1. Update - what has happened since our last meeting (contributions from all).

• Welcome Mr Kevin Corney who is the new education representative replacing Barry Maughan.
• Welcome to Ms Isabel Davies the new Community Marae representative.
  

2. The Booklet

• Mark Samson - Version 3 of the booklet is now complete. Work on the adaptations for this next edition started in October. Changes were made to the introduction and the facilitator’s foreword; a graphic was added to the timeline; Councillor Baker’s name was added to the list of WCCC members (a previous oversight); the sports page was updated; an arrow was added to the economics graph; and an email address was supplied for people to contact if they have questions or comments. At the moment that email address is administered by Mark.
• Malcolm Lane – arranged for printing of the booklets – 100 printed, available for WCCC and to be distributed via museum, Golden Legacy centre, HDC, Info centre, and Library.
• A non-interactive copy of the booklet is being added to the Waihi.org website.
  

3. Sport ‘N Action Waihi
Gary Samson & Mark Skinner gave a presentation on behalf of the sports consultation group now called Sport ‘N Action Waihi about the outcomes of the WCCC Sports consultation process to date.

Questions:
Q. Sel - How much land would be required?
A. We don’t know yet
Q. Mike – some of the concept sketches seem to be based on the Council reserve on Tauranga Rd. Is it intended that the facility goes there?
A. It is possible, but it could go anywhere. We are not yet sure how much land would be required or where the best place would be.
Q. Would there be facilities for international level sport?
A. Hopefully but the costs are also high. One suggestion is to ensure that the facilities are suitable for both national and international events for the disabled.
A. Sometimes it is possible to provide international standard courts and fields etc but seating requirements are an issue. The national bodies of some codes have minimum standards to be met for capacity and seating requirements.
Q. Does this fit with the WCCC?
A. Absolutely.
Q. Mark – where does Sport ‘N Action go to next? Is the WCCC comfortable with the group going to present to HDC/NWG, and also taking the presentations back to the individual sporting codes?
A. Sel - Go for it. It’s good for everyone to know what is happening. The suggestion was made that it might be easier to get the sport and recreation groups together for a combined presentation.

4. Feedback from Public Meeting on 4 October
The feedback about the WCCC process from the public meeting on the 4th of October 2004 was read to the meeting. The minutes from that meeting and the feedback summary were sent out prior to this meeting of the WCCC (you should therefore have them; please let us know if you don’t).

5. Report back from WG by Ruth
Ruth Ordish gave the meeting a summary of the progress of the Working Group. The Working Group has achieved the following over the course of 8 meetings:
i) Selection of contractor

• Selected 2 potential candidates from the 5 final proposals.
• Is awaiting feedback in relation to their choices from 2 WG members who were not able to be present at the meeting.
• Is going to meet with 2 top contenders for an interview process (on Monday 6 December) for a stronger sense of who they are, and to refine the scope of the contract to more closely reflect the budget allocation.

Wants the WCCC to give the WG authority to select and announce the successful contractor and the timeframe for completion.

ii) The Entity

• A summary containing the proposed purposes and rules and a matrix of practical requirements is to be forwarded to 4 identified agencies/persons who have the expertise to assist in the area of what structure the entity should take; and
• A decision is to be made on what to recommend to the WCCC based on the available advice.
• The WG wants the WCCC to give the WG authority to select and announce the successful contractor and the timeframe for completion.

iii) Steve – The WG was ill prepared at the first meeting to assess the contractors. Big progress has been made and the group present today was unanimous. Preservation of the special essence of Waihi was identified as important, and all those present came up with basically the same person.

6. Discussion re Working Group
The WG members introduced themselves to those present at this WCCC meeting prior to the group discussion on where to next. The WCCC was asked for feedback on the following:
Selection of contractor
There are two possible ways that the WG and WCCC can reach a decision on the contractor. The WG could come back to the WCCC with a summary of all of the candidates and discuss the WG view of each with the WCCC OR, the WG could come back to the WCCC with its recommendation of who should be selected.

• Sel – because of the complexity of the material, the WCCC would need a lot of discussion before it would be able to make a decision.
• Mike – I agree the decision should be made by the WG.
• Kevin – I agree with the comments made; why appoint a sub-committee if the WCCC has no confidence in it to make the right decision – the WG has a good cross-section of the WCCC on it.
• Ollie – If there are 5 applicants with 2 shortlisted, I would want to see a summary of the reasons upon which the choice is made.
• Keith – There is a difference in the funding, available and what might be required. The group is confident that we will find the difference in funding. We don’t want to see the WCCC committed to something we don’t have the resources for.
• Rod – I have confidence and trust in the WG. If it is making the decision on a consensus basis, I would endorse that, but if there is a split vote then I think the wider group (WCCC) should kick in.
• Eric – I am happy to receive a single recommendation, but I would like information re the nature of the decision and how it was achieved.
• Clare – I want to see a consensus decision making process.
• Mark – We need to be able to make the decision but need to be accountable.
• Steve – We are not agonising on the cost. We may have to pay to get what we want but will try and fit within the budget.
• Clare - What is the budget?
• Answer = $20,000 less meeting fees and advertising costs. (aprox $16,000)
• Kevin – I believe a funding shortfall, or changes to the scope of work, is the business of the whole WCCC group.
• Don – Has a ceiling been set or is the funding open-ended?
• Answer = no a ceiling has not been fixed, it might be the case that the WCCC or WG have to find some more. However, the current budget is fixed.
• Ruth – Gave an explanation of the process gone through and the intention to discuss scope with the 2 prospective contractors with intent to decrease the currently estimated fee.
• Mark – It is important at this part of process not to be too focussed on quibbling over the dollars. It is not in our best interest long-term to compromise the process for cost at this stage. We are looking at getting the best outcome we can.
• Homer – Would looking at the entity first and getting it up and running making funding applications easier?
• Ruth – We are moving both processes along – it was our mandate. We need to get input from the 4 selected groups/individuals re the best structure. It will happen reasonably quickly from here, hopefully by the next WG meeting on 6 December.
• Mark – A suggestion that using a body like Lions or Rotary to apply for funding on our behalf may assist.
• Kit – I have every confidence in the WG. I don’t expect to be consulted; I just expect to be informed. Time is running; out 24 months from now NWG will be out of here, when you meet again that will be 23 months. You can’t consult every time there is a decision to be made; you were elected to get on with the job. I don’t always expect to agree with your decisions but I do trust you.
• There should be further consideration if the WG is contracting for more money than is currently available.
• Kevin - We should be more aware of what is proposed as we are ultimately responsible.
• Keith – We told you the group today was united, but we want these matters aired in a public forum. We need you to be aware of what is happening and work together to fund it.
• Mark – If we were going to limit ourselves to the existing budget then there would only be 1 contender (based on present pricing) and that contractor is not one of the preferred 2.
  

Polling of WG Members
The members of the WG were polled to see whether they individually had confidence that this stage of the process was achievable (That is the selection of a contractor and the funding of the contract costs). The WG members said:

• Mark - Yes, we have to find a way.
• Tessa – Money is one of the smaller barriers we face. The WG has a commitment from NWG and HDC to assist with funding applications, whether through an umbrella organisation or through an HDC offshoot, but we need to find it fast.
• Steve - Tessa put it well, that is also my perspective. The Mayor gave the HDC perspective. I have got confidence we can do it. This is the smallest of the projects we are taking on. We need to have the confidence to do it.
• Ruth – I am very confident. The timeframe is for us to be finished this stage by February and I believe the money can be raised relatively easily.
• Sel – We are interviewing now. When that is complete the scene may change. There will have to be some reflection. If we are over budget and the WG is convinced a particular nominee is the one to go for, we need to come back to the WCCC with how the additional funding can be obtained and, if it can’t then the funds need to be reduced down to level that can be afforded.
• Sel – There has been a good discussion process in the WG. There has been disagreement, we have pulled things apart, looked at the advantages and disadvantages, there is a fair bit of debate and discussion, and decisions are not just automatic.

Decision re Contractor
The WCCC is happy with WG making a decision as to the contractor to be selected provided it is a consensus decision.
The WCCC want to receive the decision and a summary of the reasons why that decision was made.
If the costs of contracting the successful consultant exceed the budget available, the WCCC expect the WG to also advise them how the shortfall is to be funded.
If a consensus decision is not possible then the matter is to be brought back to the WCCC.
The WCCC expects to hear from the WG on the 13th of December 2004.

Decision re Entity
Let the WG decide on basis of same criteria as the contractor decision above – consensus, recommendation and why. If it is a split vote then it must go back to the WCCC.

7. Successors for those committee members who have left.

• Ruth – My first thought is that it is essential that replacement of member of the WCCC happens and that we not allow attrition. If we do then the WCCC ceases to be a process of community representation.
• Kevin – How did WCCC come into being? Should it be the organisation represented on the WCCC whose member is leaving that determines the successor?
• Sel – It is good to keep the same group together so we are not reinventing the wheel. We have done the work and we want the good progress to continue.
• Tessa – We need to ensure flexibility around members and keep up with changes in society. We are missing Collette from the Social Impact team and the Youth representation has not been maintained
• Clare – Other interested groups could apply to join the WCCC.
• Rod – I have been approached by another business group who are interested. I am representing their interests now. Should we limit the numbers? How do decisions then get made where there is a different weighting of numbers?
• Clare – We discussed having sector representatives, who then go back to their wider groups. Perhaps we need to adhere to those?
• Kevin – We should keep the inner and outer circles.
• Tessa – It is good to have the 3 levels but with free access for all to have input.
• Sel – This project is too big to stop people getting involved. Anyone can attend and take information back to their group. We risk reinventing the wheel if we start bringing new members in.
• Tessa – It needs to be an organic group able to change as Waihi changes. If there is a gap then we have a mechanism to allow others in.
• Kit – you will face issues of inclusion/exclusion, accountability, representation. As soon as there is money involved, there will be questions asked. Most organisations would have its membership come up for re-election.
• Don – It is timely to give thought to the lifespan of this group. Does the rest of the community know – does it have a mandate? This is not clarified and needs to be addressed.
• Members discussed the importance of retaining the model:
  

Decision re Succession of WCCC members
The group the person represents should make the selection of a replacement.

8. Planning for subsequent meetings,
a) The next WCCC meeting is to be on 13 December at 7.30 p.m. at the Golden Legacy Centre.
(Malcolm Lane suggested the meeting might be a combined business meeting and end of year windup with NWG laying on some refreshments.)

b) The first meeting of 2005 will be 7 February 2005 at the Salvation Army Hall in Seddon St.
(There will need to be focus on the shape and function of the WCCC, the Entity and the timeline for 2005 so some thinking around those subjects before that meeting will be helpful)

c) So that you can note your diaries the following WCCC meeting will be held at 7.00pm on Monday 21 February at the Salvation Army Hall in Seddon St.

The meeting finished at 9.15 p.m.

Tim and Sharon