Long Term Community Plan 2012-2022 - Hurunui District Council

www.hurunui.govt.nz
Targeted Tourism Rate and District Promotion
Our tourism promotion and limited district promotion is
currently carried out through one of our council committees
called the ‘Hurunui Tourism Board’. The way we fund this is
through a ‘targeted tourism rate’ which has had its share of
controversy. Those who pay are ratepayers and businesses
who are deemed to be involved directly in the visitor / tourism
sector. From this sector, we collect $286,000 annually with an
additional contribution of $45,000 from the Hanmer Springs
Thermal Pools and Spa. We are concerned that we don’t yet
have the funding model right and intend to review the targeted
tourism rate and explore ways of funding a broader concept of
‘district promotion’ or tourism in a different way.
We think we can better promote the district in all aspects by
adopting a broader approach, rather than just focusing only on
tourism. The issue of who benefits from district promotion and
who should fund it is a challenging issue and we want to develop
a better way to do this. We will continue with the targeted
tourism rate up to the end of the 2012/13 (and have included it
throughout the 10 year budget for the meantime), to allow time
for a viable alternative to be developed.
Having taking into account the submissions we received on
this topic, we will look at how we might phase out the current
targeted tourism rate in 2013/14 when a new model would take
effect. We will begin working on this before the end of 2012
around what a possible alternative model would look like. This
will include looking at how to improve our promotion of the
district. At this stage, we are unsure whether this new model
will retain the Hurunui Tourism Board, or see the development
of a new committee or board. We will continue with what we
have in the meantime until an alternative is found.
Cost of Insurance
It will be no surprise to anyone that the cost of insurance has
significantly risen as a result of the Canterbury earthquakes. The
damage to Christchurch in particular and the resulting insurance
liability has been unprecedented anywhere in the world before.
It is now well known that globally, the insurance industry had
to have a major rethink of how it could continue to provide
insurance cover and still be affordable. Given that the Hurunui
District is tectonically active and we are periodically subjected
to floods, rural fires, snow and winds, we have traditionally been
well insured and cover our infrastructure and liabilities.
Up until July 2011, the cost of our insurance was $212,858 per
annum. This is the total bill for all Council infrastructure and
liabilities, including the Hanmer Springs Thermal Pools and Spa.
Our new insurance arrangement now costs $564,414 per year
to cover the same infrastructure as we did in the past. This
significantly contributes to our 5.84% increase in rates as the
approximate increase in insurance across the organisation of
$350,000 alone represents 2.73% of the total rates that were
struck in the 2011/2012 year.
The process for renewing the insurance policies is likely to be
more stringent in the future and there could be the possibility
that some of our assets may not be covered by insurance, as has
been the case for Christchurch City and Waimakariri District
Councils for the 2011/2012 year. It is our intention to remain
fully insured at all times.
Earthquake Strengthening
We have completed the first stage of a desktop review of
potential earthquake prone buildings in the Hurunui district for
all council owned buildings and are now currently carrying out
the second stage which will include all privately owned buildings.
The desk top review should be completed by December 2012.
The completed desk top study will show how many commercial
and public buildings in the district are suspected to be earthquake
prone. At this early stage we have provisional numbers of 368
commercial buildings, both privately and council owned. 150
are estimated to be built before 1976, and up to 90 of them are
suspected to be earthquake prone, and therefore could pose a
potential danger to the public. We own 68 of the commercial
and public buildings built before 1976 and of these, we have
confirmed 48 that are included on the first stage of the desktop
study. Engineers are currently carrying out an initial evaluation
procedure (IEP) of some of these buildings which will confirm
whether or not they are earthquake prone.
The desk top review will only provide information about
buildings without looking at them in a detailed structural
manner. There are certain types of building that are considered
to be more earthquake prone than others and it is these that
we will be focusing on. They are usually unreinforced concrete
and masonry buildings, but there may be others that are also at
risk. The assessment process will be carried out in accordance
with the Earthquake Engineering Society of New Zealand
guidelines. We will need qualified engineers to actually assess
each of these buildings to confirm to us whether or not the
building is potentially earthquake prone and that owners should
be advised. To do this IEP assessment (without any actual repairs
or remedial work), it will cost approximately $69,000 to do
90 earthquake prone buildings spread evenly over the first 3
years of the Long Term Plan. We are taking an active approach
to identify and upgrade buildings at risk following the lessons
learned from the Christchurch earthquakes. Obviously, we do
not want a repeat of that disaster in our district.
Once we have the IEP assessments from the independent
engineers, we will then be able to inform property owners that
we suspect that their building is earthquake prone. They will
then be required to carry out a detailed engineering assessment
to show how to remedy any risks to the building. Because most
of the buildings are council owned, the same will apply to us. At
this stage, we have not made a budget provision for any actual
strengthening, repair or demolition work. We plan to decide
on this once we have the information on a case by case basis.
14