This page is not a current Christchurch City Council document. Please read our disclaimer.
MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE
CANTERBURY WASTE JOINT STANDING COMMITTEE
Held on Tuesday 8 April 1997
at 10.00 am
PRESENT: Councillor Denis O'Rourke (Chairman),
Noeline Allen (Mayor, Banks Peninsula District Council)
Councillor David Close (Christchurch City Council), Councillor Carole Evans (Christchurch City Council), Councillor John Coles (Waimate District Council), Janice Skurr (Mayor, Waimakariri District Council), Councillor Bev Tasker (Ashburton District Council).
IN ATTENDANCE: Ashburton District Council - Allan Lees
Banks Peninsula District Council - Chris Hopman
Canterbury Regional Council - Andrea Lobb
- Dr Vivienne Smith
Christchurch City Council - John Chivers
- Peter Mitchell
- Kate Morgan
- Eric Park
- Mike Stockwell
Crown Public Health - Lew Graham
Hurunui District Council - Mayor, John Chaffey
- Bruce Yates
Kaikoura District Council - Robin Jenkinson
Mackenzie District Council - Don Young
NZDF (Army) Burnham - Viv Hardie (representative)
Selwyn District Council - Councillor Bill Woods
- Dave Hock
Timaru District Council - Brian Gallagher
Waimakariri District Council - Ian Davies
- Gareth James
APOLOGIES: Canterbury Regional Council - Councillor Neil Cherry
- Councillor Judy Waters
Christchurch City Council - Jonathan Fletcher
Kaikoura District Council - Rusty Arthur
Mackenzie District Council - Anne Braun-Elwert
Selwyn District Council - Eddie Thomas
Timaru District Council - Councillor Ian Bowen
Waimate District Council - Alastair McGaughran
1. MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF 17 FEBRUARY 1997
It was noted Councillor John Cole (Waimate District Council) and Ken Taylor (Canterbury Regional Council) were present at the meeting on 17 February 1997, and resolved that the minutes be amended accordingly.
It was resolved that the minutes of the meeting of 17 February 1997 as amended be adopted.
2. SUPPLEMENTARY REPORT
The Chairman referred to the following supplementary item which had been submitted for consideration at the present meeting.
BURHAM MILITARY CAMP - STAFF COMMITTEE MEMBERSHIP
The Chairman advised that the item concerned had not been circulated with the main agenda for the reason that the relevant information was not available until after the agenda had been prepared and circulated, and that in view of the infrequent meetings of the Joint Standing Committee the item could not be deferred to a subsequent meeting.
It was resolved that the above item be received and considered at the present meeting.
This report advised the Committee of Burnham Military Camp (BMC) waste management issues, and suggested consideration be given to representation on the staff committee. Viv Hardie, representing the BMC, spoke of the landfill issues they will have to deal with. As the number of personnel present at the camp at any one time varies between 1800-3500, the life expectancy of their landfill site is estimated at 24-48 months.
Discussions on composting methods are to take place between Burnham Military Camp and Christchurch City Council staff.
It was resolved that the Burnham Military Camp be represented on the staff committee of the Canterbury Waste Joint Standing Committee.
3. LEGAL OPINIONS - PETER MITCHELL
Peter Mitchell (Legal Services Manager, CCC) spoke to two legal opinions he had prepared, "Compulsory Land Acquisition" and "Waste Disposal Levy", circulated prior to the meeting.
The meeting was advised not to underestimate the time that can be taken (once a resource consent is obtained) to acquire land through the statutory process.
It was resolved that the information be received.
4. REPORT 2 - CONSULTATION REPORT
An update on the public consultation process was presented by the Mayor of Banks Peninsula District Council, Noeline Allen. This report summarised the 12 meetings held so far to consult on the Joint Committee's regional waste concept, and the formal written submissions received. Conclusions relating to the relevance of consultation feedback to the Request for Proposals (RFP) document were drawn.
Better liaison was advocated with both the Tangata Whenua and the media. Although the city consultation strategy was considered successful, it was acknowledged that further consultation will be required throughout the process, as some city people had not been reached to the same degree as those in the rural sector.
The Committee then discussed the key points raised from the public meetings and submissions, as set out below:
2.1 Do you think Councils in Canterbury should work together to deal with solid and hazardous waste?
The answer to this had been a fairly resounding Yes with only a few people disagreeing. The Committee made special note of submission number 16 and it was suggested further consultation take place on a personal basis.
2.2 What do you think of the objectives? Are there any other objectives you would like included?
There was general approval of the objectives as stated.
The formation of a waste minimisation strategy is to be undertaken in due course.
Referring to page 2 of the report, it was noted under the heading "Community Issues":
* Equity between Council, price equalisation
This has been added to the RFP in Section 5.4.
Also on page 2 it was noted under the heading "Other Issues":
* Exit strategy for abandoning landfill early for other disposal
methods.
This has been added to the RFP in Section 5.3.
2.3 Do you think Councils in Canterbury should work together with private operators to dispose of rubbish?
The overall consensus seemed to be Yes with the caution being Councils retain enough control to prevent monopoly behaviour and risks to both the environment and waste minimisation initiatives. The Committee was advised that safeguards to prevent loss of control would be built into joint venture agreements.
There were some groups against any private company involvement, and a few who felt it all should be left to the private sector. Submission no 46 had suggested a mix of two private companies and the Council. Gareth James undertook to clarify the wording in the RFP.
The Committee agreed to flag for future consideration the matter of putting disincentives in place to keep the volume of waste minimal.
2.4 What do you think of the site selection criteria? Is there anything you think we have missed out?
There was general praise for the site selection criteria. Further suggestions submitted will be included in the RFP.
2.5 Other comments.
There were other comments and ideas made which did not strictly fit into the Objectives for the Site Selection criteria, but were strongly recurring issues that the Joint Committee should consider. These included:
* waste minimisation extremely important
* education extremely important
* hazardous waste management important
* the Joint Committee should lobby Central Government for more
stringent laws on waste reduction and more help to Local
Government
* continued community involvement necessary
A report prepared by Mike Stockwell (Waste Manager, CCC) on a possible strategy for lobbying central government is to be presented to the next meeting of the Canterbury Waste Joint Standing Committee.
It was resolved:
1. That the registration of interest (RFP) document, Attachment 3, revised as outlined above, be approved for distribution to successful registrants of interest.
2. That site selection criteria, specified in Appendices to the RFP, be expanded to include the points listed in Section 2.4 above, and be adopted.
3. That comments listed under Section 2.5 above, be considered by the Canterbury Waste Joint Standing Committee and where appropriate be incorporated into its present and future activities.
4. That report 2, as a whole, be adopted.
Kate Morgan undertook to acknowledge the submissions, and to involve and advise local elected members of other submissions in their specific areas. In order to keep a balance, it was acknowledged those who attended the meetings should also be recognised.
A media release including a summary of main points, is to be made through the Chairman, to cover both local and major newspapers.
The Committee was advised that Bob Tye (Canterbury Regional Council) is liaising with the Tangata Whenua to form a working group to facilitate ongoing discussions.
5. REPORT 1 - REGISTRATIONS OF INTEREST ANALYSIS REPORT
This report, prepared by Gareth James, reviewed the seven registrations of interest (in a possible joint venture proposal) which had been received, and assessed the information provided against the selection criteria specified in the registration of interest document.
It was resolved that Trans Link be advised of the other proposers, and invited to brief the Committee at an ordinary meeting at a convenient time on the issues raised in their letter.
Councillor Denis O'Rourke moved by way of amendment to the original recommendation "That Olivines be invited to make a full presentation to the Committee to the Stage I level."
The amendment was seconded by Councillor Ron Wright, and when put to the meeting was declared carried.
Councillor Denis O'Rourke moved by way of a further amendment to the original recommendation "That Connel Wagner be included on the list to be invited to submit a formal proposal in terms of the Joint Standing Committee's Request for Proposals Specification."
The amendment was seconded by Councillor Ron Wright and when put to the meeting was declared carried by a show of hands, the voting being
For 6
Against 2
It was resolved that the recommendation contained in this report be adopted as amended.
6. REPORT 3 - REVIEW OF TIMETABLE AND BUDGET
As a result of the consultation process taking longer than originally planned, and taking into account the likely process from hereon, a revised timetable had been prepared. A progress report on expenditure to budget was also provided.
It was resolved that the information be received.
7. REPORT 4 - EVALUATION PROCESS REPORT
This report suggested a process for completing the evaluation of proposals when they come to hand later this year.
Councillor Close moved by way of amendment "That 2(a) of the recommendation be eight voting members." The amendment was seconded by Councillor Wright, and when put to the meeting was declared lost by a show of hands, the voting being
For 2
Against 6
It was resolved that the recommendation contained in this report be adopted.
Councillor Wright asked that his vote against this recommendation be recorded.
The report was then adopted, subject to the words "and report to a full meeting of the Joint Standing Committee" being added to No 3 Evaluation Process, Step 4 on page 2 of the report.
EVALUATION PANEL
It was resolved that Mayor Noeline Allen and Councillor Bev Tasker be the two district representatives on the evaluation panel.
It was resolved that Councillor Denis O'Rourke and Councillor David Close be the two city representatives on the Evaluation Panel.
It was resolved that the four staff group members on the evaluation panel be Gareth James, Eric Park, Kate Morgan and Allen Lees.
It was resolved that the evaluation panel consider recommendations by the officers as to who the technical and financial advisers should be on the panel, and have delegated authority to appoint these people to the panel.
It was resolved that the panel have power to co-opt any expert it deems necessary and that the other four joint standing Committee members be invited to attend any such meetings as they see fit.
VOTING ISSUES
It was resolved that the four joint standing Committee members named in (a) of the recommendation be given delegated power to vote.
Councillor Evans retired 12.31 pm.
Councillor Wright retired 12.31 pm and returned to the meeting at 12.37 pm.
8. REPORT 5 - HAZARDOUS WASTE STUDY
Dr Vivienne Smith of the Canterbury Regional Council, spoke to her report.
It was resolved that the Regional Hazardous Waste Management Investigation Working Party be given the power to vary the timetable should they consider it appropriate.
The meeting concluded at 12.40 pm.
CONFIRMED THIS DAY OF 1997
CHAIRMAN