Identity Information Confirmation Act
2012
|
People and Culture
|
ü
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
|
Immigration Act 2009
|
People and Culture
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Impounding Act 1955
|
Planning and Environment
|
|
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
Income Tax Act 2002
|
Corporate Services
|
ü
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
|
Infrastructure Funding and Financing Act
2020
|
Infrastructure, Planning and Environment
|
|
ü
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
Injury Prevent, Rehabilitation, and
Compensation Act 2001
|
People and Culture
|
ü
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
|
Insolvency Act 2006
|
Corporate Services
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
|
Insurance Law Reform Act 1977
|
Corporate Services
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
|
Insurance (Prudential Supervision) Act
2010
|
Corporate Services
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
|
Intelligence and Security Act 2017
|
People and Culture
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest on Money Claims Act 2016
|
Corporate Services
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
|
Irrigation Schemes Act 1990
|
Infrastructure, Planning and Environment
|
|
ü
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
KiwiSaver Act 2006
|
People and Culture
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Land Act 1948
|
Planning and Environment
|
|
ü
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
Land Drainage Act 1908
|
Infrastructure, Planning and Environment
|
|
ü
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
Land Transfer Act 2017
|
Planning and Environment
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
|
Land Transport Act 1998
|
Infrastructure
|
ü
|
ü
|
ü
|
ü
|
|
|
|
Land Transport Management Act 2003
|
Planning and Environment
|
|
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
Land Transport (Speed Limits Validation
and Other Matters) Act 2015
|
Infrastructure
|
|
ü
|
ü
|
ü
|
|
|
|
Land Valuation Proceedings Act 1948
|
Corporate Services
|
|
ü
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
Law Reform Act 1936 and 1944
|
Corporate Services
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Layout Designs Act 1994
|
Chief Executive
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
|
Libraries and Mechanics' Institute Act
1908
|
People and Culture
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Limitation Act 2010
|
Planning and Environment
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
Land ownership and mining rights
|
|
Litter Act 1979
|
Infrastructure
|
|
ü
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
Local Authorities (Members Interests)
Act 1968
|
Governance
|
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
Local Electoral Act 2001
|
Governance, Chief Executive
|
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
Local Government (Rating) Act 2002
|
Corporate Services, Governance, Chief
Executive
|
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
Local Government Act 1974
|
Infrastructure, Planning and Environment
|
|
ü
|
|
ü
|
|
Roading and drainage portions not
entirely repealed
|
|
Local Government Act 2002
|
Chief Executive
|
|
ü
|
ü
|
ü
|
|
|
|
Local Government Borrowing Act 2011
|
Corporate Services
|
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
Local Government Official Information
and Meetings Act 1987
|
Governance, Chief Executive
|
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
Local Legislation Act 1926
|
Historic
|
|
|
|
|
ü
|
41 Otago Provincial, 65 Inclusion of
Alexandra in Manuherikia Irrigation District
|
|
Local Legislation Act 1927
|
Historic
|
|
|
|
|
ü
|
Maniototo and Vincent jubilees, Otago
power boards
|
|
Local Legislation Act 1928
|
Historic
|
|
|
|
|
ü
|
Alexandra Borough Council land
|
|
Local Legislation Act 1930
|
Historic
|
|
|
|
|
ü
|
Vincent bylaws
|
|
Local Legislation Act 1931
|
Historic
|
|
|
|
|
ü
|
Unsure if 41 River Boards Act portion
relates to CO or not
|
|
Local Legislation Act 1939
|
Historic
|
|
|
|
|
ü
|
Central Otago Power
|
|
Local Legislation Act 1940
|
Historic
|
|
|
|
|
ü
|
Credit balances to Cromwell District
Council
|
|
Local Legislation Act 1943
|
Historic
|
|
|
|
|
ü
|
Otago Central Electrical Power Board
loans
|
|
Local Legislation Act 1948
|
Historic
|
|
|
|
|
ü
|
Otago Central Electrical Power Board
elections
|
|
Local Legislation Act 1949
|
Historic
|
|
|
|
|
ü
|
Vincent land transfer
|
|
Local Legislation Act 1950
|
Historic
|
|
|
|
|
ü
|
Otago Central Power
|
|
Local Legislation Act 1953
|
Historic
|
|
ü
|
|
|
ü
|
Cromwell War Memorial donation, Clyde
Athenaeum and Public Library and asset transfer
|
|
Local Legislation Act 1954
|
Historic
|
|
|
|
|
ü
|
Cromwell Borough staff housing funding
|
|
Local Legislation Act 1955
|
Historic
|
|
|
|
|
ü
|
Cromwell Borough Council special loan
for housing
|
|
Local Legislation Act 1957
|
Historic
|
|
ü
|
|
|
ü
|
Cromwell Borough Council development
work on endowment land
|
|
Legislation
|
Department legislation is primarily
relevant to
|
Employer
|
Land, property, commercial, finance
|
Governing body/ policy maker
|
Regulator
|
Historic
|
Comments
|
|
Local Legislation Act 1958
|
Historic
|
|
|
|
|
ü
|
Alexandra Borough Council land refund to
District Fund Account, special rating purpose in Otago catchment (unsure if
Central)
|
|
Local Legislation Act 1959
|
Historic
|
|
|
|
|
ü
|
Roxburgh and Cromwell Borough Council
expenditures
|
|
Local Legislation Act 1961
|
Historic
|
|
|
|
|
ü
|
Vincent County Council refund, Cromwell
centennial expenditure
|
|
Local Legislation Act 1964
|
Historic
|
|
|
|
|
ü
|
Maniototo special loan and hopsital
board land sale (also Vincent)
|
|
Local Legislation Act 1966
|
Historic
|
|
ü
|
|
|
ü
|
Vincent special rate, Clyde water
supply, Alexandra centennial funding,
|
|
Local Legislation Act 1967
|
Historic
|
|
|
|
|
ü
|
Roxburgh centenniel
|
|
Local Legislation Act 1968
|
Historic
|
|
|
|
|
ü
|
Cromwell borough civic chamber
|
|
Local Legislation Act 1972
|
Historic
|
|
|
|
|
ü
|
Cromwell fund transfer
|
|
Local Legislation Act 1974
|
Historic
|
|
|
|
|
ü
|
Alexandra Borough Council loan guarantee
|
|
Local Legislation Act 1975
|
Historic
|
|
|
|
|
ü
|
Alexandra Borough Council land sale
|
|
Major Events Management Act 2007
|
Chief Executive
|
|
|
ü
|
|
|
Would give government powers over
'clean' zones, transport route, and periods
|
|
Maori Fisheries Act 2004
|
Planning and Environment
|
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
Te Ture mō Te Reo Māori 2016
Māori Language Act 2016
|
Chief Executive, People and Culture
|
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
Maori Purposes Fund Act 1934–35
|
People and Culture
|
|
|
ü
|
|
|
Had provisions for how local authority
can donate
|
|
Minimum Wage Act 1983
|
People and Culture
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Misuse of Drugs Act 1975
|
People and Culture
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Molyneux Gold Dredging Company (Claims
Amalgamation) Act 1936
|
Historic
|
|
|
|
|
ü
|
|
|
Museum of New Zealand Te Papa Tongarewa
Act 1992
|
Chief Executive
|
|
ü
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990
|
People and Culture
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
New Zealand Library Association Act 1939
|
People and Culture
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
|
New Zealand Maori Arts and Crafts
Institute Act 1963
|
Chief Executive
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
|
New Zealand Public Health and Disability
Act 2000
|
People and Culture
|
ü
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
|
New Zealand Tourism Board Act 1991
|
Chief Executive
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ngai Tahu Claims Settlement Act 1998
|
Chief Executive
|
|
ü
|
ü
|
ü
|
|
|
|
Ngai Tahu (Pounamu Vesting) Act 1997
|
Chief Executive
|
|
ü
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
Oaths and Declarations Act 1957
|
Governance
|
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
Occupiers' Liability Act 1962
|
Planning and Environment
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ombudsmen Act 1975
|
Chief Executive
|
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
Otago Southland Flood Relief Committee
Empowering Act 1980
|
Planning and Environment
|
|
ü
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
Ozone Layer Protection Act 1996
|
Planning and Environment, Infrastructure
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
|
Parental Leave and Employment Protection
Act 1987
|
People and Culture
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Plumbers, Gasfitters, and Drainlayers
Act 2006
|
Chief Executive
|
|
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
Privacy Act 1993
|
People and Culture, Chief Executive
|
ü
|
ü
|
ü
|
ü
|
|
|
|
Property Law Act 1952
|
Planning and Environment, Infrastructure
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
|
Prostitution Reform Act 2003
|
Chief Executive
|
|
|
ü
|
ü
|
|
|
|
Protected Disclosures Act 2000
|
People and Culture
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Protected Objects Act 1975
|
Chief Executive
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
|
Public Audit Act 2001
|
Corporate Services
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
|
Public Bodies Contracts Act 1959
|
Planning and Environment
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
|
Public Bodies Leases Act 1969
|
Planning and Environment
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
|
Public Finance Act 1989
|
Corporate Services
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
|
Public Works Act 1981
|
Infrastructure
|
|
ü
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
Rates Rebate Act 1973
|
Corporate Services
|
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
Rating Valuations Act 1998
|
Corporate Services
|
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
Remuneration Authority Act 1977
|
People and Culture
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Residential Tenancies Act 1986
|
Planning and Environment
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legislation
|
Department legislation is primarily
relevant to
|
Employer
|
Land, property, commercial, finance
|
Governing body/ policy maker
|
Regulator
|
Historic
|
Comments
|
|
Reserves Act 1977
|
Planning and Envrionment
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reserves and Other Lands Disposal Act
1932–33
|
Historic
|
|
|
|
|
ü
|
Adjustment of Southland/Otago boundary
|
|
Reserves and Other Lands Disposal Act
1974
|
Historic
|
|
|
|
|
ü
|
Part of Cromwell Racecourse designated
Aerodrome
|
|
Reserves and Other Lands Disposal Act
1977
|
Historic
|
|
|
|
|
ü
|
Cromwell Aerodrome
|
|
Reserves and other Lands Disposal and
Public Bodies Empowering Act 1907
|
Historic
|
|
|
|
|
ü
|
Lauder land sale
|
|
Reserves and Other Lands Disposal and
Public Bodies Empowering Act 1911
|
Historic
|
|
|
|
|
ü
|
Fraser Mining License conditions
|
|
Reserves and Other Lands Disposal and
Public Bodies Empowering Act 1913
|
Historic
|
|
|
|
|
ü
|
Several Cromwell, Alex, Otago
|
|
Reserves and Other Lands Disposal and
Public Bodies Empowering Act 1914
|
Historic
|
|
|
|
|
ü
|
Earnscleugh Station and water rights
|
|
Reserves and Other Lands Disposal and
Public Bodies Empowering Act 1915
|
Historic
|
|
|
|
|
ü
|
Earnscleugh Settlement, Cromwell
Borough, Cromwell Racecourse
|
|
Reserves and Other Lands Disposal and
Public Bodies Empowering Act 1916
|
Historic
|
|
|
|
|
ü
|
Mining district leases
|
|
Reserves and Other Lands Disposal and
Public Bodies Empowering Act 1917
|
Historic
|
|
|
|
|
ü
|
Roxburgh Recreation Reserve
|
|
Reserves and Other Lands Disposal and
Public Bodies Empowering Act 1918
|
Historic
|
|
|
|
|
ü
|
Cancelling Crown grant of land in Town
of Alexandra, Otago
|
|
Reserves and Other Lands Disposal and
Public Bodies Empowering Act 1922
|
Historic
|
|
|
|
|
ü
|
Land in Vincent
|
|
Reserves and Other Lands Disposal and
Public Bodies Empowering Act 1923
|
Historic
|
|
|
|
|
ü
|
Land in Bannockburn
|
|
Reserves and other Lands Disposal and
Public Bodies Empowering Act 1924
|
Historic
|
|
|
|
|
ü
|
Land in Cromwell
|
|
Reserves and other Lands Disposal and
Public Bodies Empowering Act 1925
|
Historic
|
|
|
|
|
ü
|
Cromwell development and water supply
|
|
Reserves and other Lands Sale, Disposal,
and Enabling and Public Bodies Empowering Act 1901
|
Historic
|
|
|
|
|
ü
|
Cromwell hospital land
|
|
Resource Management Act 1991
|
Planning and Environment, Infrastructure
|
|
ü
|
ü
|
ü
|
|
|
|
Sale and Supply of Alcohol 2012
|
Planning and Environment
|
|
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
Search and Surveillance Act 2012
|
People and Culture
|
ü
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
|
Secret Commissions Act 1910
|
People and Culture
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Serious Fraud Office Act 1990
|
People and Culture
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
|
Smoke-free Environments Act 1990
|
People and Culture
|
ü
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
|
Smokefree Environments and Regulated
Products Act 1990
|
People and Culture
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
Vaping at work
|
|
Soil Conservation and Rivers Control Act
1941
|
Planning and Environment, Infrastructure
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sovereign's Birthday Observance Act 1952
|
People and Culture
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Summary Offences Act 1981
|
People and Culture
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Te Runanga o Ngai Tahu Act 1996
|
Chief Executive
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Te Ture Whenua Maori Act 1993
|
Chief Executive
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Trade Marks Act 2002
|
Chief Executive, Corporate Services
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
|
Trade Unions Act 1908
|
People and Culture
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Transport Accident Investigation
Commission Act 1990
|
Infrastructure
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Transport Act 1962
|
Infrastructure
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
|
Treaty of Waitangi Act 1975
|
Chief Executive
|
ü
|
ü
|
ü
|
ü
|
|
|
|
Treaty of Waitangi (Fisheries Claims)
Settlement Act 1992
|
Planning and Environment
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Trespass Act 1980
|
People and Culture
|
ü
|
ü
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
Unit Titles Act 2010
|
Planning and Environment
|
|
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
Urban Development Act 2020
|
Planning and Environment
|
|
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
Utilities Access Act 2010
|
Infrastructure
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
|
Victims' Rights Act 2002
|
People and Culture
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Vincent County Empowering (Community
Centres) Act 1970
|
Chief Executive
|
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
Legislation
|
Department legislation is primarily
relevant to
|
Employer
|
Land, property, commercial, finance
|
Governing body/ policy maker
|
Regulator
|
Historic
|
Comments
|
|
Volunteers Employment Protection Act
1973
|
People and Culture
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Wages Protection Act 1983
|
People and Culture
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Waitangi Day Act 1976
|
People and Culture
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Walking Access Act 2008
|
Infrastructure, Planning and Environment
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
|
Waste Minimisation Act 2008
|
Planning and Environment, Infrastructure
|
|
ü
|
ü
|
ü
|
|
|
|
Weathertight Homes Resolution Services
Act 2006
|
Planning and Environment, Infrastructure
|
|
ü
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
Weights and Measures Act 1987
|
Infrastructure
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
|
Wild Animal Control Act 1977
|
Planning and Environment
|
|
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
Wildlife Act 1953
|
Planning and Environment
|
|
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
WorkSafe New Zealand Act 2013
|
People and Culture
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otago Regional Council Bylaws, Plans, Policies,
and Strategies
· Otago Regional Council
Navigation Safety Bylaw 2020
· Otago Regional Council
Flood Protection Management Bylaw 2012
· Otago Regional Council
Regional Pest Management Plan
· ORC Regional Policy
Statement
· ORC Strategies: Air
Quality Strategy, Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan, Urban and Rural Water
Quality Strategy
· ORC Plans: Air, Coast,
Waste, Water
· ORC Transport Plans
|
Audit and Risk Committee meeting
|
1
October 2021
|
21.3.4 Policy
and strategy register
Doc ID: 552152
1. Purpose
To receive the updated
Policy and Strategy Register.
|
Recommendations
That the report be received.
|
2. Discussion
The following changes have
been made to the Policy and Strategy register:
People and Culture
· Equal Employment
Opportunity, Discrimination, Harassment and Bullying Policy completed
· Performance
Management Policy completed
· Staff Interests
Policy refresh delayed to December 2021
· Child Protection
Policy added as a future work item
Information Services
· Cyber Security
Policy has had a soft review, refer to separate paper for this meeting
· Copyright Policy
completed
· LGOIMA Policy is
nearing completion
· Privacy Policy is
nearing completion
· Drone Policy has
been added as a future work item
· CCTV Policy has
been added as a future work item
Regulatory
· Smokefree Policy
delayed from September to October 2021 due to work prioritisation
Roading
· Speed Limit Bylaw
work is underway but delayed due to work prioritisation
Libraries
· Three policies were
due for review in 2021: Cataloguing Policy, Collection Development Policy,
Donations Policy
· These reviews are
underway and will be completed by December 2021
Community and Engagement
· Grants Policy
underwent a soft review, with a full review to come after this funding round
· Community
Development Strategy review completed
· Communications and
Engagement Strategy delayed from December 2021 to April 2022 due to work
prioritisation
· Museum Strategy
split into two portions.
o A sector-led strategy has been
completed
o A further piece of work, the
Council’s Museum Investment Strategy is underway
· Wellbeing Strategy
has been added as a future work item
Finance
· The following
policies were presented to the previous Audit and Risk Committee and
subsequently adopted by Council:
o Credit Card Policy
o Financial Reserves Policy
o Fixed Asset and Disposal
Policy
o Sensitive Expenditure Policy
o Travel Policy
o Staff Delegations Manual
· Fraud, Bribery,
and Corruption policy and Protected Disclosures (Whistleblowing) Policy had
internal soft reviews with no changes. Both are next due for soft review
October 2022.
· Procurement Policy
and Risk Management Policy read over by staff and soft reviews scheduled for
June 2022.
· The following
policies were reviewed and adopted through the Long-term plan process:
o Investment Policy
o Liability Management Policy
o Rates Remission Policy
o Rating Policy
o Revenue and Financing Policy
Health,
Safety and Wellbeing
· The Health and
Safety Policy Statement is near finalisation
· Health and Safety
Framework added as a future work item
General
· Long-term Plan
completed in June 2021
· Housing Strategy
went to Council for input in June and now due December 2021
· Infrastructure
Strategy and Development and Financial Contributions Policy approved in June as
part of the Long-term plan process
3. Attachments
Appendix 1 - Policy and Strategy
Register October 2021 ⇩
|
Report
author:
|
Reviewed
and authorised by:
|
|
|
|
|
Alix Crosbie
|
Saskia
Righarts
|
|
Senior
Strategy Advisor
|
Chief
Advisor
|
|
13/09/2021
|
20/09/2021
|
|
Audit and Risk Committee meeting
|
1 October 2021
|
*Updated
through Long-term plan process
21.3.5 Audit
NZ and Internal Audit Update
Doc ID: 552955
1. Purpose of Report
To provide an update on
the status of the external and internal audit programme and any outstanding
actions for completed internal and external audits.
|
Recommendations
That the Audit and Risk Committee receives the report.
|
2. Background
Council
has a legislative requirement to complete external audits of annual reports and
the long-term plan through Audit New Zealand. Audit New Zealand complete a
governance report on their findings and any recommendations for
improvements. A schedule of actions is then created and allocated to
staff to manage the completion of these recommendations.
The
2019-2020 Audit New Zealand Management Report was presented to Audit and Risk
at the June 2021 meeting. The Audit New Zealand – Audit Action Register
contains three outstanding actions from the previous year which remain in
progress with one ongoing action. There are no urgent actions outstanding.
There are eight new recommendations for improvements from the Audit New Zealand
2020 Management Report. Currently four of these have been completed.
As
reported at the June meeting, Audit New Zealand issued an unmodified audit
report on 24 March 2021 for the Consultation Document. There were no actions
resulting from this audit.
An International
Accreditation New Zealand (IANZ) audit was conducted in the Regulatory Services
activity between 27-30 July 2021. A verbal update will be provided by the
Regulatory Services Manager.
In
addition to external audits, council carries out several internal audits
annually to provide assurance over compliance and to mitigate business risks. Five
recommendations remain in progress, in the payroll and Cyber Security areas. The
cash-handling audit has been completed with Deloitte’s identifying two
recommendations for improvement which have been completed, outlined in the
attached register.
3. Discussion
Both
internal and external audits result in recommendations where council can make
improvements. Appendix 1 and 2 list the outstanding tasks and any
progress with these tasks. Once the Committee have viewed the completed tasks
these are removed from the schedule.
The
following attachments include a status update on the actions resulting from the
auditors’ recommendations.
4. Attachments
Appendix 1 - Audit New Zealand -
Audit Action Register .pdf ⇩ 
Appendix 2 - Internal Audit Action
Register .pdf ⇩ 
|
Report
author:
|
Reviewed
and authorised by:
|
|
|
|
|
Gabi
McFarlane
|
Leanne
Macdonald
|
|
Risk and
Procurement Manager
|
Executive
Manager - Corporate Services
|
|
20/09/2021
|
21/09/2021
|
|
Audit
and Risk Committee meeting
|
1
October 2021
|
|
Audit and Risk Committee meeting
|
1
October 2021
|
21.3.6 Risk
Register
Doc ID: 552756
1. Purpose
To consider an update on
the Risk Register.
|
Recommendations
That the report be received.
|
2. Discussion
The Risk Register is a
tool to identify key risks across the organisation. The register also
includes opportunities for mitigation of these risks.
At the June 2021 meeting,
the Committee requested the Strategic Risk Register be brought to the October
meeting, in the draft form. The Risk Register is currently under
development; progress so far includes identifying the key strategic risks and
their description, the risk drivers to these and consequences of these risks as
well as the current controls or treatment actions. The next step requires the
Executive Team agree the mitigations to these risks, and determines the
inherent and residual risk ratings.
The Risk Register
information to date is attached.
3. Attachments
Appendix 1 - Strategic Risk
Register - Dashboard .pdf ⇩ 
|
Report
author:
|
Reviewed
and authorised by:
|
|
|
|
|
Gabi
McFarlane
|
Leanne
Macdonald
|
|
Risk and
Procurement Manager
|
Executive
Manager - Corporate Services
|
|
16/09/2021
|
16/09/2021
|
|
Audit
and Risk Committee meeting
|
1
October 2021
|
21.3.7 Protection
of Information and Information Systems (Cyber Security) Policy and Standards
soft review
Doc ID: 551262
1. Purpose
To receive an update on the
soft review carried out on the Protection of Information and Information
Systems series of policies.
|
Recommendations
That the report be received.
|
2. Discussion
It is standard procedure
to carry out a soft review of new policies twelve months post
implementation. As a result, a soft review has been carried out on the
Protection of Information and Information Systems series of policies.
No changes are being
recommend to the Cybersecurity Policy and Acceptable Use Standard. Both are
applicable to all Council users. There are thirteen additional standards
applicable to the operational management of information and information systems
carried out by the Information Services Team.
The following table is a
summary the series:
|
Protection of Information and Information Systems series:
|
|
Cybersecurity Policy
|
Overarching policy related to Cyber Security for
information and information systems.
|
|
Acceptable
Use Standard
|
Primary
standard for user acceptable use.
|
|
The
following relate to the operational management of information and information
systems carried out by the Information Services Team:
|
|
Access
Control Standard
|
The
purpose of this Standard is to ensure that access to assets and associated
facilities is limited to authorised users, processes, or devices and to
authorised activities and transactions.
|
|
Anomalies and Event Identification Standard
|
The purpose of this Standard is to ensure that anomalous
activity is detected in a timely manner.
|
|
Asset
Management Standard
|
The
purpose of this Standard is to ensure that Assets are managed consistent with
their relative importance to business objectives and the Council's risk
strategy.
|
|
Awareness and Training Standard
|
The purpose of this Standard is to ensure that personnel
and partners are provided cybersecurity awareness education and are
adequately trained to perform their information security related duties and
responsibilities consistent with related policies, standards, procedures, and
agreements.
|
|
Continuous
Monitoring Standard
|
The
purpose of this Standard is to ensure that information systems and assets are
monitored at discrete intervals to identify cyber security events and verify
the effectiveness of protective measures.
|
|
Data Security Standard
|
The purpose of this Standard is to ensure that information
systems and assets are monitored at discrete intervals to identify cyber
security events and verify the effectiveness of protective measures.
|
|
Governance
Standard
|
The
purpose of this Standard is to ensure that Council's business environment is
understood, and that policies, standards, procedures, and processes are
established to manage and monitor performance so that activities are
conducted in accordance with regulatory, legal, risk, environmental and
operational requirements. Risks to business assets and individuals are
understood and Council's priorities, constraints and risk tolerances are
established, documented, and used to support operational risk decisions.
|
|
Information Protection Standard
|
The purpose of this Standard is to ensure that information,
assets, and resources are protected through the implementation of effective
procedures and processes.
|
|
Maintenance
Standard
|
The
purpose of this Standard is to ensure that information systems and industrial
control systems are maintained to ensure continuity of operations.
|
|
Protective Technology Standard
|
The purpose of this Standard is to ensure that Technology
is implemented and managed to ensure the security and resilience of systems
and assets.
|
|
Recovery
Management Standard
|
The
purpose of this Standard is to ensure that Council has appropriate
documentation, resources, and facilities to support an information systems
recovery operation.
|
|
Response Management Standard
|
The purpose of this Standard is to ensure that Council
has adequate documentation and resources available to successfully manage and
mitigate a cybersecurity incident or event and that the incident response
capability is subject to continuous improvement.
|
|
Response
Operations Standard
|
The
purpose of this Standard is to ensure that incidents are reported in a timely
manner and internal and external stakeholders remain informed. Accurate
analysis of an incident is carried out to ensure an appropriate response and
remediation operations minimise the impact to Council.
|
A Cyber Security Audit is
schedule for first half of 2022, at which time a subsequent review of the
series will occur, in addition to a new Cyber Security Plan.
3. Attachments
Appendix 1 - Cybersecurity
Policy.pdf ⇩ 
Appendix 2 - Acceptable Use
Standard ⇩
Appendix 3 - Access Control
Standard ⇩
Appendix 4 - Anomalies and Event
Identification Standard ⇩ 
Appendix 5 - Asset Management
Standard ⇩
Appendix 6 - Awareness and
Training Standard ⇩
Appendix 7 - Continuous Monitoring
Standard ⇩
Appendix 8 - Data Security
Standard ⇩
Appendix 9 - Governance Standard ⇩
Appendix 10 - Information
Protection Standard ⇩
Appendix 11 - Maintenance
Standard ⇩
Appendix 12 - Protective
Technology Standard ⇩
Appendix 13 - Recovery
Management Standard ⇩
Appendix 14 - Response
Management Standard ⇩
Appendix 15 - Response
Operations Standard ⇩
|
Report
author:
|
Reviewed
and authorised by:
|
|
|
|
|
Nathan
McLeod
|
Leanne
Macdonald
|
|
IS
Manager
|
Executive
Manager - Corporate Services
|
|
31/08/2021
|
1/09/2021
|
|
Audit
and Risk Committee meeting
|
1
October 2021
|
|
Audit and Risk Committee meeting
|
1 October
2021
|
|
Audit and Risk Committee meeting
|
1
October 2021
|
|
Audit and Risk Committee meeting
|
1
October 2021
|
|
Audit and Risk Committee meeting
|
1
October 2021
|
|
Audit and Risk Committee meeting
|
1
October 2021
|
|
Audit and Risk Committee meeting
|
1
October 2021
|
|
Audit and Risk Committee meeting
|
1
October 2021
|
|
Audit and Risk Committee meeting
|
1 October
2021
|
|
Audit and Risk Committee meeting
|
1
October 2021
|
|
Audit and Risk Committee meeting
|
1
October 2021
|
|
Audit and Risk Committee meeting
|
1
October 2021
|
|
Audit and Risk Committee meeting
|
1
October 2021
|
|
Audit and Risk Committee meeting
|
1
October 2021
|
|
Audit and Risk Committee meeting
|
1
October 2021
|
21.3.8 Cyber Security Plan 2018-2021 update
Doc ID: 551475
1. Purpose
To consider an update on
the 2018-2021 Cyber Security Plan.
|
Recommendations
That the report be received.
|
2. Discussion
The intent of this report
is to start building a template for regular reporting on Cyber Security to Audit
and Risk Committee and the Executive Team. We are seeking feedback on the
information you would like to receive.
In this report, the following topics will be covered:
· Executive
Summary
· What’s
happening in New Zealand?
· What’s
happening at Central Otago District Council?
· ALGIM
Cyber Security Programme update
· Outstanding
Key Recommendation Status Report (in the future, these key recommendations will
be included in the ALGIM Cyber Security Programme update)
· Cyber
Security programme of work
Executive Summary
A Cyber Security Audit is
planned for the first half of 2022. This has been delayed due to delays
with server, storage, back-up, and retention programme of work because of
COVID-19 impacts.
Following this audit, a
new cyber security plan will be prepared and brought to this Committee for
input before being initiated.
Focus areas of Cyber
Security since the last report have been on:
· User
training and awareness programme, including preparation for October’s
Cyber Security month to promote awareness
· Renewal
and deployment of new protective technologies including managed threat response
service
· Updating
and reviewing actions related to the requirements and controls Association of
Local Government Information Management (ALGIM) Cyber Security Programme
framework
· Soft
review of the Protection of Information and Information series including the
cyber security policy and standards
What’s happening in New Zealand?
Council utilise Computer
Emergency Response Team (CERT) as a resource for cyber security support. CERT
NZ works to support businesses, organisations and individuals who are affected
(or may be affected) by cyber security incidents. CERT provide trusted and
authoritative information and advice, while also collating a profile of the
threat landscape in New Zealand.
The following is a
highlights quarter one 2021 cyber security incidents across New Zealand:
More details on the current threat landscape can be found on
the CERT NZ Quarter One Report 2021: https://www.cert.govt.nz/about/quarterly-report/quarter-one-report-2021/
What’s happening at Central Otago District Council?
The following outlines
what Council protective technologies are doing for the 15 August 2021 to 14
September 2021 period:
· Potentially
unwanted applications (PUAs)
Managed Threat Response service over the last 30 days:
ALGIM Cyber Security
Programme update
Association of Local
Government Information Management (ALGIM) has defined a Cyber Security
framework which is powered by SAM for Compliance giving councils the ability to
manage and reduce organisational Cyber Security related risk. As part of the
programme, councils that demonstrate defined levels of achievement and
improvement will receive awards at the ALGIM annual conference.
The latest Management
Status Report is attached for your information (Appendix 1).
The following details the
current snapshot of how Council is preforming within this framework benchmarked
against other Councils:
· The
following shows that Council is 77.40% compliant with the framework controls:
· The
following shows how Council is tracking against other councils within this
framework over the last 12 months:
· The
following is a summary of the controls by status:
Overall, we are regularly
reviewing the framework once a month, updating controls and working on
outstanding actions and improvements. Our next focus is on the nine not started
controls and re-reviewing the exempted controls.
The following is summary
of the improvements within each function:
Identify:
· Asset
Management – we have reassessed and improved our inventory systems,
created an inventory of software applications and services – this
includes our cloud-based applications, what we refer to as services. Approval
for new applications and services is required.
· Governance
– we have undertaken a soft review of policy and standards. Also working
through documenting our procedures and plans.
Manage:
· Access
Control – improvements have been made to our controls and procedures
around remote and physical access, such as minimising access to assets. Further
work on remote access agreements with our contractors is being progressed.
· Information
and Data Security – removing USB portable drives access is underway,
along with further education using Council’s approved file sharing
service. This service enables Council to manage all its information.
· Information
Protection – new preventative maintenance tasks have been implemented to
undertake regular checks of our restricted access across official information
management systems.
· Maintenance
– our maintenance is very mature, automated, and well managed which
ensures we are as proactive as we can be. This is managed through our
preventative maintenance procedures, with associated tasks reviewed annually,
or as improvements are required.
Protect:
· Awareness
and Training – this is currently the focus, with the release of Phriendly
Phishing and onsite specialist training planned. Further details can be found
under the Cyber security staff training initiative.
· Protective
Technology – this is another focus area, the details of which can be
found in the Cyber Security programme of work section.
Detect:
· Continuous
Monitoring – Along with the new protective technologies that have been
deployed, as per the Cyber Security programme of work section, Council has
invested in Sophos Managed Threat Response service. This service has already
provided excellent support to the Information Services team, enabling improved
oversight through a global approach to threats. Additionally, with Security
information and event management (SIEM) services being put on hold, we are
investigating alternatives.
Respond:
· We
have robust response undocumented procedures in place, so this has not been a
focus area. Documentation of these procedures is underway, being the Incident
and Problem Management Procedure, plus the above-mentioned managed threat
response service has added value to this function.
· If
a significant incident occurs, the Coordinated Incident Management System
utilised for civil defence, can be applied.
Recover:
· Our
ability to recover is robust, tested and documented as part of the Information
and Communication Technology Disaster Recovery Plan. This plan has a focus on
our digital space; hence we are preparing a Physical Records Disaster Recovery
Plan to support of physical documents.
· Our
Information and Communication Technology Disaster Recovery Plan is planned to
be reviewed later this calendar year as we renew our server, storage, backup,
and recovery systems. This environment is being replaced following a successful
tender bid from The Information Management Group (TIMG). TIMG are providing the
following:
o Infrastructure as a Services
(IaaS) – Fully managed service that will reside in our Alexandra server
room
o Back-up as a Service
(BaaS) – Fully managed service that will reside in the TIMG Auckland
datacentre. This will provide all our back-up requirements, including backing up
critical cloud services such as Microsoft 365 and MAGIQ Cloud in the future
o Disaster Recovery as a
Service (DRaaS) – Fully managed service that will reside in the TIMG
Auckland datacentre. This will provide an improved recovery solution with
geographical resilience and improved recovery times.
The following shows how
Council is tracking by each function within the framework when compared to
other councils:
The following shows the
trend by each function over the last 12 months. Recover and Respond have not
been our focus, as our ability to respond is well established. However, we have
made improvements within manage, protect and detect due to our work around
protective technologies and our people.
Outstanding Key
Recommendation Status Report
Following the Cyber
Security Audit in 2019 key recommendations were made. Please find attached an
update on these recommendations (Appendix 2).
Cyber Security programme
of work
The Cyber Security Plan
has been supported by Cyber Security programme of work. This has progressed
well over last few months, with several initiatives and projects being
completed or getting underway.
Following the tender for
Cyber Security services with a focus on protective technologies and people,
Scientific Software and Systems Limited were selected as our primary Cyber
Security partner.
The following is a summary
of various initiative and projects:
Information Services
Service Management procedures
These are our primary
service management procedures, which have a relationship with the Protection of
Information and Information Systems policy and standard series:
· Asset
Management Procedure
· Change
Management Procedure
· Incident
and Problem Management Procedure, this includes the sub process of Critical Incident
Management, which includes Critical Incident Reporting
· Knowledge
Management Procedure
· Preventative
Maintenance Management Procedure
· Project
Management Procedure
· Service
Desk and Services Management Procedure
These are currently all in
draft and are expected to be completed before December 2021. All procedures are
practised by the Information Services team and managed within our service
management system. Project Management is being moved to the new Sentient
Portfolio Program Management system in conjunction with Infrastructure
Services. It’s expected that Sentient will provide improved project
reporting and awareness, along with improved project process improvements.
Perimeter security
and end point protection project
We have deployed the
latest Sophos firewalls and end point protective technologies, with centralised
cloud-based management and managed threat response services. This has provided
Council with an improved one pane of glass view of the status of perimeter and
end points across the Council ecosystem, along with a service that continually
monitors our threat landscape.
Email protection
project
Following the tender for
Cyber Security services with a focus on protective technologies and people, SMX
Limited was selected as our email protection provider. SMX are also an All of
Government provider. SPAM and email protection services have improved, and we
have recently released the ability for staff to report SPAM direct to SMX. SMX
partner with CERT NZ.
Multi factor
authentication and improved passwords project
It was decided to utilise
the investment in Microsoft 365 multifactor authentication. This has been
implemented across the organisation, and as new applications and services are
released, Microsoft 365 multifactor authentication is utilised to maintain a
high level of user security.
New password business
rules have been released to the users. User training to encourage better
password practices was also undertaken with limited success. Improvements still
need to made and further recommendations from Audit New Zealand are pending.
Privileged access
management project
With the upcoming project
related to moving our key applications – MAGIQ Enterprise, MAGIQ
Performance and MAGIQ Documents into the new MAGIQ Cloud platform, along with
most other applications and services now being cloud delivered, it’s been
decided to change this project to focus on identity management. Identity
management combined with multifactor authentication will improve our user
security and management. We are still investigating identity management
solutions.
Cloud access and web
protection project
With the release of the
above-mentioned Sophos firewalls and end point protective technologies, this
has provided us with suitable cloud access and web protection services. This
combined with approved applications and services whitelisting and blacklisting
which is currently is being deployed, is enabling us to monitor where all
Council information resides and what information systems are being utilised to
manage that information. It’s expected to take several months to get a
full picture of activity across Council. Currently users are typically using
approved applications and services.
Cyber security staff
training initiative
Scientific Software and
Systems have partnered with Association of Local Government Information
Management (ALGIM) to provide a cyber security training programme, which we are
currently undertaking.
Phriendly Phishing is
being delivered to staff and elected members with some success. Phriendly
Phishing is a digitally delivered solution that provides phishing simulation
and cyber security training. During the recent lockdown, staff were again
encouraged to undertake these 15-minute sessions to improve their cyber
security practices, this has resulted in an improved uptake. Council will take
advantage of Cyber Security month during October to promote good cyber security
practices.
Additionally, three in
person training sessions are planned to be delivered by a professional cyber
security trainer from Scientific Software and Systems. This was planned for
September, planning to be rescheduled for October/November. We are expecting
these in person sessions to help improve the Phriendly Phishing uptake and
improve of cyber security practices.
Training and awareness
will be ongoing and will be adjusted to cater for different user learning wants
and needs.
New Cyber Security
Plan
As mentioned, this project
is currently scheduled for first half of 2022, following the Cyber Security
Audit.
Security information
and event management (SIEM) project
This project has been put
on hold. This has been discussed and agreed with this Committee that during
this time of COVID-19, expenditure needs to managed well. The need for a SIEM
will be discussed further with the cyber security auditor.
In the meantime, we are
investigating and trailing better event management logging solutions to help
establish patterns and trends. This will assist in further understand the need
for more advanced Security information and event management solutions.
3. Attachments
Appendix 1 - Management Status
Report ⇩ 
Appendix 2 - Information Security
Risk Review - Oustanding Key Recommendations Status Report ⇩ 
|
Report
author:
|
Reviewed
and authorised by:
|
|
|
|
|
Nathan McLeod
|
Leanne
Macdonald
|
|
IS
Manager
|
Executive
Manager - Corporate Services
|
|
17/09/2021
|
17/09/2021
|
|
Audit
and Risk Committee meeting
|
1
October 2021
|
|
Audit and Risk Committee meeting
|
1
October 2021
|
21.3.9 Waka
Kotahi New Zealand Transport Agency Technical Investment Audit of Central Otago
District Council
Doc ID: 551278
1. Purpose
To report on the Technical Investment Audit of the Central
Otago District Council undertaken by Waka Kotahi New Zealand Transport Agency
in October 2020.
|
Recommendations
That the report be received.
|
2. Discussion
In October 2020 Waka
Kotahi New Zealand Transport Agency undertook a Technical Investment Audit of
the Central Otago District Council roading activities. The audit report was
received in mid-August, 10 months after the audit was undertaken. Council
staff formally requested this audit report three times during this period, to
enable the findings to be incorporated into the 2021 Land Transport Programme
funding request.
The audit report outlines
how Council are performing overall in areas such as:
§ Addressing previous audit issues
(not applicable)
§ Network condition and management
(some improvement needed)
§ Activity management planning (some
improvement needed)
§ Data quality (effective)
§ Road safety (some improvement
needed)
Performance against these
criteria are rated using the following scale:
· Effective
· Some improvement
needed
· Significant
improvement needed
· Unsatisfactory
Waka Kotahi summarise
their report with the following commentary:
Central Otago District
Council takes a proactive and strategic approach to activity management
planning and we were particularly impressed with Council’s management of
customer expectations in regard to unsealed road condition, resulting in
comparatively high customer satisfaction levels.
Taking a similarly
strategic approach to management of the bridge stock, rural road delineation,
footpath improvements and subdivision development would deliver improved
outcomes in terms of tactical planning, value for money and road safety.
The Central Otago
District road network is generally in good condition and well managed, despite
an apparent backlog in the resurfacing programme. Unsealed roads provide
a good ride, with leading edge maintenance practices. Footpaths, signage
and delineation require greater attention.
The annual number of
deaths and serious injuries (DSI’s), listed in New Zealand’s Crash
Analysis System (CAS) as occurring in Central Otago District (state highways
and local roads), has trended down since 2011/12, but the local road component
shows a gradual increase. This has begun to reverse over the last 3-5
years, but Council needs to focus on common factors including driver behaviours
(addressed through the Road Safety Promotion programme) and curves on rural
roads.
The report had an overall
rating assessment of some improvement needed.
Central Otago District
Council was the second lowest funded network per km of road at the time of the
audit, and limitations in meeting some of the auditors expectations within the
low funding levels was discussed with the auditors at the time of the audit.
The funding request made
to Waka Kotahi for the 2021 Land Transport Programme was increased on the
recommendation of the auditors to enable the issues that were raised to be
addressed.
For each recommendation
listed, Waka Kotahi have outlined suggestions for Council’s consideration
to meet their expectations. Council was initially given two weeks to
review and respond to this draft report. Staff have advised Waka Kotahi
that feedback will be provided after the Audit and Risk Committee meeting.
The proposed response to
the individual audit recommendations is shown on the following table.
|
Audit
Recommendation:
|
Central
Otago District Council Officer Response:
|
|
Review
resurfacing intervention approach
|
The
planning and programming for resurfacing work aims to ensure the best
surfacing type is being implemented to address known surfacing issues, and to
minimise the whole of life cost within the funding constraints that are set
by Waka Kotahi.
|
|
Ensuring
traffic services are maintained and to current standards (signs, markings and
other devices)
|
Increased
focus is being provided to addressing sign defects. These will be
prioritised to address defects on regulatory and warning signs, and by road
classification within the Waka Kotahi funding constraints.
|
|
Bridge
defects are dealt with in a timely manner to maximise their useful life
|
Increased
focus is being provided to addressing bridge defects. These are
required to be prioritised as there is insufficient funding to address all
defects identified.
|
|
Prioritise
the recruitment development and retention of roading/transportation staff
|
Council
has always prioritised the recruitment, development and retention of roading
staff within the Infrastructure Department.
As
noted by Waka Kotahi in this report, there is a shortage of skilled engineers
across all of New Zealand. This coupled with our Council being in a region
that has a very competitive employment market has made recruitment a
significant challenge.
The
Senior Roading Engineer role that was vacant during the Audit has now been
filled, but there is now a vacancy for an Asset Engineer.
|
|
Review
development standards to reduce variety and ensure quality of vested assets
|
Points
raised by Waka Kotahi are generally issues that have come about as a result
of environmental court and/or Commissioner hearings. These issues are often
raised and supported by Council, but the outcome can be beyond Council
control.
Council
do undertake proactive early engagement with developers that can help address
issues during the planning or early stages of development.
We
recommend that Waka Kotahi provide input into the national review of
development engineering standards and the Resource Management Act to provide
support to safe standards for urban developments.
We
recommend that Waka Kotahi provide technical assistance through the hearings
process where developers are suggesting road standards that staff do not
believe will provide safe outcomes.
|
|
Development
of bridge management strategy
|
Council
has now commenced work on a district wide bridge strategy.
This
bridge strategy will aid prioritisation and decision making around
Council’s bridge structures and will address the points raised by Waka
Kotahi. Funding to implement the prioritised bridge renewal and
replacement programme will be requested in the 2024 Land Transport Programme
|
|
Development
of rural road delineation strategy
|
Council
has a rural road delineation strategy, and this will be re-circulated to
staff and contractors to ensure compliance with the standard. This
standard does not include delineation on low volume roads due to funding
limitations.
|
|
Development
of footpath improvement/management plan
|
Footpath
renewals and improvements continue to be a focus area for Councils roading
team, however the recent funding request for the 2021-24 period did not see
Waka Kotahi matching the allocations Council requested.
All
new footpath and footpath renewal works conform with guidelines, but there
are still some (20%) of existing footpaths with deficient kerb crossing
points, width and condition.
Funding
was included in the 2021 Land Transport Programme request to address the drop
kerb crossing points, but this was not funded by Waka Kotahi. These
will now be replaced over time as part of routine kerb renewal programmes.
|
|
Compliance
with Waka Kotahi funding rules regarding net present value analysis
|
The
Central Otago District roading network does not have a high rate of road
rehabilitation like other Councils, the few exceptions where a road
rehabilitation is required are often many years apart which explains why
there is a lack of NPV analysis for Waka Kotahi to comment on.
We
will however ensure that NPV analysis is undertaken on any rehabilitation
work that is undertaken, noting that all road rehabilitations that were
programmed in the 2021- 24 period have been removed from the programme due to
Waka Kotahi funding restrictions.
|
|
Compliance
with Waka Kotahi funding rules regarding undertaking condition rating surveys
|
Central
Otago District undertakes condition rating and full roughness and High-Speed
Data (HSD) surveys on its transportation network every three years. This is
timed to align with the update of Council’s Activity Management Plan, Long
Term Plan (LTP) and National Land Transport Programme cycles.
Waka Kotahi
has had a long-standing requirement that visual condition rating and
roughness surveys be undertaken at least every second year and annual
condition rating surveys for all sealed roads carrying more than 2000
vehicles per day (AADT).
This
requirement is seen an inefficient use of limited funding, given that the
programme is set for a three year period and there is limited opportunity to
change this on a two year cycle.
Visual
condition rating is an outdated method for assessing the performance of the
roading network, with more specialist high-tech, repeatable, and useful
alternative surveys now available.
Council staff
have previously raised its concerns informally with Waka Kotahi and the Road
Efficiency Group.
Staff do not
believe Waka Kotahi’s higher frequency requirement represents value for
money for Central Otago District. We propose to raise this
concern formally with both the Road Efficiency Group and Waka Kotahi, and
request a review of this outdated rule.
|
|
Compliance
with Waka Kotahi funding rules regarding Road Safety Audits
|
In
the past, Waka Kotahi funding constraints for network and asset management
have limited the ability to undertake Road Safety Audits to the standard
expected.
However,
there is room to improve this going forward. We note that the
non-compliant audit related to a project on a state highway (Clyde Underpass)
that was funded through the Council roading programme, with ratepayer funding
provided.
|
|
1 October 2021
|
|
3. Attachments
Appendix 1 - CODC (T) DRAFT2 Audit
Report 2020.docx ⇩
|
Report
author:
|
Reviewed
and authorised by:
|
|
|
|
|
James
McCallum
|
Julie
Muir
|
|
Roading
Manager
|
Executive
Manager - Infrastructure Services
|
|
19/09/2021
|
20/09/2021
|
|
Approved Organisation
(AO):
|
1.
Central Otago District Council
|
|
Waka Kotahi NZ Transport Agency Investment (2018
– 2021 NLTP):
|
$ 14,702,300 (budgeted programme value)
|
|
Date of Investment Audit:
|
12-15 October 2020
|
|
Audit Team:
|
Dawn Shannon - Senior Investment Auditor (Lead)
Andrea Nicol - Team Leader - Land Transport, Ruapehu
DC
Gordon McDonald - Senior Investment Advisor
Tony Lange - Senior Investment Auditor (Observer)
|
|
Report No:
|
2.
RADST-2008
|
AUTHORITY SIGNATURES
|
Prepared by:
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dawn Shannon, Senior Investment Auditor
|
|
|
|
Approved by:
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yuliya Gultekin, Practice Manager Audit &
Assurance
|
|
Date
|
|
DISCLAIMER
While every
effort has been made to ensure the accuracy of this report, the findings,
opinions, and recommendations are based on an examination of a sample only
and may not address all issues existing at the time of the audit. The
report is made available strictly on the basis that anyone relying on it does
so at their own risk, therefore readers are advised to seek advice on
specific content.
|
EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY
Central
Otago District Council takes a proactive and strategic approach to activity
management planning and we were particularly impressed with Council’s management
of customer expectations in regard to unsealed road condition, resulting in
comparatively high customer satisfaction levels. Taking a similarly
strategic approach to management of the bridge stock, rural road delineation,
footpath improvements and subdivision development would deliver improved
outcomes in terms of tactical planning, value for money and road safety.
The
Central Otago District road network is generally in good condition and well
managed, despite an apparent backlog in the resurfacing programme.
Unsealed roads provide a good ride, with leading edge maintenance
practices. Footpaths, signage and delineation require greater attention.
The
annual number of deaths and serious injuries (DSI’s), listed in New
Zealand’s Crash Analysis System (CAS) as occurring in Central
Otago District (state highways and local roads), has trended down since
2011/12, but the local road component shows a gradual increase. This has
begun to reverse over the last 3-5 years, but Council needs to focus on common
factors including driver behaviours (addressed through the Road Safety
Promotion programme) and curves on rural roads.
AUDIT RATING ASSESSMENT
|
Subject Areas
|
Rating Assessment*
|
|
1
|
Previous Audit Issues
|
N/A
|
|
2
|
Network Condition and
Management
|
Some Improvement
Needed
|
|
3
|
Activity Management
Planning
|
Some
Improvement Needed
|
|
4
|
Data quality
|
Effective
|
|
5
|
Road Safety
|
Some
Improvement Needed
|
|
Overall Rating
|
Some
Improvement Needed
|
* Please see Introduction for Rating Assessment Classification
Definitions
RECOMMENDATIONS
The
table below captures the audit recommendations. Agreed dates are provided
for the implementation of recommendations by the approved organisation.
|
We
recommend that Central Otago District Council:
|
Implementation
Date
|
|
R2.1
|
Reviews their resurfacing intervention approach,
including surfacing data, modelling and the Forward Works Programme
(maintenance and renewal), in order to manage the risk of premature road
surface failure.
|
AO
|
|
R2.2
|
Ensures that roadside signs, markers and other
devices are maintained in a serviceable condition and to current standards.
|
AO
|
|
R2.3
|
Ensures that bridge defects are repaired in a timely
manner to maximise their useful life.
|
AO
|
|
R3.1
|
Prioritises the recruitment, development and
retention of staff to ensure continuity of level of service and resource.
|
AO
|
|
R3.2
|
Reviews development standards (technical
specifications and detailed drawings) to reduce the variety and ensure the
quality of asset types to be maintained by Council.
|
AO
|
|
R3.3
|
Develops and implements an integrated bridge
management strategy to provide long term tactical management of bridge stock.
|
AO
|
|
R3.4
|
Develops and implements a rural road delineation
strategy, with a strong focus on curve warning, to ensure a safe and
consistent driving environment during both day and night.
|
AO
|
|
R3.5
|
Develops and implements a footpath improvement/
management plan to provide a safe and accessible footpath network.
|
AO
|
|
R3.6
|
Complies with Waka Kotahi funding rules that require
Net Present Value analysis for relevant renewal and pavement rehabilitation
projects and utilises local RAMM data as inputs.
|
AO
|
|
R4.1
|
Ensures compliance with Waka Kotahi funding rules
regarding the undertaking of condition rating surveys.
|
AO
|
|
R5.1
|
Ensures ongoing full compliance with Waka Kotahi
funding rules that require Road Safety Audits for renewal and improvement
projects.
|
AO
|
1.0 INtroduction
1.1. Audit
Objective
The objective of this audit is to provide assurance
that the Waka Kotahi NZ Transport Agency’s (hereafter Waka Kotahi)
investment in Council’s land transport programme is being well managed
and delivering value for money. We also seek assurance that the Council is
appropriately managing risk associated with Waka Kotahi investment. We
recommend improvements where appropriate.
1.2. Assessment Ratings Definitions
|
|
Effective
|
Some Improvement Needed
|
Significant Improvement Needed
|
Unsatisfactory
|
|
Investment management
|
Effective systems, processes and management practices used.
|
Acceptable systems, processes and management practices but
opportunities for improvement.
|
Systems, processes and management practices require improvement.
|
Inadequate systems, processes and
management practices.
|
|
Compliance
|
Waka Kotahi and legislative requirements met.
|
Some omissions with Waka Kotahi
requirements. No known breaches of legislative requirements.
|
Significant breaches of Waka Kotahi and/or legislative requirements.
|
Multiple and/or serious breaches of Waka Kotahi or legislative
requirements.
|
|
Findings/ deficiencies
|
Opportunities for improvement may be identified for consideration.
|
Error and omission issues identified which need to be addressed.
|
Issues and/or breaches must be
addressed, or on-going Waka Kotahi funding may be at risk.
|
Systemic and/or serious issues must be urgently addressed, or on-going
Waka Kotahi funding will be at risk.
|
1.3. Council Comments
Prior
to this report being approved, Central Otago District Council was invited to
comment on the auditors’ findings, recommendations and suggestions.
Where appropriate this report has been amended to reflect this dialogue.
Any additional auditee response comments are attached in the Appendices.
2.0 assessment findings
Our findings relating to each subject area are
presented in the tables below. Where necessary, we have included
recommendations and/or suggestions.
|
1. Previous Audit Issues
|
|
The
last technical review of the Central Otago District Council was undertaken in
March 2010. The report found that the network was in generally good condition, but that greater input was
required in the areas of pre-reseal repairs, resealing, re-sheeting of
unsealed pavements and bridge repairs and renewals. It was recommended
that Council:
1. Adopt and act upon the findings of
the RISA review (see below);
2. Review its staff establishment and
resource in road asset management;
3. Establish a policy for permissible
content and location of tourist signs at intersections;
4. Check that speed limits altered since
2003 fully comply with all relevant legislation; and
5. Investigate corridor management in
other established and developing dairy farm areas and establish policies in
light of the findings of those investigations.
The
Road Infrastructure Safety Assessment (RISA) (report dated July 2010)
provided a comprehensive assessment of the state of the infrastructure
associated with road safety on Central Otago District Council’s rural
sealed roads and made the following recommendations:
1. Review the standard of shoulder width
based on traffic volume and road hierarchy. Gradual improvement could
be gained if appropriate widening was undertaken at the same time as pavement
rehabilitation work.
2. Consider a programme of hazard
removal or protection for;
a. Power
Poles
b. Trees
c. Ornamental and
non-frangible letterboxes
d. Drainage features (such as headwalls)
3. Review Council’s implementation
of the NZ standard for advisory speed signage on curves, with a view to
taking a more consistent approach to selecting advisory speeds.
4. Consider a programme of sealing
sideroads and major entranceways, to address the problem of aggregate
migration onto the main road.
Due
to the long intervening period since the undertaking of these previous
audits, the findings were not specifically reviewed, but many of the findings
noted in the RISA in particular were still found to be relevant (refer to
Section 2 Network Condition and Management and Section 5 Road Safety).
|
|
Central Otago District Council’s comment
|
AO
|
* * *
|
2. Network Condition and Management
|
Some
Improvement Needed
|
|
The Central Otago District
road network is generally in good condition and well managed, despite an
apparent backlog in the resurfacing programme. Unsealed roads provide a
good ride, with leading edge maintenance practices. Footpaths, signage
and delineation require greater attention.
Performance Monitoring
Sealed road condition indices for 2019/20 are
compared with the peer group councils (Rural Districts) in the graphs below,
along with the Central Otago trends over 12 years. The trend data shows
minimal movement in the indices over the past five years. However,
while the Pavement Integrity Index (PII) and Smooth Travel Exposure (STE)
compare well against peer councils, the Condition Index (CI) ranks at the
lower end. CI indicates the prevalence of surface faults (alligator
cracking, scabbing, potholes, pothole patches and flushing).
The
cost per km for maintenance, operations and renewals (excluding emergency
works) as a three-year average (2018-2020) is $3,622/km, which is
significantly less than the peer group average of $6,505/km.
Compliance
Council does not fully comply with the Planning
& Investment Knowledge Base (PIKB) requirements. We observed that:
· Bridge and structural inspections are generally
undertaken in accordance with Waka Kotahi’s S6 Bridges and other
significant highway structures inspection policy (leading practice
guideline for councils).
· Roughness recorded in RAMM complies with the
requirements set in Waka Kotahi Knowledge Base. Surveys undertaken
annually in recent years.
· Condition Rating is not fully complying with PIKB
(refer to Section 4 Data Quality).
· Net present value (NPV) analysis is not undertaken
routinely for improvement and rehabilitation projects (refer to Section 3 Activity
Management Planning) as is required by PIKB.
Carriageway Surfacing
As
noted above, the CI for Central Otago is relatively low (indicating a higher
incidence of faults) when compared to peer councils. Our observations
corroborated this and in particular we noted a prevalence of flushing and
edge break. Edge break extending into traffic lanes can cause vehicles
to lose control and crash. Flushing reduces the skid resistance
available to vehicles and therefore also impacts on safety. Flushed
surfaces may sometimes bleed, causing tracking (extending the loss of skid
resistance) and potentially extensive damage to the seal (can lift from the
pavement). Routine maintenance such as edge break repairs, water
cutting and hot chip will address localised failures. With more
extensive failures, Council needs to understand the mechanism of the failure
and so select the most appropriate treatment, as well as incorporating any
necessary changes into future seal designs.
|
|
 |
Council’s current resurfacing rate of
4.35% of the sealed network per year (three-year average over
2017/18-2019/20) equates to an average seal life of an unsustainable 23
years. The RAMM database residual surface life data (graphed below)
indicates that 48% of the existing surfacing is past due for renewal based on
the entered expected life value. These values should be reviewed
against the latest available data on locally achieved values and amended
where they vary. If they are generally accurate, then there is a
significant backlog of resurfacing to programme and manage.
Anomalously,
the achieved surface life data in RAMM indicates that seals are only
achieving comparatively short lives. Single coat seals outperform all
other seal types, but still only average a life of under 11 years on rural
roads. Two coat seals average a little over eight years. Each surface
type has its benefits and it is for Council to ensure the right surface type
is selected to address the problem and minimise the whole of life cost.
Signs and Markers
Traffic
signs are generally well used. However, we noted the following
deficiencies:
· Non-compliant and inconsistent use of edge marker
posts
· Inconsistent use of width markers and hazard markers
· Outdated black and white regulatory and chevron
signs (outdated signs are unlikely to meet reflectivity requirements and may
not be sufficiently conspicuous)
· Non-compliant signage on curves (primarily regarding
use of chevrons)
· Signs that are faded, incorrectly located or
installed too low (underside of sign should be a minimum of 1.5m above ground).
Examples of some sign issues are in photos
below. The issues illustrated include (from left to right) single
chevron used alone (road curves to the left), lack of obstacle markers on
poles and one single black and white chevron to mark the curve, hump sign
incorrectly located, outdated signs (unlikely to meet reflectivity
requirements and may not be sufficiently conspicuous), short sign (this
example is admittedly on a state highway intersection) and yellow striped
edge marker post used on straight road. It is important that all
traffic signs and delineation devices are installed in accordance with the
relevant standards and are thereafter well maintained.
Night
inspections are not routinely undertaken. It is suggested that a regime
of regular inspections be implemented and that they utilise a driver
unfamiliar with the network (provide “fresh eyes”). It is
best practice to ensure all roads are inspected at least annually at night to
ensure the adequacy (reflectivity, legibility and effectiveness) of existing
delineation (particularly on curves), hazard warning and regulatory signs.
General Comments
The standard of completed works was observed to be
very good. In particular, the carriageway resurfacing projects that
were inspected featured good quality surfacing finishes. Unsealed roads
have good ride quality and well-formed cross-sectional shape, including
shoulders and drainage channels. The crossfall is generally within the
preferred range of 4-6%. Further to the national One Network Road Classifications
(ONRC), Council has defined sub-categories for its very low volume unsealed
roads (tracks), often with only seasonal access. This has facilitated
the implementation of consistent and appropriate levels of service on these
roads which optimise the available maintenance budgets.
Some areas where room for improvement was noted are:
· Footpath faults
· Bridge maintenance (particularly bridge deck
maintenance, sweeping and approach sight rails).
· Very long grass growing in rural verges is dry and
may be a fire hazard. Council avoids mowing during the summer season to
mitigate the risk of sparks causing fire, but the wetter springs and hotter
summers can only increase the fire risk. Now with climate change
bringing increased temperatures (as indicated in the Bodeker Scientific
report “The past, present and future climate of Central
Otago: Implications for the District”), this is an emerging problem and council should start planning.
· Evidence of rework and failed repairs were commonly seen.
|
|
Recommendations
|
We recommend that Council:
R2.1 Reviews their resurfacing intervention
approach, including surfacing data, modelling and the Forward Works Programme
(maintenance and renewal), in order to manage the risk of premature road surface
failure.
R2.2 Ensures that roadside signs,
markers and other devices are maintained in a serviceable condition and to
current standards.
R2.3 Ensures that bridge defects are repaired in a timely
manner to maximise their useful life.
|
|
Suggestions
|
We suggest that Council:
S2.1 Considers and implements methodologies
to prevent the high incidences (and recurrences) of edge break on rural
sealed roads.
|
|
Central Otago District Council’s comment
|
AO
|
|
|
|
* * *
|
3. Activity Management Planning
|
Some Improvement
Needed
|
|
Central
Otago District Council takes a proactive and strategic approach to activity
management planning and share their learnings generously with other roading
authorities. The team was particularly impressed with Council’s
management of customer expectations in regard to unsealed road condition,
resulting in comparatively high customer satisfaction levels. Maintaining
adequate staffing levels remains an area of risk for Council. Other
challenges include managing the growth of residential developments, managing
bridge stock maintenance and renewal, upgrading rural road delineation and
providing a safe and accessible footpath network.
Activity
Management Plan
Council has an active 2018 Activity Management
Plan (AMP) that incorporates the programme business case for maintenance
operations and renewals programmes of work. The key challenges faced
relate to the cost of
maintaining the unsealed road network, aging bridge stock, urbanisation
pressures and a growing network.
Council’s 2021 Activity Management Plan
is currently in support of the 2021-24 NLTP bid. Since completion of
the onsite audit, this AMP has been submitted to Waka Kotahi and has been
positively reviewed by the Transport Services team. Their assessment summary
was:
“CODC's AMP shows very good alignment with
ONRC and is in accordance with the business case approach. It has a great
summary outlining what they do, what they need to do in the future. This is
an exemplar of what a great AMP looks like. It has an extensive improvement
plan and has recently appointed new staff to replace departures.”
Management
Challenges
Council’s
Infrastructure Services is proactively addressing the District’s
problems. We particularly recognise the progress made in areas such as
classification of low volume roads and management of customer expectations on
unsealed roads. However, we are told that there is a historic and
ongoing issue with staff recruitment. Qualified, experienced roading
staff are in short supply throughout New Zealand and new graduates are in
high demand. Unfilled vacancies will impede progress and will impact on
the workloads of the current staff, with potential negative consequences to
their physical and mental health. We encourage Council to prioritise
filling these vacancies with suitably qualified and experienced people as
soon as practicable. Succession
planning is also recommended, ideally with a risk management approach.
For example, building a pool of people with potential to undertake a particular
type of key role may work better than grooming individuals.
Staffing
levels appeared to be light for the management of a network of nearly 2,000
km. The current organisation chart shows five dedicated roading
staff. Asset management and capital project teams are separate.
Development Standards
Central Otago District is experiencing high growth
in residential developments (Cromwell township, now officially the biggest
town in Central Otago, has, for example, has experienced around 40%
population growth in the last 10 years). During our field inspection we
visited several new developments and noted many ‘as built’
features did not align with current best practice (e.g. mountable kerb
(“Wanaka kerb”)) or with sustainable maintenance/renewal practice
(e.g. decorative lamp posts, AC used on access / low volume streets). Other
concerns included carriageway and verge widths, culvert headwalls, swales and
rain gardens, street tree placement and speed treatments. The team was
concerned that a lack of control of these design aspects will lead to a
marked increase in compliance costs to meet and maintain standards (e.g.
ongoing maintenance from poor drainage feature design; cost of adding or
upgrading pedestrian facilities for accessibility). The photos below
illustrate some of the issues, such as use of paving on carriageways and
vehicle crossings, mountable kerbs encouraging vehicles to park on verge and
obstruct footpaths, varied streetlight columns and luminaires and street
trees planted where they will obstruct signs and streetlights.
It
is recommended that Council review their subdivision development standards
and update as required, including strengthening linkages to the District
Plan. At the time of this audit, a District Plan update process had commenced
and there is was a proposal to incorporate design standards from NZS
4404:2010 Land development and subdivision infrastructure. The inclusion of a comprehensive review of
asset design specifications and detailed drawings will facilitate cost
effective maintenance/renewal and ensure best whole of life costs by
standardising the asset specifications. Further to NZS 4404, extensive
guidance is also available from Austroads.
 Residential on-street parking has been identified by
staff as a source of public complaints. As can be seen in the photos
above, streets tend to be narrow with limited parking available. If
on-street parking is not facilitated by road width and it can reasonably be
expected that residents may park on footpaths/verges, the design must
facilitate safe and unobstructed access by pedestrians as well as
accommodating parking (or property access) with sufficiently robust
pavements. Parking over the kerb should only be allowed where the
infrastructure can accommodate it and appropriate R6 parking signage[1] is in place
(example in photo to the right). Note too that clauses 2.13 and 2.14 of
the Land Transport Road User Rule 2004 prohibit vehicles from driving
on/along footpaths or on grassed verges.
With
development beginning to increase on unsealed roads, it would be beneficial
to enforce a more restrictive setback from the road adjacent property
boundary to mitigate nuisance and health implications due to dust –
noting that this may also impact on minimum lot size.
For
best outcomes in subdivision development, it is good practice is to involve
the road maintenance team during the consent phase, to work alongside Council’s
resource planners and traffic engineers to ensure new developments comply
with the Council’s District Plan and meet appropriate standards and
guidelines. During construction, there should be hold points where
acceptance by roading or other qualified staff is required before
continuing. Roading staff should also be included in defects
inspections and the final handover inspection.
Structures
In their AMP, Council identifies that two bridges on
the network (Green Bridge (Waipiata) and Paerau Bridge) prohibit access by
High-Productivity Motor Vehicles (HPMV) and 50Max vehicles (affecting freight
connections), 26 bridges are posted with load and/or speed restrictions and
72 bridges are expected to reach the end of their economic life within the
next 30 years. It is clear that cost-effective and timely management of
the ongoing maintenance and renewal of the bridge stock is vital for Central
Otago. To facilitate this outcome, we suggest developing an integrated
bridge management strategy combining asset inventory and capacity data with
criticality (lifelines and economic demands), condition and maintenance
management components to provide tactical oversight, management of
performance and a forward programme of renewals. The strategy should
incorporate Council’s current pragmatic approach to failing bridges
which includes consideration of upgrading options, replacement with fords,
wash over culverts or box culverts or even permanent removal. Where
appropriate, subsequent divestment of ownership of the structure to adjacent
landowners (generally for single property roads) is encouraged.
A significant benefit of a district-wide bridge
management strategy would be forward planning for future investment
needs. This would allow for early warning of budget peaks as well for
budget smoothing.
Further,
while funding may not be currently available, or the renewal may not yet
qualify for funding assistance, it may be prudent for Council to, in
discussion with the Investment Advisor, proceed with the renewal design of
at-risk bridges. By having the design, consents and contract request
for tender “in the drawer”, Council will be ready to take
advantage of funds becoming available at short notice, or alternatively be
ready to act in the event of a sudden failure of the structure.
Reimbursement of design cost assistance is not assured but could be
negotiated with the Investment Advisor. Even if not recovered, this
remains a relatively small cost for a fast turnaround on the bridge renewal
construction.
With regard to the 26 posted bridges, we suggest a
different approach to the process. Posting by public notice, issued
under regulation 11 of the Heavy Motor Vehicle Regulations 1974, is most
applicable to temporary restriction situations where the intention is to
carry out strengthening works to reinstate the bridge to full loading
capacity (usually within the year). Where the restriction is likely to
be permanent (or semi-permanent), it is worth considering the alternative
process of regulating the weight of vehicles using the bridge through a bylaw
made under section 22AB(1)(zh) of the Land Transport Act 1998, pursuant to
the process set out in the Local Government Act 2002. While this
approach saves the costs of annually obtaining an engineer’s
certificate for each bridge and the publication of the posting notification,
it is strongly recommended that a programme of regular detailed inspections
is continued for these structures.
Curves on rural roads
The audit team observed that both road delineation
(edge marker posts, centrelines, edge lines) and curve warning signage on the
rural network is inconsistently applied and often non-complying with standard
guidance for implementation. Development and application of a rural
road delineation strategy, based on ONRC classifications, would reinforce the
consistent appearance of each road classification and thereby the level of
service that can be expected. In particular such a strategy should
focus strongly on curve warning. This includes ensuring that appropriate speed advisory values are implemented
and that all out of context curves are appropriately signed. Central
Otago has a high rate of crashes on curves on rural roads (refer to Section 5
Road Safety). A primary objective of ONRC is to ensure that
roads of the same classification in different districts have the same safety
features, so any policy regarding delineation would be enhanced by
collaboration with neighbouring councils. Guidance on general
delineation is provided in Part 5 of the Traffic Control Devices (TCD)
manual[2].
Some network-specific guidance may also be found in the 2010 Road
Infrastructure Safety Assessment (RISA) review of the rural network.
Footpaths
Many
of the footpaths in Central Otago appear to be narrow, uneven, cracked, lack
accessible pram crossings and do not safely provide for users’
requirements. As the maintenance and renewal of footpaths is now funded
by Waka Kotahi, we expect this asset group to be managed like all other
assets. This includes asset inventory,
condition monitoring (Council has undertaken modelling based on RoadRoid data
collected from a mobility scooter), targeted intervention criteria,
maintenance activity and use management. Further, we remind Council
that guidance on the design of footpaths (including width and crossfall),
pedestrian cutdowns and vehicle crossings can be found in Waka Kotahi Pedestrian
Planning and Design Guide[3].
We expect any renewals or new work to comply with this guide (renewals to a
revised current standard are not considered improvement). The new
update, Pedestrian Network Guidance 2021, will be issued later this
year.
Council’s Sustainability Strategy 2019-2024
identifies the need to “Improve infrastructure that supports walking
and cycling” in order to contribute to a “safe and healthy
community”. We suggest Council develops and documents a plan to
deliver on this strategy in terms of a long-term programme for footpath
upgrades and improvements.
Road Maintenance Management
Reliable sourcing of suitable, convenient and
affordable aggregates for unsealed road maintenance and renewal is a
challenge for Council. While prices remain relatively low in comparison
to other districts, the recent increases in unit cost significantly impact
budgets, due to the volumes of aggregate required to continuously maintain
the District’s large unsealed network (1382 km – 72% of network
length) at the current level of service. Council has initiated an
assessment of historical aggregate sources and quantities along with residual
availability and are investigating options including land purchase to secure
pit access for the future. We support this approach and recommend that
Council’s interest in the Paige-Green Index for aggregates be pursued
to add more scope in formulating usable wearing courses.
Sealed roads in the District were observed to be in
good order with mainly surface defects as opposed to pavement defects (refer
to Section 2 Network Condition and Management). A key factor in
this is the generally high subgrade strength, minimising the need for
pavement rehabilitation. However, we are concerned that net present
value (NPV) analysis is not routinely undertaken for potential rehabilitation
projects or is not producing effective results due to unreliable
inputs. NPV is used to determine
the difference between the present values of the various pavement treatment
options available over a 30-year analysis period, i.e. it assesses which
improvement option or treatment strategy provides the best return on
investment (the standard forms for economic evaluation can be found in the
Waka Kotahi Monetised Benefits and Costs Manual[4]). The
use of actual local data from Central Otago’s RAMM database, rather
than industry averages or the like, for inputs such as maintenance costs,
traffic loadings and achievable seal life will produce more robust
outcomes.
|
|
Recommendations
|
We recommend that Council:
R3.1 Prioritises the recruitment, development
and retention of staff to ensure continuity of level of service and resource.
R3.2 Reviews development standards (technical
specifications and detailed drawings) to reduce the variety and ensure the
quality of asset types to be maintained by Council.
R3.3 Develops and implements an
integrated bridge management strategy to provide long term tactical
management of bridge stock.
R3.4 Develops and implements a rural road
delineation strategy, with a strong focus on curve warning, to ensure a safe
and consistent driving environment during both day and night.
R3.5 Develops and implements a footpath
improvement/ management plan to provide a safe and accessible footpath network.
R3.6 Complies with Waka Kotahi funding
rules that require Net Present Value analysis for relevant renewal and
pavement rehabilitation projects and utilises local RAMM data as inputs.
|
|
Suggestions
|
We suggest that Council:
S3.1 Considers developing a succession plan
to assist in the development of staff and to ensure continuity of level of
service.
S3.2 Considers proceeding with the
design of bridge renewal projects in readiness for construction funding
assistance approval at a future date.
S3.3 Considers the long-term restriction
of heavy vehicles on vulnerable bridges by means of a Bylaw process.
|
|
Central Otago District Council’s comment
|
AO
|
|
|
|
* * *
|
4. Data Quality
|
Effective
|
|
Road
Efficiency Group’s (REG) 2019/20 data quality report has scored Council
with 76/100 (a score of 100 is achieved by having all metric results at the
expected standard level). This is roughly the same as the 2018/19 score
of 77.
The One Network Road Classification (ONRC) Performance Measures Reporting Tool (PMRT) indicates
(as at August 2020) that high importance areas for improvement (i.e. have
major data issues) relate to:
· Assignment of ONRC categories to new roads
· Accuracy of pavement layer records
· Timeliness of traffic count estimates, AC renewal
as-builts and renewal treatment lengths.
It is important that Council investigates,
identifies and resolves these data gaps. Doing so will improve
reporting at an individual level and allow Council to accurately compare its
ONRC performance with its peers.
Condition Rating
Council has been undertaking condition
rating surveys regularly on a three-yearly basis. This does not fully
comply with the Waka Kotahi mandatory requirements which are outlined in our
Knowledge Base[5].
Knowledge Base states “Roughness and condition rating surveys of all
sealed roads must be undertaken at least every second year.
Condition rating surveys of all sealed roads carrying more than 2000 vehicles
per day are to be undertaken annually.”
General
 A review of RAMM Manager
reports indicates that Maintenance Cost data batches have been only been
loaded three or four times a year (see snip to the right). At the time
of the audit, the previous four months of data (June to September) had yet to
be loaded. Best practice is to acquire the data, review for accuracy
and completeness and upload into RAMM on a monthly cycle. Further
guidance is provided in the REG Practice Overview for Maintenance Activity
Data[6].
Further, queries run on RAMM involving maintenance
costs highlighted anomalies in the data. No maintenance cost data was
available for the financial years 2012/13 and 2013/14. Large lump sums
were charged against minor roads – for example in 2018/19 some
$433,966.87 of administration costs were charged to Jedburgh Street.
Activities such as core maintenance relating to environment, surfacing,
traffic facilities, etc, should be reasonably consistent from year to year,
but the data showed large gaps in expenditure on these activities and an
occasional unexplainable peak. It is likely that frequent staff changes
and the coding of works are sources of some of these results and it is
suggested that Council works closely with its contractors to ensure a
consistent understanding and approach to the recording of maintenance cost
data. Robust maintenance costs facilitate invaluable analysis of
network expenditure trends by year, by kilometre, by classification and by
road - the measure of the actions taken to maintain the network inventory. They
also provide a network-specific maintenance cost history that can be used in
NPV calculations to justify renewal activity.
During the field inspection, it was noted that many
of the counts and estimates viewed on the Mobile Road app appeared to be incorrect.
Traffic count data is the basis for developing estimates[7] for the entire road network
and this provides a key dataset for understanding the current and changing
demands – an emerging area of significant interest for Central Otago.
It is suggested that the improvement of traffic count data (with an emphasis
on heavy commercial vehicle counts) be prioritised in Council’s data
improvement plan.
A high-level review of the annual number of deaths
and serious injuries (DSI’s) for Central Otago’s local road
network revealed discrepancies between the data in New Zealand’s Crash
Analysis System (CAS) and the data uploaded by Council into the ONRC
PMRT. The largest difference was in 2016/17 when CAS shows 11 DSIs
while the PMRT shows 20. Similarly, in 2014/15 and 2015/16, PMRT has a
higher number (by four DSIs in each year) than CAS. It appears that
some SH crashes are being identified in RAMM as local road. An example
is Crash #15540 (Dungannon St, CAS ID 201711653) which appears on the Council RAMM database, but is
identified by CAS as a SH crash (this is also supported by the incident
description). It is important that Council reviews its processes to
ensure that crash data in RAMM is correct, relevant and complete in order to
achieve robust reporting of results, and to have confidence in the
comparative peer reporting.
Council’s 2019/20 Annual Achievement
submission was reviewed and was found to be of a good standard, with few
inconsistencies. However, Council is reminded that in future closer
scrutiny will be given to data accuracy in TIO annual achievement reporting
and to the delivery of the forecast quantities within the approved budget.
|
|
Recommendations
|
We recommend that Council:
R4.1 Ensures compliance with Waka Kotahi funding rules regarding the undertaking
of condition rating surveys.
|
|
Suggestions
|
We suggest that Council:
S4.1 Considers reviewing the relevant
processes to ensure that maintenance cost data added to the RAMM database is
timely, accurate and complete.
S4.2 Considers prioritising the
improvement of traffic count data (with an emphasis on heavy commercial
vehicle counts), and the supporting processes, in Council’s data
improvement plan.
S4.3 Considers reviewing quality assurance
processes relating to the downloading of CAS crash data into RAMM and
subsequent uploading into the ONRC PMRT.
|
|
Central Otago District Council’s comment
|
AO
|
|
|
|
* * *
|
5. Road Safety
|
Some
Improvement Needed
|
|
Performance Monitoring
The annual number of
deaths and serious injuries (DSI’s), listed in New Zealand’s Crash
Analysis System (CAS) as occurring in Central Otago District (state
highways and local roads), has trended down since 2011/12, but the local road
component shows a gradual increase. This has begun to reverse over the
last 3-5 years (refer to the CAS graph below on left). DSI crashes
appear to be occurring in higher numbers on Access and Low Volume roads
(refer PMRT graph below on right). While these roads do make up 88% of
the network length, they only account for 36% of vehicle kilometres travelled
(VKT). It is also noted that there are significant discrepancies
between the CAS data and the data showing on the ONRC reporting tool,
particularly in the 2014/15 to 2016/17 periods.
|
|
 |
Levels of collective risk (crashes per km)
generally align with the peer group averages (refer PMRT). Personal
risk (crashes per VKT) aligns with peer group averages on the higher volume
classifications but is significantly greater for rural Low Volume
roads. The Communities at Risk Register 2019 notes young drivers
and distraction as areas of high concern. (Note – the subsequent
2020 Register rates these two areas as medium concern).
Over the last five years (2015/16 – 2019/20),
CAS records show 46 crashes which resulted in 55 DSI’s. Of these,
44% of the crashes occurred at the weekend, 80% were midblock, 57% on a bend
(loss of control or head-on), 72% in a 100 kph speed zone, 54% on unsealed
roads (noting 72% of network is unsealed) and 33% involved motorcycles.
Investigation is required to identify common factors in crashes and develop
potential engineering solutions. Note that solutions can reduce the
likelihood of a crash occurring or they can reduce/mitigate the consequences,
if the crash is a result of non-roading factors.
Road Safety Audits
Council
does carry out road safety audits on improvement projects but does not fully
comply with the Agency’s requirements. Road safety audits must be
undertaken at key stages of the “development of any improvement or
renewal activity that involves vehicular traffic, and/or walking and/or
cycling, proposed for funding assistance from the NLTP”[8]. If there is
justification for not conducting a safety audit at a particular stage, then
an exemption declaration for that stage must be completed and filed.
Road Safety Promotion
Road Safety Promotion provides Councils with the
most effective tool for addressing the behavioural aspects of road
safety. Specifically, young drivers and distraction have been
identified as risks areas for Central Otago. Campaigns that focus on
motorcyclist skills and driving on unsealed roads would also be
beneficial. Staff advise that Council has experienced a relatively high
turnover of road safety coordinators and struggles to maintain this
resource. We suggest that Council prioritises recruitment in this role
to ensure the consistent delivery of a programme that will support and
promote the safe use of the District’s road network.
Curves on Rural Roads
Based on CAS data, nearly half (22
crashes or 48%) of the DSI crashes over the past 5 years occurred on bends on
100 kph open roads. And 70% of these (or 33% of the total DSI crashes)
occurred on unsealed roads (including three crashes on each of Danseys Pass
Road and Nevis Road). This high
rate of crashes on curves on rural roads, and at night (12 crashes occurred
at night/twilight), highlights the need for correct delineation and effective
advisory signage on out of context curves.
The audit team observed that both road
delineation (edge marker posts,
centrelines, edge lines) and
curve warning signage on the rural network is inconsistently applied and
often non-complying with standard guidance for implementation. Central Otago District faces the added challenge of
a relatively high proportion of long straight rural roads leading into tight
radius bends. Consistent curve advisory signage and supporting curve
delineation are essential for traffic to safety navigate this type of route,
particularly at night. We
recommend a strategic approach to ensuring consistency across the network
– refer to Section 3 Activity Management Planning.
|
|
 |
In conjunction with delineation improvements,
a review of curve geometry and surface condition might further enhance curve
safety. Motorcyclists in particular are impacted by build-up of loose
aggregate on unsealed roads and loose aggregate or seal joins (including
patches) on sealed roads. The Motorcycle Safety Advisory
Council’s Making Roads Motorcycle Friendly[9] provides some useful guidance
for motorcyclist safety. A common occurrence on the Central Otago
network is access driveways and side roads intersecting with a curve (see
photos below). In these instances, there may be scope to consider a review
of the layout or at least warning devices. Rehabilitation projects may
provide an opportunity to improve the geometric design of curves (including
horizontal and/or vertical alignment) where required, if this can be
undertaken at acceptable costs.
General Observations
From our observations, Council is proactive in the
incorporation of safety features in the design of capital projects and in the
investigation, development and implementation of safety improvement
projects. Examples range from the high proportion of intersection
controls on access and low volume rural roads through to
well-designed/constructed cycle network interfaces and connections.
 However, the team did note the following areas of
concern:
· Inconspicuous intersections - an ‘avenue’
effect which draws the driver on, straight through the intersection, is seen
in many intersections (refer to photo on right). This effect is
compounded by trees and/or utility poles. The night-time effect can be
even more pronounced. Low-cost treatments might include larger
STOP/GIVE WAY signage, advance signage, gateway signs, etc.
·  Gravel migration – loose gravel from unsealed
side roads was repeatedly observed migrating onto the sealed through road (or
intersection), reducing traction and erasing roadmarking. A preferred
method to improve safety, road condition and reduce maintenance costs is to
chip seal the side road approach. The optimal seal back distance is
calculated based on the safe stopping distance for a heavy vehicle approaching
the intersection. Sealing back provides further safety benefits such as
facilitating the installation of full intersection makings, reducing dust and
eliminating corrugations formed by acceleration and braking forces.
Increased sealing back should also be considered on single lane bridge
approaches and on rural driveways and farm entrances to minimise gravel
migration and edge break at these locations.
·  Obstacles near traffic
lanes – there is some inconsistency in signing of obstacles adjacent to
the road. Some utility poles are appropriately signed with an obstacle
marker, while others are not. Bridge end markers (or width markers) are
occasionally poorly located away from the road. Concrete culvert
headwalls immediately adjacent to the sealed edge are either not signed or
are marked with edge marker posts. Council should be consistent in
marking hazardous obstacles with an appropriate device in a complying
manner.
· Temporary traffic management - we noted some
deficiencies with temporary traffic control on rural roadworks sites,
including missing or obscured signs, faded/dirty devices and non-complying
use of personal protective equipment (PPE). A temporary increase in
site audits may deter any relaxing of standards on worksites and ensure compliance
with the Code of Practice for Temporary Traffic Management (CoPTTM).
While some work on the roads does not relate to Council activity, Council is
responsible for ensuring compliance with the Code of Practice for
Temporary Traffic Management (CoPTTM)[10].
|
|
Recommendations
|
We recommend that Council:
R5.1 Ensures ongoing full compliance with
Waka Kotahi funding rules that require Road Safety Audits for renewal and
improvement projects.
|
|
Suggestions
|
We suggest that Council:
S5.1 Prioritises the retention of qualified
road safety promotion staff to ensure the consistent delivery of a programme
that will support and promote the safe use of the District’s road
network.
S5.3 Considers developing safety
improvement strategies to:
· Improve intersection conspicuity
· Minimise gravel migration
· Upgrade obstacle marking.
S5.4 Considers increasing the number of
temporary traffic management site audits to improve compliance.
|
|
Central Otago District Council’s comment
|
AO
|
|
|
|
* * *
3.0 APPENDICES
APPENDIX A
Council Feedback
APPENDIX B
Network Field Inspections
APPENDIX C
Sample of Audit Photos
1,117
km (58%) of the Central Otago District road network is rural and is classified
as Low Volume. Council has developed sub-categories and manages these
roads to appropriate levels of service – the lowest being for back road
tracks (440 km).
There
is little pavement failure evident on the sealed network, but surfacing faults
are prevalent – in particular flushing and edge break.
A
large number of Central Otago bridges have been identified as potentially
requiring replacement over the next 30 years. Closer attention to routine
bridge maintenance will maximise their useful life.
21.3.10 Health,
Safety and Wellbeing Report
Doc ID: 552163
1. Purpose
To provide information on
key health and safety risks and the measures in place to mitigate those risks
at the Central Otago District Council.
|
Recommendations
That the report be received.
|
2. Discussion
2.1 COVID-19 Lockdown
Council responded to the
national COVID-19 alert level change on 18 August 2021. Council has complied
with all requirements set out by the Ministry of Health. We are currently in
alert level 2. Council workplaces and facilities are open for business.
All Council activities
have operations plans in place. These plans are informed by guidance from the
COVID-19 Local Government Response Unit which are adapted to the needs of our
business.
New operational
requirements include:
· Contact tracing
record keeping is mandatory at all alert levels
· Masks are
recommended anywhere physical distancing is difficult to maintain
· Physical
distancing of 2 metres is required in public-facing areas such as libraries,
pools, and customer service counters
2.2 COVID-19
vaccination
Council is communicating
with staff about the benefits of COVID-19 vaccination based on guidance from
the Ministry of Health.
The Ministry of Health invited
expressions of interest for workplace vaccination in July 2021. Workplaces were
required to meet all of the following criteria:
· Have
delivered a vaccination programme onsite before
· Be
able to provide staff to carry out support roles (e.g. booking management and
logistics)
· Be
able to offer a high volume of vaccinations (several hundred per day)
Council does not meet these
criteria.
Council is supporting staff who
wish to be vaccinated by providing flexibility to attend vaccination
appointments.
2.3 Contractor
management
Contractors were required
to provide their Covid-19 Management Plans to Central Otago District Council.
The safety standards of Central Otago District Council contractors continues to
improve. Nine contractors improved their pre-qualification scores from SiteWise
green to gold between June and September 2021.
2.4 Incident statistics
The following is a summary
of incidents in the financial year 1 July 2020 – 30 June 2021:
· Total incidents
reported: 156
· 65% of incidents
occurred at the aquatic facilities
· Top causes of
incidents: Human or biological factors, trips and slips, and contact with
substances or chemicals.
· These are common,
low risk incidents that are typical of our working environments.
· Top nature of
injuries: cuts and abrasions, strains and sprains, and nosebleeds
Affected person:
· 62% of incidents
involved customers or members of the public
· 34% of incidents
involved employees
· 3% of incidents
involved a contractor carrying out work for CODC
There were no notifiable
incidents during this period.
2.5 Critical risk
Critical risks arise from
activities that could cause serious injury or death. These risks are reviewed
quarterly to ensure they are actively managed.
|
Critical risk
|
Existing controls
|
New controls or preventive actions
|
|
Driving
|
· Vehicle User Policy
2020-23
· Adverse Weather Policy
· E-Roads installed in
fleet vehicles
· 5-Star ANCAP rated
vehicles
· Licenced drivers
|
· Provided chain fitting
training with focus on new or inexperienced employees
· Fleet inductions
completed for new starters
|
|
Remote
or isolated working
|
· Working from Home
Policy 2020-21
· Panic buttons
· Work planning
· Buddy systems
· Risk assessments
|
· Planned procurement of
Lone Worker software in Q4 2021-22
|
|
Psychosocial
e.g.
workload, stress, violence and aggression, mental health, bullying
|
· Employee Assistance
Programme (EAP) provided by Workplace Support
· Wellbeing programme
· 1 to 1s between
employees and managers
· Flexible working
guidelines
· Glide time guidelines
|
· Introduced the Equal
Employment Opportunity (EEO), Discrimination, Harassment and Bullying Policy
2021-23
· Introduced the
Performance Management Policy 2021-23
· Introduced a Fit for
Work programme for employees returning from illness or injury
· Increased the support
provided by our Employee Assistance Programme provider
· De-escalation training
provided to aquatics and Alexandra customer services teams
|
|
Biological
hazards
e.g.
tetanus, Hep A/B, Covid-19
|
· High-risk vaccinations
programme
· Engineering controls
· PPE is provided
|
· Water Services hazard
management workshop is taking place in September 2021
· Facilitated Covid-19
vaccination for high-risk workers
|
|
Hazardous
chemicals
e.g.
pool chemicals
|
· Chemical register
· Display safety data
sheets
· Appropriate storage
· Quantities stored is
kept at a minimum
· Ventilation and
circulation of air is monitored
· PPE is provided for
handling or working with chemicals
· Records of training
are maintained
|
· Water Services hazard
management workshop is taking place in September 2021
· Fire scheme chemical
registers were updated with FENZ by the Property Team
|
2.6 Training and
initiatives
|
Internal training
|
External training
|
|
· Health and safety
inductions
· Incident reporting
training
· Covid-19 vaccination
information sessions
|
· First Aid (new and
refreshers)
· SiteSafe passports
(new and refreshers)
· Fire warden training
(new and refreshers)
· BNZ Financial
Wellbeing Programme
· Chain fitting
· De-escalation training
· Contractor management
training (Infrastructure team).
· Three health and
safety representatives attended the SafeSkills conference in Dunedin on
August 3, 2021.
|
3. Attachments
Nil
|
Report
author:
|
Reviewed
and authorised by:
|
|
|
|
|
Rachel
Ennis
|
Louise
Fleck
|
|
Health,
Safety and Wellbeing Officer
|
Executive
Manager - People and Culture
|
|
10/09/2021
|
20/09/2021
|
6 Chair's
Report
21.3.11 October
2021 Chair's Report
Doc ID: 553579
1. Purpose
To consider the October Chair’s report.
|
Recommendations
That the report be received.
|
2. Attachments
Nil
7 Members'
Reports
21.3.12 October
Members' Reports
Doc ID: 553581
1. Purpose
To consider the October members’ reports.
|
Recommendations
That the reports be received.
|
2. Attachments
Nil
8 Status
Reports
21.3.13 October
Governance Report
Doc ID: 552960
1. Purpose
To report on items of
general interest, consider the Audit and Risk Committee’s forward work
programme and the current status report updates.
|
Recommendations
That the report be received.
|
2. Discussion
Forward Work Programme
The Audit and Risk Committee’s forward work programme
has been included for information.
Status Reports
The status report has been updated with any actions since
the previous meeting.
Audit New
Zealand’s Final Report on the 2021-31 Long-term Plan
Audit New Zealand’s
final report on the 2021-31 Long-term Plan was received in July and was
circulated to Audit and Risk at that time. It is included here to provide
an opportunity to ask any further questions.
3. Attachments
Appendix 1 - Forward Work
Programme ⇩
Appendix 2 - Status Update ⇩
Appendix 3 - Audit New Zealand's
Final Report on the 2021-31 Long-term Plan ⇩
|
Report
author:
|
Reviewed
and authorised by:
|
|
|
|
|
Rebecca
Williams
|
Sanchia
Jacobs
|
|
Governance
Manager
|
Chief
Executive Officer
|
|
19/09/2021
|
22/09/2021
|
|
Audit and Risk Committee
meeting
|
1 October 2021
|
|
Audit
and Risk
Forward Work Programme 2021 - 2022
|
|
Area of work and Lead
Department
|
Reason for work
|
Committee’s role
(decision and/or direction)
|
Expected timeframes
Highlight the month(s) this is expected
to come to Audit and Risk in 2021/22
|
|
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
|
|
Long-term Plan 2021/31
|
|
Long-term Plan
Chief Advisor/Executive Manager - Corporate Services
|
Oversight of the preparation of the Long-term Plan.
|
Direction required: Direction
on timeline and progress. To make recommendations to Council on matters
and proposals relevant to risk management and internal review practices.
|
Not applicable until 2024/34 LTP is
being prepared
|
|
Annual Report
|
|
Annual Report
Executive Manager - Corporate Services
|
Oversight of the preparation of the Annual Report.
|
Direction required: For
the Committee to recommend to Council that they adopt the 2020-2021 Annual
Report subject to any changes the Committee may identify.
|
|
|
|
R
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Governance Reports
|
|
Governance
Reports
Executive
Manager - Corporate Services
|
Oversight
of governance reports post internal and external audits
|
Direction required: Overseeing
the progress of key recommendations arising from the audits.
|
|
|
|
R
|
|
R
|
|
R
|
|
|
|
R
|
|
Internal Audits
|
|
Internal Audits
Executive Managers / Business Risk and Procurement
Manager
|
Reviewing the internal audit programme of work (3 yearly)
and the actions arising from those audits.
|
Direction required: Direction
on timeline and progress. Identifying the key risks and actions arising from the
audits.
|
|
|
|
R
|
|
R
|
|
R
|
|
|
|
R
|
|
Policy Reviews
|
|
Policy Reviews
Senior Strategy Advisor
|
Oversight of Council’s policy renewal schedule and reviewing
relevant updated and new policies.
|
Direction required: Provide
feedback on policies and recommend for approval and implementation.
Review policy schedule to ensure timelines are being achieved.
|
|
|
|
R
|
|
R
|
|
R
|
|
|
|
R
|
|
2022 Annual Plan
|
|
2022 Annual Plan
Executive Manager - Corporate Services
|
Oversight of the preparation of the Annual Plan.
|
Direction required: Direction
on timeline and progress. To make recommendations to Council on matters
and proposals relevant to risk management and internal review practices.
|
|
|
|
|
|
R
|
|
R
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Key
– R = recommendation
, U = update
|
Audit and Risk Committee meeting
|
1
October 2021
|
|
Meeting
|
Report Title
|
Resolution No
|
Resolution
|
Officer
|
Status
|
|
4/06/2021
|
Sensitive Expenditure Policy
|
21.2.3
|
That the Audit and Risk
Committee
A. Receives the report
and accepts the level of significance.
B. Recommends to
Council that they approve the amended Sensitive Expenditure Policy, the
Travel Policy and the Credit Card Policy.
|
Risk and Procurement Manager
|
10 Jun 2021
Action memo sent to officer
22 Jul 2021
The Sensitive Expenditure Policy, the Travel Policy
and the Credit Card Policy have been uploaded to the council intranet for
staff information. CLOSED
|
|
4/06/2021
|
Financial Reserves Policy
|
21.2.7
|
That the Audit and Risk
Committee
A. Receives the report
and accepts the level of significance.
B. Notes the Financial
Reserves Policy will be considered at the Council 30 June meeting.
|
Executive Manager - Corporate Services
|
10 Jun 2021
Action memo sent to officer
06 Jul 2021
Financial Reserves Policy has been uploaded to the
website. CLOSED
|
|
Audit and Risk Committee meeting
|
1
October 2021
|
10 Resolution
to Exclude the Public
|
Recommendations
That the public be excluded from the following parts of
the proceedings of this meeting.
The general subject matter of each matter to be considered
while the public is excluded, the reason for passing this resolution in
relation to each matter, and the specific grounds under section 48 of the
Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 for the passing
of this resolution are as follows:
|
General subject of each matter to be
considered
|
Reason for passing this resolution in
relation to each matter
|
Ground(s) under section 48 for the
passing of this resolution
|
|
Confidential Minutes of the Audit and
Risk Committee
|
s7(2)(a) - the withholding of the information is
necessary to protect the privacy of natural persons, including that of
deceased natural persons.
s7(2)(c)(ii) - the withholding of the information
is necessary to protect information which is subject to an obligation of
confidence or which any person has been or could be compelled to provide
under the authority of any enactment, where the making available of the
information would be likely otherwise to damage the public interest.
s7(2)(d) - the withholding of the information is
necessary to avoid prejudice to measures protecting the health or safety of
members of the public.
s7(2)(g) - the withholding of the information is
necessary to maintain legal professional privilege.
s7(2)(i) - the withholding of the information is
necessary to enable Council to carry on, without prejudice or disadvantage,
negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiations.)
|
s48(1)(a)(i) - the public conduct of the relevant
part of the proceedings of the meeting would be likely to result in the
disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding would exist
under section 6 or section 7
|
|
21.3.14 - Review of the draft
non-audited Annual Report 2020/21
|
s7(2)(i) - the withholding of the information is
necessary to enable Council to carry on, without prejudice or disadvantage,
negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiations)
|
s48(1)(a)(i) - the public conduct of the relevant
part of the proceedings of the meeting would be likely to result in the
disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding would exist
under section 6 or section 7
|
|
21.3.15 - August 2021 cyber security
critical incidents
|
s7(2)(j) - the withholding of the information is
necessary to prevent the disclosure or use of official information for
improper gain or improper advantage
|
s48(1)(a)(i) - the public conduct of the relevant
part of the proceedings of the meeting would be likely to result in the
disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding would exist
under section 6 or section 7
|
|
21.3.16 - Update on progress of Lake
Dunstan Water Supply and Clyde Wastewater Projects and risks to the wider
water and wastewater capital works programme
|
s7(2)(b)(ii) - the withholding of the information
is necessary to protect information where the making available of the
information would be likely unreasonably to prejudice the commercial
position of the person who supplied or who is the subject of the
information
|
s48(1)(a)(i) - the public conduct of the relevant
part of the proceedings of the meeting would be likely to result in the
disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding would exist
under section 6 or section 7
|
|
21.3.17 - Litigation Register
|
s7(2)(g) - the withholding of the information is
necessary to maintain legal professional privilege
|
s48(1)(a)(i) - the public conduct of the relevant
part of the proceedings of the meeting would be likely to result in the
disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding would exist
under section 6 or section 7
|
|
21.3.18 - Ombudsman Investigation
Outcome
|
s7(2)(a) - the withholding of the information is
necessary to protect the privacy of natural persons, including that of
deceased natural persons
|
s48(1)(a)(i) - the public conduct of the relevant
part of the proceedings of the meeting would be likely to result in the
disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding would exist
under section 6 or section 7
|
|
21.3.19 - October 2021 Confidential
Governance Report
|
s7(2)(c)(ii) - the withholding of the information
is necessary to protect information which is subject to an obligation of
confidence or which any person has been or could be compelled to provide
under the authority of any enactment, where the making available of the
information would be likely otherwise to damage the public interest
s7(2)(d) - the withholding of the information is
necessary to avoid prejudice to measures protecting the health or safety of
members of the public
|
s48(1)(a)(i) - the public conduct of the relevant
part of the proceedings of the meeting would be likely to result in the
disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding would exist
under section 6 or section 7
|
|
