I hereby give notice that an ordinary meeting of the Kaipātiki Local Board will be held on:

 

Date:                      

Time:

Meeting Room:

Venue:

 

Wednesday, 23 November 2016

2.00pm

Kaipātiki Local Board Office
90 Bentley Avenue
Glenfield

 

Kaipātiki Local Board

 

OPEN AGENDA

 

 

 

MEMBERSHIP

 

Chairperson

Danielle Grant

 

Deputy Chairperson

John Gillon

 

Members

Paula Gillon

 

 

Ann Hartley, JP

 

 

Kay McIntyre, QSM

 

 

Anne-Elise Smithson

 

 

Adrian Tyler

 

 

Lindsay Waugh

 

 

(Quorum 4 members)

 

 

 

Blair Doherty

Kaipātiki Local Board Democracy Advisor

 

15 November 2016

 

Contact Telephone: (09) 484 8856

Email: Blair.Doherty@aucklandcouncil.govt.nz

Website: www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz

 

 


 

 

Kaipātiki Local Board area

 

 

 

 


Kaipātiki Local Board

23 November 2016

 

 

ITEM   TABLE OF CONTENTS                                                                                        PAGE

1          Welcome                                                                                                                         5

2          Apologies                                                                                                                        5

3          Declaration of Interest                                                                                                   5

4          Confirmation of Minutes                                                                                               5

5          Leave of Absence                                                                                                          5

6          Acknowledgements                                                                                                       5

7          Petitions                                                                                                                          6

8          Deputations                                                                                                                    6

9          Public Forum                                                                                                                  6

10        Extraordinary Business                                                                                                6

11        Notices of Motion                                                                                                          7

12        Kaipātiki Quick Response, Round Two 2016/2017                                                    9

13        Appointment of board members to external community organisations               25

14        Adoption of a business meeting schedule                                                               99

15        Urgent decision-making process                                                                             105

16        Kaipātiki Community Facilities Trust Quarterly Report                                       107

17        Auckland Council's Quarterly Performance Report: Kaipātiki Local Board for Quarter One, 1 July - 30 September 2016                                                                              123

18        Swimming Pool Fencing Exemption Applications                                                169

19        Special Exemption (Section 6) Fencing of Swimming Pools Act 1987               173  

20        Consideration of Extraordinary Items 

PUBLIC EXCLUDED

21        Procedural Motion to Exclude the Public                                                               177

19        Special Exemption (Section 6) Fencing of Swimming Pools Act 1987

a.      15 Chatswood Grove, Birkenhead                                                                 177

b.      16 Seaview Road, Glenfield                                                                            177  

 


1          Welcome

 

 

2          Apologies

 

At the close of the agenda no apologies had been received.

 

3          Declaration of Interest

 

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.

 

The Auckland Council Code of Conduct for Elected Members (the Code) requires elected members to fully acquaint themselves with, and strictly adhere to, the provisions of Auckland Council’s Conflicts of Interest Policy.  The policy covers two classes of conflict of interest:

 

i)          A financial conflict of interest, which is one where a decision or act of the local board could reasonably give rise to an expectation of financial gain or loss to an elected member; and

 

ii)         A non-financial conflict interest, which does not have a direct personal financial component.  It may arise, for example, from a personal relationship, or involvement with a non-profit organisation, or from conduct that indicates prejudice or predetermination.

 

The Office of the Auditor General has produced guidelines to help elected members understand the requirements of the Local Authority (Member’s Interest) Act 1968.  The guidelines discuss both types of conflicts in more detail, and provide elected members with practical examples and advice around when they may (or may not) have a conflict of interest.

 

Copies of both the Auckland Council Code of Conduct for Elected Members and the Office of the Auditor General guidelines are available for inspection by members upon request. 

 

Any questions relating to the Code or the guidelines may be directed to the Relationship Manager in the first instance.

 

4          Confirmation of Minutes

 

That the Kaipātiki Local Board:

a)         confirm the ordinary minutes of its inaugural meeting, held on Wednesday, 2 November 2016, as a true and correct record.

 

 

5          Leave of Absence

 

At the close of the agenda no requests for leave of absence had been received.

 

6          Acknowledgements

 

At the close of the agenda no requests for acknowledgements had been received.


 

7          Petitions

 

At the close of the agenda no requests to present petitions had been received.

 

8          Deputations

 

Standing Order 3.20 provides for deputations. Those applying for deputations are required to give seven working days notice of subject matter and applications are approved by the Chairperson of the Kaipātiki Local Board. This means that details relating to deputations can be included in the published agenda. Total speaking time per deputation is ten minutes or as resolved by the meeting.

 

At the close of the agenda no requests for deputations had been received.

 

9          Public Forum

 

A period of time (approximately 30 minutes) is set aside for members of the public to address the meeting on matters within its delegated authority. A maximum of 3 minutes per item is allowed, following which there may be questions from members.

 

At the close of the agenda no requests for public forum had been received.

 

10        Extraordinary Business

 

Section 46A(7) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 (as amended) states:

 

“An item that is not on the agenda for a meeting may be dealt with at that meeting if-

 

(a)        The local authority by resolution so decides; and

 

(b)        The presiding member explains at the meeting, at a time when it is open to the public,-

 

(i)         The reason why the item is not on the agenda; and

 

(ii)        The reason why the discussion of the item cannot be delayed until a subsequent meeting.”

 

Section 46A(7A) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 (as amended) states:

 

“Where an item is not on the agenda for a meeting,-

 

(a)        That item may be discussed at that meeting if-

 

(i)         That item is a minor matter relating to the general business of the local authority; and

 

(ii)        the presiding member explains at the beginning of the meeting, at a time when it is open to the public, that the item will be discussed at the meeting; but

 

(b)        no resolution, decision or recommendation may be made in respect of that item except to refer that item to a subsequent meeting of the local authority for further discussion.”

 

11        Notices of Motion

 

At the close of the agenda no requests for notices of motion had been received.

 


Kaipātiki Local Board

23 November 2016

 

 

Kaipātiki Quick Response, Round Two 2016/2017

 

File No.: CP2016/22925

 

  

Purpose

1.       The purpose of this report is to present applications received for the Kaipātiki Quick Response Round Two 2016/2017. The local board is required to fund, part fund or decline these applications.

Executive summary

2.       The Kaipātiki Local Board has set a total community grants budget of $10,000 for quick response grants for the 2016/2017 financial year.

3.       A total of $810 was allocated under Quick Response Round One 2016/2017, leaving a balance of $9,190 to be allocated for the remainder of the 2016/2017 financial year.

4.       Two applications were received for Quick Response Round Two 2016/2017, with a total amount requested of $2,400.

 

Recommendation/s

That the Kaipātiki Local Board:

a)      consider the applications listed in the table below for Quick Response Round Two 2016/2017 and agree to fund, part fund or decline each application in this round.

Application No.

Organisation Name

Project

Total Requested

Eligible/

ineligible

QR1708-201

Neighbourhood Support North Shore Incorporated

Towards the purchase of gifts and wages for the North Shore Neighbourhood Support manager between December 2016 to November 2017.

$2,000

Ineligible – amount requested is greater than the quick response maximum of $500.

QR1708-202

Action Education Incorporated

Towards the wages for the facilitator to run 10 spoken word poetry workshops across the Kaipātiki Local Board area between February to April 2017.

$400

Eligible.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Comments

5.       The Auckland Council Community Grants Policy supports each local board to adopt a grants programme (refer Attachment A).

6.       The local board grants programmes sets out:

·          local board priorities;

·          lower priorities for funding;

·          exclusions;

·          grant types, number of grant rounds and when these will open and close; and

·          any additional accountability requirements.

7.       The Kaipātiki Local Board will operate four quick response rounds for this financial year. The second quick response round closed on 24 October 2016.

8.       Community grant programmes have been extensively advertised through the council grants webpage, local board webpages, local board e-newsletter, Facebook pages, council publications, radio and community networks.

9.       For the 2016/2017 financial year, the Kaipātiki Local Board set a total quick response grant budget of $10,000. The Kaipātiki Local Board allocated $810 in Quick Response Round One 2016/2017, leaving a total of $9,190 to allocate for the remainder of 2016/2017. 

10.     Two applications were received for this quick response grants round, requesting a total of $2,400.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

11.     Local boards are responsible for the decision-making and allocation of local board community grants. The Kaipātiki Local Board is required to fund, part-fund or decline these grant applications against the local board priorities identified in the local board grant programme.

12.     The local board is requested to note that section 50 of the Community Grants Policy states

“We will also provide feedback to unsuccessful grant applicants about why they have been declined, so they will know what they can do to increase their chances of success next time.”

13.     A summary of each application is attached (refer Attachment B).

Māori impact statement

14.     The provision of community grants provide opportunities for all Aucklanders to undertake projects, programmes, activities that benefit a wider range of individuals and groups, including Māori. As a guide for decision-making, in the allocation of community grants, the new community grants policy supports the principle of delivering positive outcomes for Māori. There are no organisations applying in this round that have identified as Māori and one has indicated their project targets Māori or Māori outcomes.

Implementation

15.     The allocation of grants to community groups is within the adopted Long-term plan 2015-2025 and local board agreements.

16.     Following the Kaipātiki Local Board allocating funding for Quick Response Round Two, Commercial and Finance staff will notify the applicant of the local board’s decision.

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Kaipātiki Local Grants Programme 2016/2017

11

b

Kaipātiki Quick Response Round Two 2016/2017 application summaries

15

      

Signatories

Authors

Kim Hammond - Community Grants Advisor

Authorisers

Marion Davies - Community Grants Operations Manager

Jennifer Rose - Operations Support Manager

Eric Perry - Relationship Manager

 


Kaipātiki Local Board

23 November 2016

 

 

Page_000001


Page_000002


Page_000003


Page_000004


Kaipātiki Local Board

23 November 2016

 

 

Page_000001


Page_000002


Page_000003


Page_000004


Page_000005


Page_000006


Page_000007


Page_000008


Page_000009


Kaipātiki Local Board

23 November 2016

 

 

Appointment of board members to external community organisations

 

File No.: CP2016/22920

 

  

 

Purpose

1.       To appoint board members to external community organisations relevant to the local board area.

Executive summary

2.       Elected members participate as representatives of the local board on a number of external community and national organisations.

3.       The beginning of the new electoral term generates the need for new appointments. This report provides details of the external organisations relevant to the local board, and requests that the local board nominates a lead and alternate member to represent the board on those external organisations for the 2016-2019 triennium.

4.       In addition, there are a small number of appointments - due to legislation or the terms in a deed – that are the responsibility of the governing body, but because the relationship between the council and the organisation is local, the governing body has delegated its responsibility to nominate an elected member to the relevant local board.

 

Recommendation/s

That the Kaipātiki Local Board:

a)      appoints the following board members to the external community groups and organisations listed below, noting that the alternate appointee should only attend meetings when the lead is unavailable:

External organisation

Lead

Alternate

Bayview Community Centre

 

 

Beach Haven Birkdale Resident's Association

 

 

Birkenhead Town Centre Association

 

 

Northcote Town Centre Incorporated

 

 

Glenfield Community Centre Governance Group

 

 

North Shore Centre for Maritime Education Trust

 

 

Kauri Point / Centennial Park Committee

 

 

The NorthArt Society Incorporated

 

 

Birkdale Beach Haven Community Project

 

 

Northcote Citizen's Centre Management Trust

 

 

The North Shore Events Centre Trust Board

 

 

Onepoto Awhina

 

 

Highbury Community House

 

 

Friends of Shepherd's Park

 

 

b)      recommends that, to avoid potential conflicts of interest, elected members appointed to any outside organisation do not exercise any voting rights conferred by the organisation.

c)      agrees to identify and appoint a trustee to the Kaipātiki Community Facilities Trust using the process set out in the Auckland Council Appointment and Remuneration Policy for Board Members of Council Controlled Organisations.

d)      appoints an interview panel constituted by the chairperson of Kaipātiki Local Board, the chairperson of Kaipātiki Community Facilities Trust, and local board member [NAME], to agree on a skills matrix, shortlist and interview candidates, and make recommendations to the local board on a candidate for nomination to the position of council-appointed trustee to the board of Kaipātiki Community Facilities Trust.

 

 

Comments

5.       A number of external organisations provide for the formal participation of Auckland Council elected members in their affairs. Elected member appointees will have a variety of duties and liabilities depending on the individual organisation.

6.       At the commencement of each triennium, the governing body and local boards recommend appointments to external organisations.

7.       As local board representatives, the nominated members represent the board, not in a personal capacity. Board members should provide updates at local board meetings to keep the board regularly informed of discussions and decisions made of their activities unless good reasons exist for confidentiality. These updates should be in the form of business meeting reports which maintain public transparency.

8.       The reasons for elected member participation in external organisations can be described in a number of ways:

·          a trust deed, that requires Auckland Council to make an appointment to an organisation;

·          an organisation of interest to the local board is inviting elected member representation at its meetings;

·          associations entered into by the council which provide for elected member representation - such as Local Government New Zealand (LGNZ);

·          organisation governance, or project or programme oversight, such as regional or local parks management groups;

·          a statutory or regulatory provision (for example a regulation providing for a community liaison committee); or

·          a resource consent requiring the formation of a committee or hearing panel.

9.       In making decisions about these appointments, it is suggested that local boards are mindful of:

·          the elected members’ availability;

·          any conflicts of interest, including whether the local board provides funding to the entity;

·          relevance; and

·          historical relationship with the organisation and Auckland Council.

10.     Most appointments to outside organisations are part of an on-going relationship between that organisation and the local board. In these cases, there is wide variation in the expectations that the outside organisation has of the board member appointed. This can range from an appointment as a trustee of the organisation, membership of the management committee with voting rights, membership of the management committee with no voting rights through to general liaison. Some of these expectations can give rise to potential conflict of interest challenges for the local board member.

11.     By way of example, an appointment as a trustee brings with it legal obligations to act honestly and in good faith for the benefit of the trust’s beneficiaries. This could potentially result in conflict with the local board member’s duty to act impartially in the best interests of the wider community. Such conflicts could be real or perceived.

12.     Similar issues can arise if the elected member becomes a voting member of the outside organisation’s governance structure, as the elected member may feel responsibility to try to favour the outside organisation’s aspirations in their role as an elected member of the board.

13.     In all cases, elected members are expected to act in accordance with the Auckland Council Code of Conduct for Elected Members (refer Attachment A), which provides the following guidance:

“Elected members should ask themselves if there a real danger of bias on the part of a member of the decision-making body, in the sense that he or she might unfairly regard with favour (or disfavor) the case of a party to the issue under consideration. The question is not limited to actual bias, but relates to the appearance or possibility of bias. This is in line with the principle that justice should not only be done, but should be seen to be done.”

14.     Potential conflicts of interest would be better managed if the local board sets out clear expectations for the role of the elected member appointed to external organisations.  Set out below is a suggested ‘job description’ for the elected member role on the outside organisation, which is derived from the local board representative role as set out in the Business Improvement District Policy (BID Policy):

·          The local board representative to an outside organisation ensures there is a direct link between Auckland Council and the governance of the outside organisation. The role comprises: 

o    providing updates to the outside organisation on Auckland Council and local board activities, plans and projects;

o    communicating to the other local board members providing information on the activities, plans and projects of the outside organisation; and

o    in exercising their role, elected members should ensure that they represent the collective board views on issues.

15.     For those roles where an elected member is given voting rights by the outside organisation, it would be preferred if elected members abstained or otherwise stood aside for any vote the outside organisation took on any issue relating to Auckland Council or the local board.  This will help reduce potential conflicts of interest, either real or perceived.

16.     Members are appointed in their capacity as elected local board members. Should they no longer be a local board member, their nominations would be automatically repealed.

17.     Board members may be part of any organisation in their private capacity and in line with their personal interests. Members are therefore encouraged to disclose memberships to external organisations in the conflict of interest register.

Relevant external organisations

18.     The details of the organisations relevant to the local board are detailed below.

Bayview Community Centre

19.     The Bayview Community Centre is one of the community houses supported by the board and offers a range of programmes and activities.

20.     The previous local board representative was Danielle Grant.

21.     The time commitment is one meeting a month, and the role is as a non-voting member of the executive committee.

22.     The local board is asked to appoint one member to the Bayview Community Centre executive committee.

Beach Haven Birkdale Residents Association

23.     The Beach Haven Birkdale Residents Association exists to promote and protect the interests, welfare and wellbeing of the residents of Beach Haven, Birkdale and the wider community.

24.     The previous local board representative was Richard Hills.

25.     The time commitment is one meeting a month, and the role is general liaision.

26.     The local board is asked to appoint one member to the Beach Haven Birkdale Residents Association.

Birkenhead Town Centre Association and Northcote Town Centre Incorporated

27.     There are 46 Business Improvement District Partnership Programmes operating within the Auckland region. There are two local Mainstreet or Business Improvement Districts (BID) in the Kaipātiki area.

28.     The local board has a day-to-day relationship with the business associations as a joint partner in the BID Partnership Programme. The local board will work with the business associations to align the direction for the BID programme and local priorities expressed the Local Board Plan. The local board will receive regular reporting on the BID Partnership Programme and review progress against objectives.

29.     A business association may invite the appointed member onto the BID Governance Board or Executive Committee. The discretion on whether this member has voting rights will lie with the business association under the rules of their constitution.

30.     The previous local board representatives were: Birkenhead Town Centre Association – Danielle Grant and Northcote Town Centre Incorporated – Lorene Pigg.

31.     The role of the local board member with the BID is set out in the 2016 BID Policy Part 1 Policy Principles Table 1 (refer Attachment B).

Glenfield Community Centre Governance Group

32.     The purpose of the Glenfield Community Centre is to focus on recognising and responding to the social, cultural, recreational and educational needs of the Glenfield / Kaipātiki community, and finding ways to meet these needs with special recognition for those who have the least opportunity to participate in decision-making in the community.

33.     The previous local board representative was John Gillon.

34.     The time commitment is one meeting every two months, and the role is as a voting member of the governance group.

35.     The local board is asked to appoint one member to Glenfield Community Centre Governance Group.

North Shore Centre for Maritime Education Trust

36.     The Trust’s purpose is to promote marine education in the community and to manage community group access to the Northcote and Birkenhead Yacht Club building.

37.     The previous local board representative was Lorene Pigg.

38.     The time commitment is one meeting every three months, and the role is as a voting member of the executive committee.

39.     The local board is asked to appoint one member to North Shore Centre for Maritime Education Trust.


Kauri Point / Centennial Park Committee

40.     The committee cares for, protects and restores the ecology of Kauri Point / Centennial Park and Chatswood Reserve. It also helps maintain the track network so visitors have good access to, and can appreciate, the coastal, stream, bush and historical features.

41.     The previous local board representative was John Gillon.

42.     The time commitment is one meeting a month and the role is as a non-voting member of the executive committee.

43.     The local board is asked to appoint one member to Kauri Point / Centennial Park Committee.

The Northart Society Incorporated

44.     The objectives of Northart are to encourage the practice and appreciation of the arts (especially the visual arts) in the Kaipātiki area, and to provide and govern a public gallery (Northart Gallery) and any other associated arts venues, to cater for the exhibition, performance and development of the visual arts.

45.     The previous local board representative was Lindsay Waugh.

46.     The time commitment is one meeting a month, and the role is as a non-voting member of the executive committee.

47.     The local board is asked to appoint one member to the Northart Society.

Birkdale Beach Haven Community Project

48.     The purpose of the Birkdale Beach Haven Community Project is to promote the wellbeing of the community in Birkdale and Beach Haven.

49.     The previous local board representative was Ann Hartley.

50.     The time commitment is one meeting a month.

51.     The local board is asked to appoint one member to Birkdale Beach Haven Community Project.

Northcote Citizen's Centre Management Trust

52.     To encourage and foster social, recreational and cultural pursuits within the district of Northcote and elsewhere.

53.     The previous local board representative was Grant Gillon.

54.     The time commitment is approximately 4 – 6 meetings per year.  The role is as a trustee.

55.     The local board is asked to appoint one member to Northcote Citizen's Centre Management Trust.

The North Shore Events Centre Trust Board

56.     The North Shore Events Centre Trust Board operates the North Shore Events Centre. The Events Centre is owned by Regional Facilities Auckland.

57.     The previous local board representative was Lorene Pigg.

58.     The time commitment is one or two meetings a year.

59.     The local board is asked to appoint one member to North Shore Events Centre Trust Board.

Onepoto Awhina

60.     Onepoto Awhina provides support for low socio-economic communities, a place to meet for problem solving and provides an affordable early childhood education venue.

61.     The previous local board representative was Grant Gillon.

62.     The time commitment is approximately one meeting a month, and the role is as a voting member of the executive committee.

63.     The local board is asked to appoint one member to Onepoto Awhina.

Highbury Community House

64.     Highbury Community House has been providing a wide range of services to the local community since 1979. It offers room hire, classes, early learning centre and an after school care programme.

65.     The previous local board representative was Ann Hartley.

66.     The time commitment is one meeting a month and the role is general liaison.

67.     The local board is asked to appoint one member to Highbury Community House.

Friends of Shepherd's Park

68.     Friends of Shepherd’s Park is an ecological restoration group.

69.     The previous local board representative was Richard Hills.

70.     The time commitment is one meeting a month, and the role is general liaison.

71.     The local board is asked to appoint one member to Friends of Shepherd's Park.

Kaipātiki Community Facilities Trust

72.     The purpose of the Kaipātiki Community Facilities Trust (KCFT) is to promote the wellbeing of the community in the Kaipātiki area.

73.     The previous local board representative was Danielle Grant.

74.     KCFT is a key community development organisation for the board area. KCFT and the board signed a partnership agreement in 2015. The Trust is also the local board’s largest community partner and received approximately $479,000 in funding from the local board and other parts of the council family in the 2015/16 financial year. KCFT also acts as an ‘umbrella’ group for unincorporated community groups to enable them to receive funding from the local board, such as the Beach Haven Marae study and Kaipātiki Restoration Network. This funding is included in the figure above. 

75.     The KCFT Trust deed gives the local board the right to appoint one trustee, as set out below. There is no requirement that this trustee is a board member:

“(b) (i)         One trustee shall be that person from time to time nominated in writing by the Kaipātiki Local Board Auckland Council, which trustee shall hold office at the pleasure of the Kaipātiki Local Board and be replaced at the pleasure of the Kaipātiki Local Board subject to procedures herein contained.”

76.     This right of appointment gives KCFT the status of a council organisation (CO) under section 6 (1) of the Local Government Act 2002.  A council organisation is defined as one where the council has the right to appoint one or more directors (however defined).  This is not the same as a council controlled organisation, where council has the right to appoint 50 percent or more of the directors. There are potential conflicts of interest between a board member acting in the twin roles of local board member and KCFT trustee. As the board’s largest community partner, it is also important to both the local board and the wider community that the governance of KCFT is effective and efficient.

77.     Auckland Council’s policy in the Governance Manual for Substantive CCOs sets out the suggested appointment process for council organisations. This policy states that appointments to COs must be made by the responsible party in a manner that is consistent with the trust deed or constitution of the entity. In this case, the local board is the designated decision-maker. KCFT’s trust deed does not provide further guidance on trustee appointments beyond the clause stated above.

78.     The policy recommends that council appoints trustees who are not elected members whenever possible. This is because perceived or real conflicts are likely to arise, particularly when council has a financial and/or governance relationship with the entity, and has to monitor/hold it accountable for its performance.

79.     Due to these issues, it is recommended that the board does not make an appointment from within its membership. Council’s policy (refer Attachment C) provides guidance on the appointment process as well as guidance on core skills, knowledge and experience generally required in these positions.

80.     The process can be tailored to meet the local board needs but, in general, the process is as follows:

·          The local board appoints an interview panel to shortlist, interview and recommend a candidate for nomination to the local board. This panel could be constituted by the chairperson of the local board and the chairperson of the Trust. If appropriate, the panel could also include a member of another relevant community entity that may have a relationship with the Trust and the local board. The panel would be further supported by the local board advisor, and CCO Governance and External Partnerships senior advisor, or other relevant staff (e.g. People and Capability advisor).

·          The local board (or the panel) agrees a skills matrix by identifying the skills, knowledge and experience required for the overall Trust board. This would then allow the board to appoint a trustee whose skills complement and strengthen the skill mix on the remainder of the KCFT board, in collaboration with the Trust’s chairperson.

·          Applicants are sought through advertising, council’s trustee register/network, and from nominations from elected members, the Independent Maori Statutory Board (IMSB), and the chairperson of the Trust.

·          Where there is more than one candidate, the panel shortlists candidates for interview by assessing the submissions against the identified skills, knowledge and experience, and can take the following factors into account:

o        council’s policy to encourage demographic diversity and the appointment of more women to governance positions;

o        alignment with council’s objectives for the entity;

o        board dynamics and stakeholder relationships;

o        the capacity of candidates to attend regular meetings and fulfill other workload requirements; and

o        chairperson and deputy chairperson (of the trust) succession planning.

·          Following interview of shortlisted candidates, the panel decides on the preferred candidate and makes a recommendation to the local board; as per the usual decision-making processes. The panel’s recommendation would be put to the local board via a report by staff outlining the process and any other relevant information to assist the local board’s decision.

·          As per the trust deed, the local board’s decision would be to nominate the preferred candidate, and this nomination would then be provided in writing to the trust; this could be a local board chairperson’s letter.

81.     From start to finish, the process can take at least three months.

82.     The CCO and external partnerships team is able to support this process on behalf of the board.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

83.     This report seeks the local board decisions on representation to external community organisations relevant to the local board area.

Māori impact statement

84.     This report has no specific impact on Māori. It covers appointments of local board members to external organisations and community networks to represent the view of local communities, including Māori communities.

Implementation

85.     There are no implementation issues as a result of the recommendations in this report.

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Code of Conduct: Elected Members

35

b

Business Improvement District Policy 2016 extract on partner roles

65

c

Auckland Council Appointment and Remuneration Policy for Board Members of Council Organisations

77

     

Signatories

Authors

Andy Roche - Local Board Advisor

Authorisers

Eric Perry - Relationship Manager

 


Kaipātiki Local Board

23 November 2016

 

 

Page_000001


Page_000002


Page_000003


Page_000004


Page_000005


Page_000006


Page_000007


Page_000008


Page_000009


Page_000010


Page_000011


Page_000012


Page_000013


Page_000014


Page_000015


Page_000016


Page_000017


Page_000018


Page_000019


Page_000020


Page_000021


Page_000022


Page_000023


Page_000024


Page_000025


Page_000026


Page_000027


Page_000028


Page_000029


Kaipātiki Local Board

23 November 2016

 

 

Page_000001


Page_000002


Page_000003


Page_000004


Page_000005


Page_000006


Page_000007


Page_000008


Page_000009


Page_000010


Page_000011


Kaipātiki Local Board

23 November 2016

 

 

Page_000001


Page_000002


Page_000003


Page_000004


Page_000005


Page_000006


Page_000007


Page_000008


Page_000009


Page_000010


Page_000011


Page_000012


Page_000013


Page_000014


Page_000015


Page_000016


Page_000017


Page_000018


Page_000019


Page_000020


Page_000021


Page_000022


Page_000023


Page_000024


Kaipātiki Local Board

23 November 2016

 

 

Adoption of a business meeting schedule

 

File No.: CP2016/22567

 

  

 

Purpose

1.       To seek the adoption of the Kaipātiki Local Board meeting schedule for the 2016-2019 electoral term.

Executive summary

2.       A draft meeting schedule for the 2016-2019 electoral term has been developed and is included below for adoption by the local board.

3.       The specific times and dates for meetings, public engagement and any hearings which may be required (e.g. for local board plans or local board agreements) are yet to be finalised. Local board meeting schedules may therefore be updated once these details are confirmed.

 

Recommendation/s

That the Kaipātiki Local Board:

a)      adopt the meeting schedule outlined in Attachment A to the agenda report, consisting of:

i.        one business meeting per month, generally to be held on the third Wednesday of each month, commencing at 9.00am, to consider the general business of the board; and

ii.       one community forum meeting per month, generally to be held on the fourth Wednesday of each month, commencing at 6.00pm, with the primary purpose of engaging with the public via deputations and reporting from community organisations, and also to consider any items of business that need to be considered due to time constraints, or that are more appropriately dealt with at community forum.

b)      note that:

i.        business meetings are not scheduled to be held in January 2017, January 2018 or January 2019;

ii.       community forum meetings are not scheduled to be held in January 2017, December 2017, January 2018, December 2018 or January 2019; and

iii.      business meetings in December 2017 and December 2018 will be held on the second Wednesday of the month in order to avoid conflicting with the Christmas period.

c)      note that dates and times for meetings, public engagement and any hearings and deliberations for local board plans and local board agreements, or other special consultative procedures are yet to be finalised.

 


Comments

4.       The Local Government Act 2002 (LGA) and the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 (LGOIMA) have requirements regarding local board meeting schedules.

5.       In summary, adopting a meeting schedule helps meet the requirements of:

·        Clause 19, Schedule 7 of the LGA on general provisions for meetings, which requires the Chief Executive to give notice in writing to each local board member of the time and place of meetings.  Such notification may be provided by the adoption of a schedule of business meetings.

·        Sections 46, 46(A) and 47 in Part 7 of the LGOIMA, which requires that meetings are publicly notified, agendas and reports are available at least two working days before a meeting and that local board meetings are open to the public.

6.       Adopting a business meeting schedule also allows for a planned approach to workloads and ensures that local board members have clarity about their commitments.

7.       There are some instances for which the local board may need to have meetings in addition to this schedule - for example, the local board plan (developed every three years) and local board agreement (developed annually). The specific times and dates for those meetings, public engagement and any hearings processes for these matters are yet to be finalised, and are therefore not included in the schedule above.

Meeting schedule

8.       In the previous term, the Kaipātiki Local Board adopted a schedule consisting of one business meeting per month to consider the business before the board, and one community forum meeting per month that enabled community participation and provided the opportunity for community organisations and individuals to engage with the board.

9.       Conducting business meetings during business hours enables meetings to be productive and ensures the best use of resources. A consequence of this is that the availability for community to attend may be impacted, depending on their personal and/or work commitments. Consequently, conducting business meetings outside of business hours may limit the ability of the board to receive expert advice and increase the costs associated with meetings. Community participation may not necessarily be enabled due to family or extra-curricular commitments.

10.     Kaipātiki Local Board staff consider the community forum model to be the preferred option as it was effective at balancing the needs of the community and the availability of staff and contractors who provide expert advice to the board. It is recommended that this approach is continued for the 2016-2019 electoral term.

11.     If the board wishes to continue utilising the community forum meeting model, it is recommended that the monthly business meeting considering business before the board is scheduled to be conducted during business hours, commencing at 9:00am, and that the community forum be conducted outside business hours, commencing at 6:00pm. There is a further recommendation that the scope of the community forum meeting be broadened to allow items of business to be brought to these meetings if necessary.

12.     Alternately, if the board does not wish to utilise the community forum model, it is recommended that there is one business meeting a month, commencing at 2:00pm. This option is a compromise in that part of the meeting is conducted during business hours and part of the meeting is conducted outside business hours. This is not the preferred option as staff and subject matter expert availability for items considered in meetings that continue past 5:00pm may not be available. It is also not ideal for people who wish to attend meetings for deputations and/or public forum, or to present petitions which are held at the beginning of meetings.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

13.     The implication of this report is to ensure that the local board meets its legislative responsibilities, as outlined in paragraph five above.

Māori impact statement

14.     There is no specific impact for Māori arising from this report. Local boards work with Māori on projects and initiatives of shared interest.

Implementation

15.     If there is any need to depart from the resolved dates, Auckland Council will publicly notify the updated details.

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Proposed meeting schedule for Kaipātiki Local Board 2016-2019

105

     

Signatories

Authors

Blair Doherty - Kaipātiki Local Board Democracy Advisor

Authorisers

Eric Perry - Relationship Manager

 


Kaipātiki Local Board

23 November 2016

 

 

Page_000001


Page_000002


Kaipātiki Local Board

23 November 2016

 

 

Urgent decision-making process

 

File No.: CP2016/22568

 

  

 

Purpose

1.       The purpose of this report is to seek the Kaipātiki Local Board’s agreement to use the urgent decision-making process when appropriate.

Executive summary

2.       The urgent decision-making process enables the board to make decisions without calling the full board together and meeting the requirement of a quorum. By agreeing to this process, the board delegates decision-making authority to the Chairperson and Deputy Chairperson, or any person acting in these roles.

3.       At times, such as during the Christmas and New Year period, it is not practical to call the full board together and meet the requirements of a quorum. This is an example of when the urgent decision-making process would be used.

 

Recommendation/s

That the Kaipātiki Local Board:

a)      adopts the urgent decision-making process for matters that require a decision where it is not practical to call the full board together and meet the requirement of a quorum.

b)      delegates authority to the Chairperson and Deputy Chairperson, or any person acting in these roles, to make urgent decisions on behalf of the local board.

c)      agrees that the Relationship Manager, Chairperson and Deputy Chairperson (or any person/s acting in these roles) will authorise the urgent decision-making process by signing off the authorisation memo.

d)      notes that all urgent decisions will be reported to the next ordinary meeting of the local board.

 

Comments

What an urgent decision is

4.       The urgent decision-making process enables the Chairperson and Deputy Chairperson, or any person acting in these roles, to make urgent decisions on behalf of the local board when it is not practical to call the full board together and meet the requirement of a quorum. Examples include during the Christmas and New Year period or for participating in a council submission process.

5.       The Local Government Act 2002[1] provides for local boards to delegate to committees, sub-committees, members of the local board or Auckland Council staff, any of its responsibilities, duties and powers, with some specific exceptions. This legislation enables the urgent decision-making process.

6.       The urgent decision-making process provides an alternative decision-making mechanism to an extraordinary meeting. An extraordinary meeting is called when an urgent decision is required on matters that cannot wait until the next scheduled business meeting of the local board.

7.       Urgent decisions are different from emergency decisions, which are only made if there is a risk to public health and safety.

The urgent decision-making process

8.       All requests for an urgent decision will be supported by a memo stating the nature of the issue, reason for urgency and what decisions or resolutions are required. 

9.       The local board Relationship Manager will use the information in this memo to determine whether or not to authorise the urgent-decision making process.

10.     A number of factors will be considered by the relationship manager before approval to use the urgent decision-making process is given, such as:

·                    the timing of the next scheduled meeting;

·                    confirmation that the local board has the delegation to make the decision;

·                    consideration of the rationale for the urgency; and

·                    the significance of the decision and whether the urgent decision-making process is appropriate.

11.     Once the Relationship Manager authorises the use of the urgent decision-making process, the Chairperson and Deputy Chairperson (or any person/s acting in these roles) also need to approve the use of the urgent decision-making process by signing the same memo.

12.     Once the authorisation memo has been approved, the Chairperson and Deputy Chairperson will refer to the substantive report for advice and staff recommendations to inform their decision. This report will meet Auckland Council quality advice standards and adhere to the report authorisation processes.

13.     Any decision made using the urgent decision-making process will be reported as an information item to the next ordinary meeting of the local board and the signed approval memo will be attached.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

14.     This report outlines the local board urgent decision-making process, and seeks the local board’s agreement to adopt this process.

Māori impact statement

15.     There is no specific impact for Māori arising from this report.

Implementation

16.     This report outlines how the local board Relationship Manager and elected members will execute the urgent decision-making process when the need arises. Paragraph four outlines the implications of this for local boards.

17.     The local board Relationship Managers can provide advice as to what might constitute an urgent decision.

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.     

Signatories

Authors

Felicity Prance - Policy Advisor

Authorisers

Karen Lyons - General Manager Local Board Services

Eric Perry - Relationship Manager

 


Kaipātiki Local Board

23 November 2016

 

 

Kaipātiki Community Facilities Trust Quarterly Report

 

File No.: CP2016/22821

 

  

 

Purpose

1.       The purpose of this report is to update members on the schedule of work achieved and completed, aligned to Schedule 1 of the Kaipātiki Local Board contract delivery partnership.

Executive Summary

2.       The attached report provides members with an oversight of Kaipātiki Local Board and Auckland Council’s shared community development partnership with the Kaipātiki Community Facilities Trust. The Kaipātiki Community Facilities Trust leads and supports collaborative responses to improve community wellbeing in the Kaipātiki Local Board area.

 

Recommendation/s

That the Kaipātiki Local Board:

a)      receive the Kaipātiki Community Facilities Trust Quarter Four report.

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Kaipātiki Community Facilities Trust  Quarter 1 report - October 2016

113

     

Signatories

Authors

Blair Doherty - Kaipātiki Local Board Democracy Advisor

Authorisers

Eric Perry - Relationship Manager

 



Kaipātiki Local Board

23 November 2016

 

 

Page_000001


Kaipātiki Local Board

23 November 2016

 

 

Page_000002


Kaipātiki Local Board

23 November 2016

 

 

Page_000003


Kaipātiki Local Board

23 November 2016

 

 

Page_000004


Kaipātiki Local Board

23 November 2016

 

 

Page_000005


Kaipātiki Local Board

23 November 2016

 

 

Page_000006


Kaipātiki Local Board

23 November 2016

 

 

Page_000007


Kaipātiki Local Board

23 November 2016

 

 

Page_000008


Kaipātiki Local Board

23 November 2016

 

 

Page_000009


Kaipātiki Local Board

23 November 2016

 

 

Page_000010


Kaipātiki Local Board

23 November 2016

 

 

Page_000011


Kaipātiki Local Board

23 November 2016

 

 

Page_000012


Kaipātiki Local Board

23 November 2016

 

 

Page_000013



Kaipātiki Local Board

23 November 2016

 

 

Auckland Council's Quarterly Performance Report: Kaipātiki Local Board for Quarter One, 1 July - 30 September 2016

 

File No.: CP2016/22834

 

  

 

Purpose

1.       To provide the Kaipātiki Local Board members with an integrated quarterly performance report for quarter one 2016/17, against the Local Board Agreement work programme.

Executive summary

2.       This report is the first in a new format, to provide an integrated view of performance for the Kaipātiki Local Board, including financial performance, progress against local board key performance indicators, progress against each operating department work programme, key challenges the board should be aware of, and any risks associated with delayed delivery against the Kaipātiki 2016/17 work programme.

3.       Of significance this quarter, the following projects were opened:

·        Croftfield Lane wetland; and

·        Kaimataara o Wai Manawa (platform opening).

4.       The board also:

·        endorsed the Pest Free Kaipātiki Strategy and took some initial decisions to support its implementation; and

·        selected an operator for the Marlborough Park Hall Youth Facility.

5.       The Kaipātiki Local Board has an approved 2016/17 work programme for the following operating departments:

·        Arts, Community and Events, approved on 13 July 2016;

·        Parks, Sport and Recreation, approved on 8 June 2016

·        Libraries and Information, approved on 8 June 2016;

·        Community Facility Renewals, approved on 10 August 2016; and

·        Infrastructure and Environmental Services, approved on 13 July 2016.

6.       All operating departments with agreed work programmes have provided a quarterly update against their work programme delivery, with all items reported as ‘green’ status (on track) except for the following which have a ‘red’ status (behind delivery, significant risk):

·        Community Facilities – Project Delivery 136 Birkdale Road park development.

7.       Overall, the financial performance of the board against quarter one, FY16/17 is on track, however there are some points for the board to be aware of:

·        Kaipātiki Local Board has invested $1.8 million in capital expenditure and $2.5 million net operating expenditure for the first quarter ended 30 September 2016;

·        most of the capital investment in the quarter has been in the local planning activity ($1.0 million) with parks sport and recreation contributing $600,000;

·        the operating net cost of service is tracking in line with budget; and

·        total revenue is slightly below budget, the main cause being the pool closure at Glenfield Leisure for its annual maintenance period.

8.       The key performance indicators (KPI’s) for the Kaipātiki Local Board show a trend of delivery that is meeting the indicators, with the exceptions being park usage, satisfaction with library environments and grant processes, connection with neighbourhood and community, safety in town centres and Business Improvement District organisations complying with their partnership obligations. These are explained further in detail in the report.

9.       The overall dashboard for the Kaipātiki Local Board indicates performance in the Kaipātiki Local Board area is tracking positively (refer Attachment B).

 

Recommendation/s

That the Kaipātiki Local Board:

a)      receive the performance report for the financial quarter ending 30 September 2016.

 

 

Comments

Key achievements for quarter one

 

10.     The Kaipātiki Local Board has a number of key achievements to report from the quarter one period, which include:

·        the Croftfield Lane wetland project completion;

·        the opening of Kaimataara o Wai Manawa (platform opening);

·        endorsing the Pest Free Kaipātiki Strategy and initial decisions to support its implementation;

·        selecting an operator for the Marlborough Park Hall Youth Facility;

·        revising and updating the Kaipātiki Connections Plan; and

·        initial decisions on how to invest the Local Board Capital Fund.

 

Key project updates from the 2016/17 work programme

 

11.     All operating departments with an approved 2016/17 work programme have provided performance report updates for quarter one. A full summary of progress against the programmes is provided in Attachment A.

12.     The following are progress updates against key projects identified in the Local Board Plan:

·        develop a community-led youth facility - the Kaipātiki Youth Development Trust has been selected as the preferred operator for the Marlborough Park Hall Youth Facility.  Construction and refurbishment of the facility is continuing, but is slightly behind schedule.

·        advocate for regional equity of funding for sport – the scoping of a board funded investigation is near completion.

·        implement the Kaipātiki Connections Network Plan – the plan has been reviewed and the current projects confirmed.

·        provide support for the Kaipātiki Project and other environmental groups – the board has endorsed the Pest Free Kaipātiki Strategy and taken some initial decisions to support its implementation. Work with the community partners and the council family to implement the strategy continues.

·        improve the main street and develop a bush gateway and lookout on Birkenhead Avenue – Kaimataara o Wai Manawa has been opened. The café operator is developing the café space and the full project should be completed prior to the end of the calendar year.

·        work with ethnic and migrant owned businesses to develop and support their business offerings in Kaipātiki – the next phase of this project is currently under development. A number of other local boards have approved similar projects, and some consideration is being given as to how these separate projects might support and complement each other.

·        ensure all facilities are fit for purpose and comply with regional standards by implementing effective renewals and maintenance programmes – the Glenfield Leisure Centre Pool annual maintenance shut down has been completed.

13.     The overall dashboard for the Kaipātiki Local Board indicates performance in the Kaipātiki Local Board area is tracking positively (Attachment B.)

Risks identified in the 2016/17 work programme

 

14.     The following are risks that have been identified by operating departments where the progress and performance indicator has been set to ‘red’ – significantly behind budget/time or achievement of outcomes.

Parks, Sport and Recreation – Community Facilities – Project Delivery 136 Birkdale Road park development

a)      Foundation works of a car park, playspace and plaza at 136 Birkdale Road has been identified as on hold. The department has advised that there is no funding available as was set out in the Long-term Plan. Work is underway to identify the required budget however the project is on hold until funding is agreed.

 

Financial performance

 

15.     The Kaipātiki Local Board has invested $1.8 million in capital expenditure and $2.5 million net operating expenditure for the first quarter ended 30 September 2016.

16.     Most of the capital investment in the quarter has been in the local planning activity ($1.0 million) with parks sport and recreation contributing $600,000.

17.     The operating net cost of service is tracking in line with budget.

18.     Total revenue is slightly below budget, the main cause being the pool closure at Glenfield Leisure for its annual maintenance period.

19.     The full summary of financial performance is provided in Attachment C.

 

Key performance indicators

 

20.     There are a number of KPIs which are not tracking as well as expected. These are:

·        Percentage of residents who visited a local park in the previous 12 months. This figure is tracking down, but a recent change in the survey question may mean that residents living close to the board margin are now being recorded as using parks in neighbouring board areas.

·        Percentage of visitors satisfied with the library environment. Feedback relates to issues relating to parking and seating. Furniture and fitting renewals at Birkenhead Library are underway.

·        Percentage of funding grant applicants satisfied with information, assistance and advice provided. The 2016 financial year was the first year of the new grants policy and also saw the establishment of a funding hub. A series of workshops are planned for the forthcoming financial year to better understand applicants issues and improve applicants understanding of processes and the need to complete and provide documentation necessary for both the application and payment process.

·        Percentage of Aucklanders that feel connected to their neighbourhood and local community. There are a range of issues that may lead to a lack of connectedness. A number of council activities, such as events and community programme, are designed to address this, and the empowered communities approach is also expected to improve these figures.

·        Percentage of attendees satisfied with council delivered and funded local events. Only a small sample of events are surveyed for residents satisfaction and, as such, it is difficult to extrapolate those results across all events delivered by, or on behalf of, council.

·        Percentage of Aucklanders that feel their local town centre is safe (day) and (night). This result is influenced by a number of factors, only some of which are within council’s control. The redevelopment of Northcote Town Centre is expected to improve the perception of safety in the area over time.

·        Number of visitors to community centres and venues for hire. This result is based on two months of actual data and one month of estimates. Visitation has declined over previous years, but no data was received from Glenfield Community Centre, which has adversely impacted on this result.

·        Percentage of Business Associations meeting their Business Improvement District (BID) Partnership obligations. The Northcote Town Centre Association is not meeting its obligations under the BID programme, as has been reported to the board in the previous term of council. Council resources are now supporting the delivery of the BID programme in Northcote.

21.     All other KPI indicators are tracking on or above target. It is expected that, for those elements of the above KPIs which are directly influenced by council’s activities, the remedial actions being implemented will improve the next quarter’s report.

22.     The full summary of performance against KPI’s is provided in Attachment D.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

23.     This report informs the Kaipātiki Local Board of the performance to date for the period ending 30 September 2016.

Māori impact statement

24.     The expressions of interest for the proposed Beach Haven Marae feasibility study closed on 20 October 2016. These proposals are currently being evaluated and a recommendation will be brought to the steering group.

Implementation

25.     The Senior Advisor Kaipātiki Local Board will continue to facilitate performance updates to the local board.

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Kaipātiki Quarter One report 2016-2017

133

b

Kaipātiki Dashboard Quarter One 2016-2017

157

c

Kaipātiki Financial Appendix Quarter One 2016-2017

159

d

Kaipātiki Key Performance Indicators report Quarter One 2016-2017

165

     

Signatories

Authors

Andy Roche - Local Board Advisor

Authorisers

Eric Perry - Relationship Manager

 



Kaipātiki Local Board

23 November 2016

 

 

Page_000001


Kaipātiki Local Board

23 November 2016

 

 

Page_000002


Kaipātiki Local Board

23 November 2016

 

 

Page_000003


Kaipātiki Local Board

23 November 2016

 

 

Page_000004


Kaipātiki Local Board

23 November 2016

 

 

Page_000005


Kaipātiki Local Board

23 November 2016

 

 

Page_000006


Kaipātiki Local Board

23 November 2016

 

 

Page_000007


Kaipātiki Local Board

23 November 2016

 

 

Page_000008


Kaipātiki Local Board

23 November 2016

 

 

Page_000009


Kaipātiki Local Board

23 November 2016

 

 

Page_000010


Kaipātiki Local Board

23 November 2016

 

 

Page_000011


Kaipātiki Local Board

23 November 2016

 

 

Page_000012


Kaipātiki Local Board

23 November 2016

 

 

Page_000013


Kaipātiki Local Board

23 November 2016

 

 

Page_000014


Kaipātiki Local Board

23 November 2016

 

 

Page_000015


Kaipātiki Local Board

23 November 2016

 

 

Page_000016


Kaipātiki Local Board

23 November 2016

 

 

Page_000017


Kaipātiki Local Board

23 November 2016

 

 

Page_000018


Kaipātiki Local Board

23 November 2016

 

 

Page_000019


Kaipātiki Local Board

23 November 2016

 

 

Page_000020


Kaipātiki Local Board

23 November 2016

 

 

Page_000021


Kaipātiki Local Board

23 November 2016

 

 

Page_000022


Kaipātiki Local Board

23 November 2016

 

 

Page_000023



Kaipātiki Local Board

23 November 2016

 

 

Page_000001


Page_000002


Kaipātiki Local Board

23 November 2016

 

 

Page_000001


Page_000002


Page_000003


Page_000004


Page_000005


Page_000006


Kaipātiki Local Board

23 November 2016

 

 

Page_000001


Page_000002


Page_000003


Page_000004


Page_000005


Page_000006


Page_000007


Page_000008


Kaipātiki Local Board

23 November 2016

 

 

Swimming Pool Fencing Exemption Applications

 

File No.: CP2016/22569

 

  

 

Purpose

1.       The purpose of this report is for the Kaipātiki Local Board to establish an agreed approach for how swimming pool fencing exemption applications are going to be resolved upon during the 2016/2019 term.

Executive summary

2.       Under Section 6 of the Fencing of Swimming Pools Act 1987 (the Act), territorial authorities may grant exemptions from the requirements in the Act for particular swimming pools if satisfied that it “would not significantly increase danger to young children”.

3.       The decision-making responsibility for swimming pool fencing exemptions has been delegated to the local boards by the governing body (resolution GB/2011/163).

4.       It is recommended that the local board assesses and considers these applications at a general business meeting.

5.       The local board could resolve to nominate a sub-group of local board members to make site visits when required and to make recommendations to the full board to be formally resolved upon at a business meeting.

 

Recommendation/s

That the Kaipātiki Local Board:

a)      agrees to assess swimming pool fencing exemption applications as part of business meetings during the 2016/2019 term as the need arises.

 

 

Comments

6.       The purpose of the Fencing of Swimming Pools Act 1987 is to promote the safety of young children by requiring the fencing of certain swimming pools. The Act places an obligation on territorial authorities to ensure that pool owners comply with the Act, both at the time when the pool is built, and subsequently by occasional inspections of pools to ensure ongoing compliance.

7.       Under Section 6 of the Act, territorial authorities may grant exemptions from the requirements in the Act for particular pools. Territorial authorities can also impose special conditions on a property and a pool. A territorial authority can only grant an exemption, or impose a special condition, if, after having regard to the characteristics of the pool and the property, it is satisfied that it “would not significantly increase danger to young children”.  No exemption is required for a new pool fence, or an alteration to an existing fence, if the new or altered fence is at least as safe as one built in accordance with the standard in the schedule of the Act.

8.       The governing body has delegated decision-making responsibility for swimming pool fencing exemptions to local boards (resolution GB/2011/163). 

9.       To administer this delegation, staff recommend that applications are determined as part of a local board business meeting as this is the most efficient, transparent and effective decision-making mechanism.

10.     Assessing and determining swimming pool exemption applications at a business meeting has a number of benefits, including:

·          consistent and streamlined approach for applications to be considered;

·          business meetings are the primary formal decision-making mechanism of the local board; and

·          an appropriate level of administrative support can be provided.

11.     There is a risk with this approach in that applications will not be given due consideration amongst congested local board business meeting agendas. However, this can be mitigated by a sub-group of local board members visiting pools as required, to inform the boards’ decisions.

12.     A sub-group of local board members could nominate themselves to conduct site visits, on an as-needed-basis, and make recommendations to the full local board for consideration and adoption at a regular business meeting.

13.     If the local board resolves to nominate a sub-group to conduct site visits, staff recommend that no more than four board members participate in the sub-group. Sub-group participants should be agreed by resolution.

14.     If an application includes sensitive information, the local board may, by resolution, exclude the public from the whole or any part of the proceedings of the meeting if one or more of the grounds set out in the legislation under the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 (LGOIMA) and in the Standing Orders for the Local Boards are met.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

15.     The recommendations within this report fall within the local board’s delegated authority.

Māori impact statement

16.     This report does not specifically impact on Māori.

Implementation

17.     Costs associated with a small number of elected members meeting to consider the applications, in advance of putting forward recommendations to the full board at a business meeting, will be met within internal operating budgets.

18.     The decision of the local board following an exemption hearing is open to challenge by a judicial review process. Local board members will be briefed by Legal Services and Building Control staff regarding the requirements of the Fencing of Swimming Pools Act 1987, the Building Act and the appropriate considerations to take into account when determining an application by a hearings process.

19.     The Building (Pools) Amendment Bill was introduced to New Zealand Parliament on 9 September 2015. Once adopted, this may impact on the role of the local boards in assessing swimming pool fencing exemption applications. Staff will provide more information on this as it becomes available[2].

 

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.     

Signatories

Authors

Felicity  Prance - Policy Advisor

Authorisers

Karen Lyons - General Manager Local Board Services

Eric Perry - Relationship Manager

 


Kaipātiki Local Board

23 November 2016

 

 

Special Exemption (Section 6) Fencing of Swimming Pools Act 1987

 

File No.: CP2016/22965

 

  

 

Purpose

1.       This report seeks decisions on the following application for special exemption from some of the requirements of the Fencing of Swimming Pools Act 1987 (the Act).

Executive Summary

2.       Applications for exemption for swimming or spa pools has been received from the owners of:

·                    15 Chatswood Grove, Birkenhead; and

·                    16 Seaview Road, Glenfield.

3.       The applications do not comply with the Act. Pool inspectors have inspected the properties and consulted with the applicants. Full assessment reports are attached to this report.

4.       The local board must resolve to grant, grant subject to conditions or decline the exemptions sought.

 

Recommendation/s

That the Kaipātiki Local Board:

a)      grant the application for special exemption as sought for 15 Chatswood Grove, Birkenhead with the following conditions:

i.          that New Zealand Standard 8500-2006 clause (a-k) is met at all times; and

ii.         the spa remains in its current location.

b)      grant the application for special exemption as sought for 16 Seaview Road, Glenfield with the following conditions:

i.          the exemption is personal to the applicant and upon the sale of the property the new owner will need to apply for a new exemption.

 

 

Comments

Background

5.       Auckland Council pool inspectors have inspected each property for which an application for special exemption from the Act has been received. In each case, the swimming pool fencing does not comply with the Act. The details of the non-compliance are specified in the attachments to this report.

6.       The council’s pool inspectors have consulted with the applicants in each case. The applicants have been made aware of the council’s requirements to ensure fencing is compliant with the Act, and they have chosen to seek a special exemption from those requirements.

Legislative implications

7.       Compliance with the Act is a mandatory requirement for all pool owners unless exemptions are granted by the local board.

8.       The Act requires pool owners to fence their pool, or all or some of the immediate pool area including the pool itself.  Specific detail on this is contained in the schedule to the Act. If a pool does not have a complying fence it is an offence under the Act, unless exempt.

9.       An exemption can only be granted by the local board after a consideration of the particular characteristics of the property and the pool, other relevant circumstances and taking into account any conditions it may impose. Then, only if “satisfied that an exemption would not significantly increase the danger to young children”, can an exemption be granted.

10.     The definition of the immediate pool area, which is “the land in or on which the pool is situated and as much of the surrounding area that is used for activities or purposes related to the use of the pool”, is a key consideration for granting an exemption.

11.     Where a building forms part of the pool fence and there are doors opening into the pool area, the local board may grant an exemption from compliance with clauses 8 and 10 of the schedule to the Act. It may exempt if it is satisfied that compliance with the Act is impossible, unreasonable or in breach of any other Act, regulation or bylaw and the door is fitted with a locking device that when properly operated prevents the door from being readily opened by children under the age of six years.

12.     When granting a special exemption the local board may impose reasonable conditions relating to the property or the pool or reflecting other relevant circumstances. These may include:

a)      making the exemption personal to the applicant so that on a sale of the property a new owner will need to apply for a new exemption; or

b)           granting the exemption for a fixed term irrespective of changes of ownership.

13.     Any exemption granted or condition imposed may be amended or revoked by the local board by resolution. The rules of natural justice would however dictate that this action should not be taken without informing the pool owner and giving them the opportunity to be heard.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

14.     Local boards have delegated authority to approve exemptions to the Fencing of Swimming Pools Act.

15.     Before making an exemption, the local board must consider:

·                    the particular characteristics of the property and the pool;

·                    any other relevant circumstances; and

·                    conditions it may be necessary to impose.

16.     The local board must also be satisfied that the exemption would not significantly increase the danger to young children.

17.     The local board may resolve to grant, grant subject to conditions, or decline the application for special exemption.

18.     If the application is declined the applicant will be required to fence the pool in accordance with the Act.

Maori impact statement

19.     There are no particular impacts on Maori that are different from those of other pool owners.

Implementation

20.     The decision must be made by resolution.

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

15 Chatswood Grove, Birkenhead (Under Separate Cover) - Confidential

 

b

16 Seaview Road, Glenfield (Under Separate Cover) - Confidential

 

     

Signatories

Authors

Phillip Curtis - Senior Swimming Pool Specialist

Authorisers

Sally Grey - Manager Weather Tightness & Compliance

Eric Perry - Relationship Manager

     

 


Kaipātiki Local Board

23 November 2016

 

 

Exclusion of the Public: Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987

 

That the Kaipātiki Local Board:

a)      note the confidential status of Attachment A and Attachment B to Item 19 for the following reasons.

 

19        Special Exemption (Section 6) Fencing of Swimming Pools Act 1987 - Attachment a - 15 Chatswood Grove, Birkenhead

Particular interest(s) protected (where applicable)

s7(2)(a) - The withholding of the information is necessary to protect the privacy of natural persons, including that of a deceased person.

In particular, the report contains personal information.

 

19        Special Exemption (Section 6) Fencing of Swimming Pools Act 1987 - Attachment b - 16 Seaview Road, Glenfield

Particular interest(s) protected (where applicable)

s7(2)(a) - The withholding of the information is necessary to protect the privacy of natural persons, including that of a deceased person.

In particular, the report contains personal information.

 

   



[1] Part 1A, Schedule 7, 36D Local Government Act 2002

[2] Once the outcome of the Building (Pools) Amendment Bill is known, more work will be carried out, if necessary, based on a review of the governance framework undertaken in 2016 and the option to move responsibility for granting swimming pool fencing exemptions to the governing body.