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

 

Date:                      

Time:

Meeting Room:

Venue:

 

Wednesday, 13 December 2017

4.00pm

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

Kaipatiki Local Board Democracy Advisor

 

6 December 2017

 

Contact Telephone: (09) 484 8856

Email: Blair.Doherty@aucklandcouncil.govt.nz

Website: www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz

 

 

 


Kaipātiki Local Board

13 December 2017

 

 

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                                                                                                                          5

8          Deputations                                                                                                                    6

9          Public Forum                                                                                                                  6

10        Extraordinary Business                                                                                                6

11        Notices of Motion                                                                                                          6

12        Options for Chelsea Estate Heritage Park Reserve Management Plan                  7

13        Endorsement of the greenway high level concept design and principles            15

14        Kaipātiki Local Grants, Round Two 2017/2018 grant applications                        19

15        Kaipātiki Local Board Community Grants Programme 2017/2018 updated         23

16        Auckland Transport Monthly Update - December 2017                                          33

17        10-year Budget 2018-2028 consultation                                                                    45

18        Local board feedback on rates remission and postponement policy review       49

19        Decision making allocation                                                                                        57

20        Local Board Services Monthly Report - December 2017                                        75

21        Governing Body and Independent Maori Statutory Board Members' Update     83

22        Kaipatiki Local Board Chairperson's Report                                                           85

23        Members' Reports                                                                                                       91

24        Governance Forward Work Calendar                                                                       97

25        Workshop Records - Kaipātiki Local Board, held on 8 and 22 November 2017 101

26        Revising the local board Standing Orders                                                             109  

27        Consideration of Extraordinary Items 

PUBLIC EXCLUDED

28        Procedural Motion to Exclude the Public                                                               117

18        Local board feedback on rates remission and postponement policy review

d.      All community and sporting remissions by local board area                     117  

 


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 meeting, held on Wednesday, 15 November 2017, 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

 

There were no notices of motion.


Kaipātiki Local Board

13 December 2017

 

 

Options for Chelsea Estate Heritage Park Reserve Management Plan

 

File No.: CP2017/25135

 

  

 

Purpose

1.       To provide an update on the options to progress the draft reserve management plan for Chelsea Estate Heritage Park, with the recommendation to include reserve within an open space management plan covering all parks in the local board area.

Executive summary

1.       The Kaipātiki Local Board has sought advice on re-initiating a project to create a reserve management plan (RMP) under the Reserves Act 1977 for Chelsea Estate Heritage Park (Chelsea). 

2.       A draft RMP was completed in September 2010 following public consultation by the North Shore City Council. However public notification of the draft was put on hold upon the formation of the Auckland Council. The draft was re-visited in 2013/2014 however work was halted pending resolution of stormwater issues in the park.

3.       The content and process required to complete the draft RMP have been assessed and three options to progress the management planning of the park are analysed in Attachment A. The options are:

·          Option 1a:  Reinitiate public notification of the existing draft RMP noting the risk and potential challenge to consultation processes as a result of time elapsed since the initial public notification.  Approximately $45,000 and six months would be needed to bring the project to completion. 

·          Option 1b: Re-notify the intent to prepare the RMP and engage with key stakeholders and mana whenua prior to finalising the draft RMP for public notification.  Approximately $74,000 and nine months would be needed to complete the project under this option. 

·          Option 2: Include Chelsea in a multi-park open space management plan to be programmed for FY19 and FY20. Approximately $120,000 and 15 months would need to be set aside to complete a management plan for all of Kaipātiki’s parks and reserves. 

4.       Staff recommend Option 2 – inclusion of Chelsea in a multi-park open space management plan to be programmed for FY19 and FY20. The advantages are felt to significantly outweigh the disadvantages as multi-park plans provide a consistent and holistic network view of management issues across the local board area. The production of multi-park plans also offers improved economies of scale and reduction in consultation fatigue compared with creating individual management plans for a number of parks.  

5.       The estimated cost is $120,000 and would be spread over two financial years; $80,000 in FY19 and $40,000 in FY20. If initiated in July 2018 the plan would take 15 months to complete depending on any complexities resulting from statutory consultation processes.   

6.       If the local board prefer to proceed with an individual RMP for Chelsea, it is recommended that option 1b be pursued as this is more likely to result in a robust plan reflecting recent public and mana whenua views and policy guidance.


 

 

Recommendation/s

That the Kaipātiki Local Board:

a)      note the benefits and costs for the three options for progressing management planning for Chelsea Estate Heritage Park subject to funding and resourcing being:

i.        re-initiating the public notification of an individual draft reserve management plan for Chelsea Estate Heritage Park;

ii.       re-notifying the intent to prepare an individual reserve management plan for Chelsea Estate Heritage Park, or

iii.      including Chelsea Estate Heritage Park in an open space management plan for all parks and reserves within the local board area

b)      note that the Service and Asset Planning team are working on an open space management framework and programme to roll out open space management plans across all 21 local boards.

c)      agree to include Chelsea Estate Heritage Park into a multi-park open space management plan for the Kaipātiki Local Board area.

d)      note the opportunity to include funding for a multi-park open space management plan into the FY19 and FY20 local board work programme at a cost of $80,000 and $40,000 in each respective financial year, from the local board’s locally driven initiative budget.

 

Comments

7.       The Kaipātiki Local Board has requested a report on the status of the draft Chelsea Estate Heritage Park (Chelsea) reserve management plan (RMP) including associated costs to complete the plan under section 41 of the Reserves Act 1977 (resolution number KT/2017/104).

8.       Following an initial round of consultation, a draft RMP was prepared and endorsed for public notification by the Birkenhead-Northcote Community Board of the North Shore City Council in 2010.  However following the formation of Auckland Council, public notification of the draft RMP was not carried out.

9.       In 2013, staff carried out work to review and update the draft. However, work was halted in 2014 pending an investigation into, and resolution of, stormwater matters. A project to renew the stormwater network in the park has since commenced and is due for completion at the end of 2018. 

10.     The content of the latest draft RMP on file has been reviewed. If the local board seek to re-initiate the RMP, it is strongly recommended that the plan be updated to:

·          Review the text, policies and recommendations of the draft RMP and conservation plans to ensure they are aligned to and reflect current council policy and good practice. For example some of the draft policies appear overly prescriptive or onerous whilst others do not provide sufficient direction.  

·          Update and align references to outdated legislation and council policies/plans (e.g. the Auckland Council District Plan Operative North Shore Section 2002 and the Historic Places Act 1993).

·          Update the draft plan to take into account any new information or changes to the reserve, including recent or upcoming works and programmes. 

11.     The process to complete the draft document has also been reviewed against statutory requirements.  It is understood that the draft reserve management plan was publicly consulted in 2009/2010 in accordance with section 41(5) of the Reserves Act 1977.   

12.     However, a significant period of time has lapsed since that notification period and it is possible that public views, expectations and values for the reserve have changed.  Furthermore, staff have not been able to locate the original files for the public notification and mana whenua consultation which creates a risk around identifying how the consultation has informed the draft (in accordance with Reserves Act 1977 requirements).

13.     Work was instigated in 2013/2014 to engage with mana whenua while re-drafting the plan.  A preliminary workshop was held in March 2014 and all 12 mana whenua present indicated an interest in the plan.  It appears that the project went on hold before that could be followed up.

14.     If the local board seek to re-initiate the project, it is recommended that contact is re-established with mana whenua and that the intent to draft the plan is re-notified.   

15.     The Service and Asset Planning team are working on a new approach to management planning which offers another option to plan for the management of the Chelsea Estate Heritage Park. This approach is based on grouping up local parks and reserves within each local board area into a single open space management plan. Open space management plans will meet the statutory requirements for reserve management plans under the Reserves Act 1977.

16.     Parks with particular values or management issues, such as Chelsea, would be given special consideration to ensure those values are protected and issues are addressed. However it is not anticipated that extensive contextual information is included for every park in a multi-park open space management plan. Instead, links or references can be made to specialist technical reports or other sources of information that have informed the management plan analysis.

17.     A comparison of three options to proceed with management planning for the park is included in Attachment A. The three options are:

·          Option 1a:  Re-initiate public notification of the existing draft RMP and continue with the project noting the risk and potential challenge to consultation processes as a result of time elapsed since the RMP was last actively consulted.   Approximately $45,000 and six months would be needed to bring the project to completion. 

·          Option 1b: Re-notify the intent to prepare the RMP and engage with key stakeholders and mana whenua prior to finalising the draft RMP for public notification.  Approximately $74,000 and nine months would be needed to complete the project under this option. 

·          Option 2: Include Chelsea in a multi-park open space management plan to be programmed for FY19 and FY20. Approximately $120,000 and 15 months would need to be set aside to complete a management plan for all of Kaipātiki’s parks and reserves. 

18.     Option 2 is recommended as there are a number of advantages to writing multi-park open space management plans over individual park reserve management plans. These range from providing a consistent and holistic network view of management issues and responses across a local board area, to improved economies of scale and reduction in consultation fatigue.

Consultation with the Chelsea Regional Park Association

19.     Staff have spoken with the president of the Chelsea Regional Park Association (CHERPA) who has advocated that the draft RMP process be continued. It is understood that this is because CHERPA would like to ensure the council and the community are working towards agreed goals, specifically;

i.          ensuring the council is abiding by contractual agreements, including ongoing maintenance requirements put in place when the park was acquired through the sale and purchase agreement;

ii.          ensuring specific actions are agreed such as dealing with vagrancy or reinvestment of rental incomes into the houses and park;

iii.         ensuring appropriate operational management occurs, such as clearing slips, maintaining the heritage buildings and maintaining pond water quality; and

iv.        determining prioritisation of renewals and improvements to be funded.

20.     These items reflect a range of concerns from strategic outcomes to operational management and maintenance issues. While a RMP would address the higher level strategic issues specific to the reserve (such as giving public oversight and clarification of statutory or legal commitments and providing guidance on the type of experience the community would have on various parts of the reserve), it would not set out levels of service for operational management, nor would it determine funding levels for improvements or maintenance.  

21.     In this case, some of the operational concerns of CHERPA will be addressed through other initiatives underway.  This includes current work to improve the stormwater network by:

·          replacing the existing failing pipe through the contaminated landfill area with a new pipe away from the landfill;

·          initiatives to improve maintenance contracts and performance; and

·          work to investigate options around the slip that has closed the walking track by pond 4.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

22.     The option to progress the reserve management plan for Chelsea Estate Heritage Park together with a discussion on the proposal for a multi-park open space management plan was workshopped with the local board on 11 October 2017. The local board expressed an interest in reviewing other multi-park RMPs and questioned how Chelsea Estate Heritage Park could be appropriately incorporated within a multi-park plan.

Māori impact statement

23.     Any proposal to reinitiate reserve management planning either as an individual RMP or an open space management plan for all parks in the local board area will include mana whenua input. Option 1a will limit the consultation to a post-draft invitation to submit on the draft plan including speaking to any submission at a hearing. Options 1b and 2 will also provide for pre-draft engagement with mana whenua to help shape the plan.

24.     As a statutory document under the Reserves Act 1977, a management plan can provide protection of Māori cultural values and sites associated with Chelsea including policies to strengthen Māori outcomes in the management of the park.

Implementation

25.     Each of the options identified has resourcing requirements as outlined above. All would require inclusion in the next local board work programme. This will confirm project management resource from Service Strategy and Integration Unit plus subject matter expertise from departments, mana whenua consultation and budget.

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Comparison of options for management planning of Chelsea

13

      

Signatories

Authors

Tania Utley - Service and Asset Planning Specialist

Authorisers

Mace Ward - General Manager Parks, Sports and Recreation

Eric Perry - Relationship Manager

 


Kaipātiki Local Board

13 December 2017

 

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Kaipātiki Local Board

13 December 2017

 

 

Endorsement of the greenway high level concept design and principles

 

File No.: CP2017/25387

 

  

 

Purpose

1.       To seek Kaipātiki Local Board endorsement for the high level concept design and principles for the Awataha greenway project as outlined in Attachment A.

Executive summary

2.       The Kaipātiki Local Board recognises the significance of a Northcote greenway in terms of its cultural, ecological, and recreational importance to the community.

3.       In June 2017 Pānuku and Home, Lands and Community (HLC) commissioned the Isthmus Group to prepare a Greenway Design Guide (design guide) that will provide a high-level concept design vision.

4.       The greenway will link up Northcote’s existing parks and open spaces, and will include a shared cycle and walking path, planted native corridor, play trails and play destinations.

5.       Controlled daylighting of the historic Awataha Stream will occur along some sections of the greenway. 

6.       The greenway development will continue to be informed by community concepts gathered in the past. Extensive engagement and consultation with the local board, mana whenua, stakeholders and the wider community has been undertaken to inform the design guide. An engagement summary is attached at Attachment B.

7.       The design principles of the greenway align with the vision and outcomes of the Kaipātiki Local Board Plan 2017, and the Te Aranga Principles.

8.       Endorsement of the high-level concept vision will ensure that design principles and linking elements are carried through into the delivery of the greenway.

9.       The greenway will be delivered in stages led by either HLC or Panuku Development Auckland (Panuku) over the coming years.

10.     Future engagement will be undertaken with the community and stakeholders to co-design the greenway spaces. 

 

Recommendation/s

That the Kaipātiki Local Board:

a)      endorse the high level concept design and principles for the Awataha greenway project as encapsulated in Attachment A to the agenda report.

b)      note the level of past and recent engagement and consultation with the community and stakeholders that has been undertaken to inform the development of the greenway concept design, as articulated in the engagement summary presented within Attachment B to the agenda report.

 

 

Comments

11.     The greenway will comprise a series of ‘connected’ spaces to form a contiguous and continuous public spaces network through Northcote. The ten spaces that make up its length consist of reserves, walkways and streetscapes. 

12.     Panuku and Home, Lands and Community (HLC) will lead their respective stages to deliver the greenway. As such, the high-level concept design was produced to summarise and collate a comprehensive vision, including design themes and principles, for the length of the greenway. It is intended as an internal aid to assist the project designers and partners to align project designs moving forward.

13.     The proposed stream daylighting brings controlled stormwater flows (currently piped) to the surface and into a restored stream environment. Controlled flow stream daylighting is proposed (subject to funding) along the northern edge of Greenslade Reserve and through the southern school’s edge from Lake Road to Fraser Ave as shown on page two of  Attachment A.

14.     Technical and individual design aspects (including health and safety) are subject to further refinement during the detailed design phase. Local board approval will be sought as required as the future stages of this project are undertaken.

15.     The high level concept design principles outlined in Attachment A were developed in consideration of past and recent community and stakeholder consultation and engagement as outlined in Attachment B.

16.     Panuku and HLC, in collaboration with Auckland Council and relevant CCOs, will engage and involve the community, stakeholders and partners on the detailed design of the respective greenway spaces.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

17.     The local board has been involved through an agreed engagement process on a fortnightly basis with the local board project working group, which includes all board members who are able to attend the workshop. In addition, bimonthly workshops are set up to involve and update the local board.

18.     A site walkover was organised with the local board to provide an opportunity for board members to directly share their views and feedback with the designers and staff.

19.     The local board views and feedback have been integrated into developing the design guide.

20.     The local board was provided with the opportunity to be involved in all community and stakeholder engagement sessions.

21.     The local board will be involved and consulted in future engagement with the community and stakeholders.

Māori impact statement

22.     Northcote is steeped in environmental and cultural history. It can trace its lineage back to the Awataha Stream and surrounds and those ancestors that occupied this area

23.     The Awataha greenway project presents an opportunity to reacquaint the community with the surrounding natural environment. This fundamental taonga is paramount, serving as an artery to the body, a journey, a key connector. The opportunity for this corridor following the Awataha Stream natural landform, ‘from the mountains to the sea’, will bind us to the wider landscape and the regenerative, interdependent and intergenerational nature of our connected existence.

24.     Mana whenua were engaged through the development of the design guide to ensure their concerns and aspirations were acknowledged and integrated into the high-level concept design.

25.     Design themes and principles are strongly embedded in Te ao Māori (a Māori world view), demonstrated by the use of Te Aranga Māori Design Principles.

Implementation

26.     Panuku and HLC are currently working with council’s Healthy Waters team to develop a catchment wide solution to stormwater detention and conveyance that aligns with the high-level design intent of the greenway. The outcomes of this work will influence the design and technical briefs for the future stages, but will not alter the high-level intent of the greenway.

27.     Both Panuku and HLC will work with the community on further engagement and co-design of their respective greenway spaces to reflect community preferences and priorities.

28.     Informed by the high-level concept design, each space of the greenway will be shaped and created as a separate project, with the potential to work collaboratively with mana whenua, neighbours and local community groups on particular spaces or features that build identity and ownership of the greenway. 

29.     The final timing, staging and delivery of the project remain to be confirmed

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Concept Design and Principles (Under Separate Cover)

 

b

Engagement Summary (Under Separate Cover)

 

     

Signatories

Authors

Carlos Rahman - Senior Engagement Advisor, Panuku Development Auckland

Authorisers

Toni Giacon - Manager Stakeholder Engagement

Eric Perry - Relationship Manager

 


Kaipātiki Local Board

13 December 2017

 

 

Kaipātiki Local Grants, Round Two 2017/2018 grant applications

 

File No.: CP2017/23723

 

  

 

Purpose

1.       The purpose of this report is to present applications received for the Kaipātiki Local Grants, Round Two 2017/2018. 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 $200,000 for the 2017/2018 financial year. The local board has set a programme consisting of three local grant rounds within the 2017/2018 financial year.

3.       The local board has allocated a total of $44,947 in Local Grants Round One 2017/2018, leaving a balance of $155,053 for the remaining two local grant rounds in this financial year.

4.       Seventeen applications were received in Local Grants, Round Two 2017/2018, with a total requested of $115,211.

5.       Two deferred applications from Local Grants, Round One 2017/2108 will also be considered in this round, requesting a total of $13,563.

 

Recommendation/s

That the Kaipātiki Local Board:

a)      consider the applications received for Kaipātiki Local Grants, Round Two 2017/2018 and agree to fund, part-fund or decline each application in this round.

Application No.

Organisation Name

Project

Total Requested

LG1808-121

Northart Society Incorporated

Towards purchasing one laptop and salary for the Chinese community liaison officer between November 2017 to October 2018

$18,149

LG1808-211

New Zealand Dance Advancement Trust

Towards venue hire, dancers and artistic teams salaries and transport for the Youth Engagement Programme delivery to schools within the Kaipatiki area

$5,000

LG1808-212

Kaipatiki Public Arts Trust

Towards promotion, event management and administration of the “Short Shorts 2018” film contest

$7,100

LG1808-201

Royal New Zealand Plunket Society Incorporated

Towards rent, resources and consumables for the Birkenhead and Beach Haven playgroups for January to June 2018

$2,696

LG1808-203

Northcote Point Community Crèche Incorporated

Towards operational costs, dance and playball fees, recruitment costs, and purchasing a replacement dishwasher and vacuum cleaner for the Northcote Point Community Crèche

$10,109

LG1808-205

Nepalese Cultural Centre New Zealand Incorporated

Towards venue hire, stationary, resources, koha for speakers, promotion, transport, refreshments, decoration and reception for language and dance classes and “Orientation Programme for Kiwis”

$5,150

LG1808-207

Shakti Asian Women's Centre Incorporated

Towards venue hire, coordinator, facilitators, stationary, promotion and volunteer petrol for “Project ReachOut: building community resilience against family violence”

$4,000

LG1808-210

Beach Haven Scout Group

Towards supply and installation of an air conditioning unit at the Beach Haven Scout Den

$3,968

LG1808-213

North Shore Group Riding for the Disabled Incorporated

Towards insurance costs for 2018

$2,000

LG1808-217

New Zealand Centre for Gifted Education Limited

Towards a specialist educator salary to deliver the MindPlus North Shore programme

$4,000

LG1808-220

Kids Safe With Dogs Charitable Trust

Towards instructors, administration and printing for the “Kids Safe With Dogs” to be delivered in the Kaipatiki area

$8,947

LG1808-222

Helen Fergusson

Towards venue hire and instructor fee for the MBODY movement free workshop series in Kaipatiki

$1,092

LG1808-216

Babylon Charitable Trust

Towards venue hire, equipment hire, cultural items, koha for volunteers, coordinators, and entertainers for the “Babylon Trust Family Day”

$6,000

LG1808-221

Lijun Guan

Towards venue hire, purchasing games and printing for the “Games are Fun” event

$1,000

LG1808-206

Badminton North Harbour

Towards shuttle cocks and trophies for the Badminton North Harbour International Badminton Tournament

$2,000

LG1808-214

Gymnastics Community Trust

Towards a coach salary for” Kindy, Schools, Special Needs and Recreational Gymnastics” programmes

$30,000

LG1808-219

Shepherds Park Squash Club Incorporated

Towards purchasing a pool table for the Shepherds Park Squash Club

$4,000

 

 

Total Requested

$115,211

 

b)      consider the deferred applications from Kaipātiki Local Grants, Round One 2017/2018 and agree to fund, part-fund or decline each application in this round.

Application Number

Organisation Name

Project

Total Requested

LG1808-116

Birkdale Beach Haven Community Project Incorporated

Towards purchasing marquees, laptops, modem and repair of existing sewing machines for Beach Haven and Birkdale Community Houses

$9,783

LG1808-109

Marlborough Park Tennis Club Incorporated

Towards fees for the Marlborough Park Tennis Club - Junior Coaching Programme from October 2017 to March 2018

$3,780

 

 

Total Requested

$13,563

 

 

 

Comments

1.       The Auckland Council Community Grants Policy supports each local board to adopt a grants programme. The Kaipātiki grants programme for the 2017/2018 financial year is provided as (see Attachment A).

2.       The local board grants programme sets out:

·        local board priorities;

·        lower priorities for funding;

·        exclusions;

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

·        any additional accountability requirements.

3.       The Kaipātiki Local Board will operate three local grant rounds in this financial year. The Kaipātiki Local Grants, Round Two 2017/2018 closed on 3 November 2017.

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

5.       The Kaipātiki Local Board has set a total community grants budget of $200,000 for the 2017/2018 financial year. It is recommended that the board consider allocating up to 33% of the budget in this grant round.

6.       The local board has allocated a total of $44,947 in Local Grants Round One 2017/2018, leaving a balance of $155,053 for the remaining two local grant rounds in this financial year.

7.       Seventeen applications were received in Local Grants, Round Two 2017/2018, with a total requested of $115,211 (see Attachment B).

8.       Two deferred applications from Local Grants, Round One 2017/2108 will also be considered in this round, requesting a total of $13,563 (see Attachment C).

Consideration

Local board views and implications

9.       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.

10.     The 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.”

11.     A summary of each application is attached (refer Attachment B and C).

Māori impact statement

12.     The provision of community grants provides opportunities for all Aucklanders to undertake projects, programmes and, 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. One applicant applying in this round has identified as a Māori individual or organisation and one application has indicated their project targets Māori or Māori outcomes.

Implementation

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

14.     Following the Kaipātiki Local Board allocating funding for Local Grants Round Two, Commercial and Finance staff will notify the applicants of the local board’s decision.

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Kaipātiki Grants Programme 2017/2018 (Under Separate Cover)

 

b

Kaipātiki Local Grants, Round Two 2017/2018 grant applications (Under Separate Cover)

 

c

Kaipātiki Local Grants, Round One 2017/2018 deferred applications (Under Separate Cover)

 

     

Signatories

Authors

Caroline Teh - Community Grants Advisor

Authorisers

Marion Davies - Community Grants Operations Manager

Shane King - Operations Support Manager

Eric Perry - Relationship Manager

 


Kaipātiki Local Board

13 December 2017

 

 

Kaipātiki Local Board Community Grants Programme 2017/2018 updated

 

File No.: CP2017/24550

 

  

 

 Purpose

1.       The purpose of the report is to present the amended Kaipātiki Local Board Community Grants Programme 2017/2018.

Executive Summary

2.       The Auckland Council Community Grants Policy was implemented on 1 July 2015. The policy guides the establishment of local, multi-board and regional grant programmes to groups and organisations delivering projects, activities and services that benefit Aucklanders.

3.       The Community Grants Policy supports each local board to review and adopt their own local grants programme.

4.       This report presents the current local board grants programme (Attachment A) and an amended Kaipātiki Local Board Community Grants Programme 2017/2018 (Attachment B). The amended programme has been updated to reflect the newly adopted outcomes and priorities in the Kaipātiki Local Board Plan 2017.

 

Recommendation/s

That the Kaipātiki Local Board:

a)      adopt the amended Kaipātiki Local Board Community Grants Programme 2017/2018.

 

 

Comments

5.       The Auckland Council Community Grants Policy was implemented on 1 July 2015. The policy guides the establishment of local, multi-board and regional grant programmes to allocate funding to groups and organisations delivering projects, activities and services that benefit Aucklanders.

6.       The Community Grants Policy supports each local board to review and adopt their own local grants programme. The local board grants programme guides community groups and individuals when making funding applications to the local board.

7.       The local board community grants programme includes:

·          outcomes as identified in the local board plan;

·          specific local board grant priorities;

·          which grant types will be offered, the number of grant rounds and opening and closing dates;

·          any additional criteria or exclusions that will apply; and

·          other factors the local board consider to be significant to their decision-making.

8.       The Kaipātiki Local Board adopted their 2017 Kaipātiki Local Board Plan at their September 2017 business meeting. The 2017 local board plan includes new outcomes and priorities.

9.       The changes to the amended grant programme for 2017/2018 include these new outcomes, as well as:

·          the new local board plan outcomes; and

·          new priorities which are aligned to the local board outcomes

10.     Once the new local board community grants programme for the 2017/2018 financial year, has been adopted, these changes will be advertised through an integrated communication and marketing approach that includes utilising the local board channels.

11.     There is one remaining local grant round remaining for the 2017/2018 financial year, which opens on 12 February 2018 and closes on 23 March 2018, with local board decisions on 16 May 2018.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

12.     The Community Grants Programme has been developed by the local board to set the direction of their grants programme. This programme is reviewed on an annual basis and will be reviewed again in 2018, to adopt a new grants programme for the 2018/2019 financial year.

Māori impact statement

13.     All grant programmes should respond to Auckland Council’s commitment to improving Maori wellbeing by providing grants to organisations delivering positive outcomes for Maori. Applicants are asked how their project may increase Maori outcomes in the application form.

Implementation

14.     The amended local board grants programme will be locally advertised through the local board and community channels.

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Kaipatiki Local Board Grants Programme 2017/2018 current

25

b

Kaipatiki Local Board Community Grants Programme 2017/2018 amended

29

     

Signatories

Authors

Marion Davies - Community Grants Operations Manager

Authorisers

Shane King - Operations Support Manager

Eric Perry - Relationship Manager

 


Kaipātiki Local Board

13 December 2017

 

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Kaipātiki Local Board

13 December 2017

 

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Kaipātiki Local Board

13 December 2017

 

 

Auckland Transport Monthly Update - December 2017

 

File No.: CP2017/09194

 

  

 

Purpose

The Auckland Transport Monthly Update Kaipatiki Local Board December 2017 report is attached.

 

Recommendation/s

That the Kaipātiki Local Board:

a)         note the Auckland Transport Monthly Update Kaipatiki Local Board December 2017.

 

 

 

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Auckland Transport Monthly Update Kaipatiki Local Board December 2017

35

     

Signatories

Authors

Blair Doherty - Kaipatiki Local Board Democracy Advisor

Authorisers

 

 


Kaipātiki Local Board

13 December 2017

 

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator



Kaipātiki Local Board

13 December 2017

 

 

PDF Creator



Kaipātiki Local Board

13 December 2017

 

 

10-year Budget 2018-2028 consultation

 

File No.: CP2017/25941

 

  

 

Purpose

1.       To agree local engagement events, and adopt local content and supporting information for consultation as part of the 10-year Budget 2018-2028 process.

Executive summary

2.       Consultation on the 10-year Budget 2018-2028 (Long-term Plan) will take place from 28 February – 28 March 2018. Local boards will be consulting on their areas of focus and advocacy for their 2018/2019 Local Board Agreement. The Local Board Agreement is part of the budget setting process for the first year of the 10-year Budget 2018-2028.

3.       There will also be concurrent consultation on the Auckland Plan Refresh (APR), Regional Land Transport Plan (RLTP), Regional Pest Management Plan (RPMP) and the Waste Management and Minimisation Plan (WMMP). 

4.       This report seeks agreement from local boards on spoken interaction events that will be held in their local board area during the consultation period and to adopt their local content and supporting information for consultation, including:

·          areas of focus for 2018/2019; and

·          the key advocacy project.

5.       The Governing Body will agree regional items for consultation on 11 December 2017 and local boards will agree their items by 14 December 2017. The regional and local consultation items will then be incorporated into the consultation document and supporting information, which will be adopted by the Governing Body on 7 February 2018.

 

Recommendation/s

That the Kaipātiki Local Board:

a)      agree, subject to approval by the Governing Body, to hold spoken interaction events during the consultation period.

b)      delegate to the following elected members and staff the power and responsibility to hear from the public through spoken/ New Zealand sign language interaction in relation to the local board agreement at the council’s public engagement events during the consultation period for the 10-year Budget 2018-2028:

i.        Local Board Members and Chairperson;

ii.       General Manager Local Board Services, Local Board Relationship Manager, Local Board Senior Advisor, Local Board Advisor; and

iii.      any additional staff approved by the General Manager Local Board Services or the Chief Financial Officer.

c)      adopt local content for consultation and local supporting information for consultation, including the key advocacy project.

d)      delegate authority to the Chairperson to approve any final minor changes required following review by council’s legal team and/or Audit New Zealand, of the local consultation content for the 10-year Budget 2018-2028 prior to publication, including online consultation content, and should any changes be made they are to be reported to the next business meeting.

 

Comments

6.       The 10-year Budget sets out the priorities and funding for council activities that are planned over a 10-year period. It includes financial and non-financial information for the whole Auckland Council group. The Long-term Plan is reviewed and consulted on every three years.

7.       As part of the 10-year Budget 2018-2028 process, the council is required to produce a consultation document. This will cover any significant or important issues proposed to be included in the 10-year Budget 2018-2028. The consultation document and supporting information will also include information on local board issues and priorities. 

8.       As part of the consultation on the 10-year Budget 2018-2028, local boards will consider and be consulting on their areas of focus and advocacy for their 2018/2019 Local Board Agreement. The Local Board Agreement is part of the budget setting process for the first year of the 10-year Budget 2018-2028.

9.       Public consultation on the 10-year Budget 2018-2028 will take place from 28 February – 28 March 2018.There will also be concurrent consultation on the Auckland Plan Refresh (APR), Regional Land Transport Plan (RLTP), Regional Pest Management Plan (RPMP) and the Waste Management and Minimisation Plan (WMMP).  

10.     Aucklanders will be able to provide feedback during the consultation process through a variety of channels that include verbal (or face to face), written, social media and digital. A report on how council will receive verbal feedback from the public was considered by the Finance and Performance Committee on 21 November 2017. At a high level, the report outlines several different types of events that are planned for specific audiences and communities as well as those planned for general Auckland residents. At that meeting, the Finance and Performance Committee resolved to:

·          approve the approach to receive all feedback from Aucklanders on the Long-term Plan and Auckland Plan from 28 February 2018 to 28 March 2018 comprising of:

o    up to 25 Have Your Say events targeting general Auckland residents are held in local board areas across the region;

o    four regional stakeholder events (traditional hearing style);

o    an independently commissioned quantitative survey;

o    community specific events to collect feedback from different demographic and interest groups. Demographic events will target Youth, Seniors, Pacific, Ethnic, Rainbow and Disability communities;

o    hui with mana whenua and mataawaka.

and

·          require the Mayor and councillors to attend a minimum of three Have Your Say events each to hear the views of Aucklanders and all regional stakeholder events.

11.     The final consultation process for the 10-year Budget 2018-2028 will be approved by the Governing Body on 7 February 2018.

12.     Spoken interaction constitutes any opportunity where Aucklanders have a dialogue with decision makers or their official delegations on the themes relating to the consultation. Investigation is currently being undertaken on options for potential spoken interaction events to be held in the Kaipatiki Local Board area.

13.     Local boards are requested to agree their key priorities and key advocacy project for 2018/2019. This information is currently being prepared and will be made available for the meeting.

14.     Any new local business improvement district (BID) targeted rates must be consulted on before they can be implemented. Local boards are therefore also requested to agree any new proposals for consultation.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

15.     Local board decisions are being sought in this report.

16.     Local boards will have further opportunities to provide information and views as council progresses through the 10-year Budget 2018-2028 process.

Māori impact statement

17.     Many local board decisions are of importance to and impact on Māori. Local board agreements and the 10-year Budget are important tools that enable and can demonstrate council’s responsiveness to Māori. Local board plans, which were adopted in September and October of 2017, form the basis for local priorities.

18.     Bespoke consultation materials for the Māori community are being developed. These materials will explain how the Long-term plan (LTP) and APR are relevant for them. Engagement advisors will have access to this collateral to support local engagement.

19.     Specific regionally supported local engagement with Māori is being targeted for south and west Auckland.

20.     An integrated approach to mana whenua engagement is being taken, with LTP and APR discussions already happening through the Mana Whenua Kaitiaki Forum.

21.     There is a need to continue to build relationships between local boards and iwi, and where relevant the wider Māori community. Ongoing conversations will assist local boards and Māori to understand each other’s priorities and issues. This in turn can influence and encourage Māori participation in council’s decision-making processes.

Implementation

22.     The governing body will approve the consultation document, supporting information and consultation process for the 10-year Budget 2018-2028 on 7 February 2018.

23.     Following consultation, the governing body and local boards will make decisions on the 10-year Budget 2018-2028 and Local Board Agreements 2018/19 respectively.

 

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.     

Signatories

Authors

Christie  McFayden - Graduate Advisor

Authorisers

Carol McKenzie-Rex - Acting General Manager Local Board Services

Eric Perry - Relationship Manager

 


Kaipātiki Local Board

13 December 2017

 

 

Local board feedback on rates remission and postponement policy review

 

File No.: CP2017/26278

 

  

 

Purpose

1.       To seek preliminary feedback from local boards on the review of the rates remission and postponement policy and in particular the legacy schemes. Feedback will be considered by Finance and Performance Committee when agreeing a rates remission and postponement policy, and any options, for consultation.

Executive Summary

2.       The council is required to review its rates remission and postponement policy every six years.

3.       Rates remissions are a reduction in rates, usually by a set percentage. Rates postponement defers the payment of rates to a future point in time, usually the sale of the property.

4.       The current policy includes six regional schemes and eleven legacy schemes inherited from the former councils that are only available within the former districts. Only minor changes are proposed to the regional schemes.

5.       Officers recommend Option 1 that the legacy schemes (excluding the postponement for Manukau sports clubs) be replaced with grants because:

·          funding decisions are more transparent;

·          spending for each activity is within an annual budget; and

·          level of support for each organisation is more visible.

6.       A three-year transition is proposed for current recipients during which they will receive their current funding via a grant. At the end of transition, they would need to apply for renewal.

7.       Current legacy remissions and postponements funding would move to grant budgets:

a)         regional grants programmes: remissions for natural heritage and community/sporting remissions for regional/sub-regional facilities.

b)         local board grants programmes: all other legacy remissions in the relevant area and the Great Barrier Island postponements.

8.       Each board will be funded to provide the same level of grants as is presently provided in b) above. After three years, boards can choose to continue the grants if they wish. While some boards will get more funding than others, this will be smoothed over time by the local board funding policy.

Alternative options

9.       The other three options were considered and rejected because:

·          Option 2: keeping the current remissions schemes is inequitable;

·          Option 3: extending the remissions in their current form is costly and does not provide the same level of transparency and oversight as is achieved with grants; and

·          Option 4: removing the schemes with no replacement could present some ratepayers/community groups with affordability issues.

10.     Local boards feedback on the review will be included in the report to the Finance and Performance Committee in February 2018. Public consultation on the proposed Rates remission and postponement policy and any options will occur in April 2018. Local boards will be able to consider public feedback, and provide their formal views on the proposed policy at their May 2018 meetings. Local board and public feedback will be reported to the 31 May 2018 meeting of the Finance and Performance Committee when the adoption of the policy will be considered.

 

Recommendation/s

That the Kaipātiki Local Board:

a)      resolves feedback on the options to address the legacy council remission and postponement schemes.

 

 

Comments

Background

11.     The current Rates remission and postponement policy includes:

·          six regional schemes available to all ratepayers with the objectives to:

o    provide ratepayers with some financial or other assistance where they might otherwise have difficulty meeting their obligations; and

o    address circumstances where the rating system results in anomalies in the incidence of rates.

·          eleven legacy schemes supporting community objectives set by the former councils and only available in some areas:

o    five remission schemes for natural and in some cases historic heritage.

o    six remission schemes for community and sporting organisations.

o    a rates postponement scheme for sports clubs in Manukau.

o    a rates postponement scheme for businesses on Great Barrier Island.

12.     A summary of the regional and legacy schemes and the amount of remission or postponement granted in 2016/2017 is in Attachment A. The full rates remission and postponement policy is in Attachment B.

Assessment of Regional Schemes

13.     Officers have reviewed the regional schemes and identified that the schemes are operating in accordance with expectations. The only amendment proposed to the regional schemes is to simplify the remission scheme for rates penalties. This amendment will be designed to maintain ratepayers’ existing level of access to penalty remissions. 

Assessment of Legacy Schemes

14.     Four options were considered for the legacy schemes:

·          Option 1: integrate with grants schemes with three-year transition for current recipients.

·          Option 2: retain the status quo.

·          Option 3: extend to entire region.

·          Option 4: remove.

15.     A summary of the options can be found in Table 1 at the end of this report.

16.     The following criteria were used to assess options for the legacy remissions and postponements policies.

·          equity – same treatment for all ratepayers in all areas across Auckland;

·          transparency;

·          cost;

·          minimise the effects of change; and

·          administrative simplicity.

Option 1: Integrate remissions and postponements with grants schemes with three-year transition (excluding the Manukau postponement scheme for sports clubs)

17.     This option would remove the present remission and postponement schemes. Up to the current amount equivalent of the 2018/2019 remission would be transferred to grants expenditure in the relevant areas over the next three years. The amount of grants will be adjusted for the increase in rates in the subsequent two years.

18.     This option will increase the council’s grants and other budget lines by $900,000. This increase is offset by the increase in rates revenue of $900,000 resulting from remissions no longer being applied. There is no net cost to ratepayers of converting rates remissions to grants.

Allocating grants

19.     Integration of remissions into wider regional, or local, grants schemes is preferable because:

·          allocation of rates expenditure will be transparent;

·          spending via grants is public and assessed against other comparable demands on public money in terms of efficacy. Value for money is regularly assessed;

·          administrative systems for grants are already in place although there will be a change in volume;

·          proposed transition will result in no change for recipients over the three years;

·          regional equity will be achieved over time as the legacy grants are integrated into the wider grants programme; and

·          enables equity between community organisations that own land and those that do not.

20.     Legacy schemes have been assessed against local and regional responsibilities. From this it is proposed that grants budgets be allocated as follows:

Remission/Postponement for

Aligns with

Grant allocates to

Natural heritage

Regional

Regional Environment and Natural Heritage Grants Programme 

Historic Heritage

Regional

Regional Historic Heritage Grants Programme

Regional or sub-regional sports facilities

Regional

Regional Sports and Recreation Grants Programme

Local sports clubs and facilities

Local

Local Board where property receiving remission is located

Regional or sub-regional community facilities

Regional

Regional Community Development Grants programmes  

Local community organisations and facilities

Local

Local Board where property receiving remission is located

Great Barrier businesses

Local

Great Barrier Local Board

21.     Remissions for community and sporting organisations have been split between Regional and Local based on the area served by the property receiving the remission. For example, Eden Park, St John’s ambulance stations, IHC care homes and the SPCA have been classed as regional. Remissions for the Scouts Association and Plunket NZ have been classed as local because they relate to local scout halls and Plunket centres.

22.     The value of remissions by local board area can be found in Attachment C. A list of all community and sporting remissions by local board showing the ratepayer and amount of remission, can be found in Attachment D.

Three-year transition

23.     The relevant decision maker, e.g. the Governing Body Committee for regional grants, and local boards for local grants, would be required to provide a grant to the level of the existing remission for a period of three years. The present recipient would therefore be protected from any change to their current funding for that period. At the end of the three years the decision maker can then decide whether to continue the grants on the existing basis or release the funds to the wider grants pool.

Option 2: Retain the status quo

24.     This option would retain the remissions and postponement schemes in their current form in the former council areas. Properties in other parts of the region would not be able to apply for them

25.     This option is administratively simple for the council and recipients. It minimises change. Costs will depend on applications but have been relatively stable over time. This option is not equitable because the schemes are only available to ratepayers in some areas.

26.     Rates remissions and postponements are not a transparent mechanism for supporting wider council goals because they:

·          are recorded as a charge against revenue;

·          do not appear as a cost in the council’s accounts;

·          do not increase the rates requirement and hence do not impact the headline rates increase[1] (They still increase the rates burden on other ratepayers); and

·          are not prioritised against other expenditure proposals or subject to the same value for money scrutiny.

Option 3: Extend to entire region

27.     This option would extend the current policies to apply to the entire Auckland Council area. Extending the policies in their current form is equitable, and simplifies administration. However, this option:

·          increases costs to ratepayers without being compared to other council proposals that may offer greater benefits;

·          lacks evidence as to how much benefit will be returned by this investment; and

·          is not transparent as described in Option 2 above.

28.     The cost of extending existing legacy remission schemes regionally will depend on the criteria for eligibility. Costs for extending the current remission schemes have been estimated at $4.5-$6 million as follows:

·          extending remission for natural heritage to properties with a covenant managed by the Queen Elizabeth the Second Trust: $40,000. There are just over 100 properties in Auckland with a QEII covenant. If the criteria are extended to include other types of covenant, such as a covenant with a council, then the number of eligible properties will increase significantly. For example, there are 4,500 properties with a bush-lot covenant from Rodney Council.

·          extending remissions for historic heritage: $3 million. This is derived from the rates for properties that are scheduled Category A in the Auckland Unitary Plan, where the status is associated with a building. This ignores archaeological sites such as middens and pa, but will capture the whole value of properties where the heritage status only applies to part of the property.

·          extending remissions for community and sporting organisations: $1.5 million for 50 per cent remission to $3 million for 100 per cent remission. This is estimated by applying a full remission to properties currently receiving a five per cent remission for the Auckland Regional Council scheme for community and sporting organisations. This is likely to under estimate the value of remissions, as offering a more generous remission is likely to significantly increase the number of applicants.

Option 4: Remove the schemes

29.     Removing the schemes would lead to immediate financial impacts for a number of organisations presently receiving support from council. While the sums remitted are in many cases small, it is not clear that all the current recipients would be able to adequately accommodate change in a short time period. 

Postponement for sports clubs in the district of the previous Manukau City Council

30.     It is not recommended that the rates postponements for Manukau Sports clubs be converted to remission. This is because the postponement is currently set to be cost neutral. This is achieved by interest being charged, and by the postponement being secured against the title of the property. The council can require the full amount of postponed rates and interest be paid before any sale of the property can proceed. It would not be effective or efficient to try and replicate the postponement through a grants process.

31.     The clubs are accruing a major liability against their land under this scheme. The total current liability including interest is $880,000. If the policy is not changed then rates will continue to accrue as the rates are never remitted. While the postponements are cost-neutral when they end, in the meantime they represent a significant debt liability at a time when the council is debt constrained. For this reason, officers prefer that the schemes be removed after a suitable transition period. (The outstanding liability at the time the scheme is removed would remain a liability on the land until its sale or transfer of ownership.)

32.     The two clubs receiving the postponement are zoned for residential development. Both clubs have significant (around 240 per cent) increases in capital valuation following changes in zoning under the unitary plan. One club has repaid a portion of its liability following the sale of part of the property, and has chosen to pay rather than postpone the current year’s rates.

33.     Officers propose to do further work to understand the individual circumstances of these two golf courses before developing formal recommendation and options for addressing this postponement scheme. Next steps and a timeline for actions will be included in the report to the February Finance and Performance Committee.

Next steps

34.     Preliminary feedback from local boards will be attached to the report to the February 2018 Finance and Performance Committee. The committee will agree a Rates remission and postponement policy, and any options, for consultation.

35.     Public consultation will occur in April 2018. All current recipients of the legacy rates remission and postponement schemes will be notified of any proposed changes to enable them to submit feedback.

36.     Local boards will be able to consider the results of the public consultation, and provide formal feedback on the proposed policy, at their May 2018 meetings. 

37.     The Finance and Performance Committee will consider feedback from the public and local boards and adopt a final Rates remission and postponement policy by 31 May 2018. This enables the council’s budgets to be updated for the adoption of the Long-term Plan 2018-2028.

Review of the rates remission and postponement policy: Options for legacy remission and postponement schemes

Option

Description

Pros

Cons

Implementation

Option 1: Integrate with grants schemes

 

· Legacy remission and postponements schemes (excluding MCC postponement for sports clubs) transfer to regional or local grants schemes.

· Three-year transition – same level of support given as provided in remission or postponement

· Increased transparency and accountability – grants assessed for value for money

· Can cap costs

· No change for three years for current recipients – time to adjust

· Greater flexibility in application – not restricted to organisations that own land, level of support can reflect outcomes not property rates

· Reduced rates administration

· Increased grants administration

· Administrative systems already in place for grants

· Increase in grants volume

Option 2: Retain the status quo

 

· Legacy remission and postponements schemes continue unchanged

· Minimises change

· Inequitable – only available in some areas, and only available to groups that own land

· Lacks transparency – spending not reviewed against other council priorities

· No cap on costs

· No change to current processes

Option 3: Extend to entire region

 

· Schemes expanded to regional schemes. Costs will depend on the criteria applied

· Increases equity across the region

· Cost – estimated at $4.5m to $6m

· No cap on costs

· Lacks transparency – spending not reviewed against other council priorities

· Lack of evidence this would improve outcomes

· Only available to groups that own property

· Increases volume of remissions to process

Option 4: Remove the schemes

· Legacy schemes removed without transition

· $700,000 reduction in cost of rates for 2018/2019

· No time for recipients to adjust

· Reduces rates administration

Consideration

Local board views and implications

38.     Implications for local boards are set out in the report. Under the proposal boards will be provided with additional funding to maintain the existing level of support for local community and sports groups in their board area that currently receive remissions.  However, local boards will have more grant applications to appraise in the future and potentially more decisions to make at the end of the three-year transition.

39.     This report seeks feedback from local boards to inform the consideration of this issue by the Finance and Performance Committee in February.

Māori impact statement                          

40.     None of the properties presently receiving remissions or postponements under the legacy schemes are known to be Māori owned or operated.

41.     The only reference to Māori in the legacy remission and postponement schemes is the provision for remissions for Māori reservations in the Rodney District. No properties applied under this criterion. Such properties would be eligible for remission under the council’s Māori freehold land rates remission and postponement policy. The council is not required to review its MFL rates remission and postponement policy until 2019. No changes are proposed for this policy.

42.     Under the principles for the Community Grants Policy, all grants programmes should respond to Auckland Council’s commitment to improving Māori outcomes.

Implementation

43.     Differences in implementation for each of the options are set out in the table above.

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Summary of Auckland Council Rates remission and postponement policy scheme (Under Separate Cover)

 

b

Rates remission and postponement policy (Under Separate Cover)

 

c

Value of legacy schemes by local board area Remissions for communitysporting are split by regional and local (Under Separate Cover)

 

d

All community and sporting remissions by local board area (Under Separate Cover) - Confidential

 

     

Signatories

Authors

Beth Sullivan - Principal Advisor Policy

Andrew Duncan - Manager Financial Policy

Authorisers

Ross Tucker - Acting General Manager, Financial Strategy and Planning

Carol McKenzie-Rex - Acting General Manager Local Board Services

Eric Perry - Relationship Manager

 


Kaipātiki Local Board

13 December 2017

 

 

Decision making allocation

 

File No.: CP2017/25938

 

  

 

Purpose

1.       This report seeks local board input on the allocation of non-regulatory decision-making as part of the 10 Year Budget 2018-2028.

Executive summary

2.       The Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009 requires the Governing Body to allocate decision-making responsibility for non-regulatory activities, either to the Governing Body or to local boards. This must be undertaken in accordance with certain legislative principles and after considering the views and preferences of each local board. There is a presumption that local boards will be responsible for making decisions on non-regulatory activities, except where decision-making on a region-wide basis will better promote the wellbeing of communities across Auckland because certain criteria are satisfied.

3.       Each long-term plan and annual plan must identify the non-regulatory activities allocated to local boards.

4.       A significant review of this decision-making allocation was undertaken during the 2015-2025 Long-term Plan (LTP) cycle. The allocation was also recently considered during the Governance Framework Review, over the period 2016-2017. A comprehensive review is, therefore, not being undertaken in this LTP cycle.

5.       One substantive change to the allocation is proposed in order to implement a policy decision from the Governance Framework Review: allocating certain local service property optimisation decisions to local boards. There are various other minor wording amendments to improve clarity and consistency.

6.       Local board feedback is sought on this proposed allocation. It will be considered by the Governing Body during its adoption of the 10 Year Budget 2018-2028.

 

Recommendation/s

That the Kaipātiki Local Board:

a)      endorse the proposed allocation of non-regulatory decision-making as attached to the agenda report.

 

 

Comments

Background

7.       The Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009 sets out the functions and powers of the Governing Body and local boards. Local board functions and powers come from three sources:

·          those directly conferred by the Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009;

·          non-regulatory activities allocated by the Governing Body to local boards; and

·          regulatory or non-regulatory functions and powers delegated by the Governing Body or Auckland Transport to the local boards.

8.       The Auckland Transition Agency (ATA) was given the task of determining the initial allocation of the council’s non-regulatory activities using the Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009 (the Auckland Council Act). In undertaking this exercise, the question considered by ATA was not ‘why should the activity be allocated to local boards?’ but ‘why not?’ This was in line with the Auckland Council Act.

9.       The non-regulatory decision-making allocation has been reviewed twice since the ATA first developed it, as part of the Long-term Plan 2012-2022 and the Long-term Plan 2015-2025.The current non-regulatory decision-making allocation was determined as part of the 2015-2025 Long-term Plan. It is written on an inclusive basis; it does not contain an exhaustive list of all elements that might make up an allocated activity.

10.     A significant review of the allocation was undertaken during the 2015-2025 Long-term Plan. The review concluded that a number of clarifications and text changes were required, but no substantive changes were needed to the allocated responsibilities. The review also concluded that the then allocation had worked well and there had been a growing understanding and increasing sophistication of how to use it.

11.     The 2016 independent Governance Framework Review report also considered the decision-making allocation as part of the respective roles of the Governing Body and local boards, and what is working well and not working well in Auckland Council’s governance. As with the Long-term Plan 2015-2025 review, the Governance Framework Review found that the current allocation is well understood, sensible, and generally works well. It did recommend that one minor technical change be made to the allocation to more accurately describe the current practical limitations of local board roles in park acquisitions. Further analysis and consultation demonstrated that this recommended change was not necessary.

12.     In responding to the Governance Framework Review report, and considering how local boards could be further empowered, the Governing Body decided on a policy change that requires the allocation table to be amended. This is described below.

13.     Local boards were extensively consulted during the Governance Framework review.

14.     Due to the recent timing of the Governance Framework Review and the consideration of the allocation of non-regulatory decision-making as part of it, no comprehensive review of the allocation table is being undertaken this Long-term Plan cycle.

15.     The Governance Framework Review did identify other decision-making opportunities for local boards, e.g. around service levels. No change is required to the allocation table to provide for this; local boards already have the necessary responsibilities allocated to them. Rather, the organisation needs to be in a position to provide local boards with quality advice when making those decisions.

Summary of proposed amendments

16.     The current allocation with proposed amendments is attached as Attachment A.

17.     The only substantive amendment to the allocation is to allocate decision-making for disposal of local service properties and reinvestment of sale proceeds to local boards where this falls within the service property optimisation policy. This policy was adopted in 2015 by the Governing Body and sets out the purpose and principles for optimisation of underperforming or underutilised service property. A key element is that sale proceeds from underperforming service property are locally reinvested to advance approved projects or activities on a cost neutral basis.

18.     Under the current allocation the Governing Body makes the final decision on disposal and acquisition of all property assets, including local service properties that may be optimised.  Through the Governance Framework Review process the Governing Body agreed that these local service property optimisation decisions should be made by local boards.[2] This amendment to the allocation implements this decision. This issue was canvassed with local boards during consultation on the Governance Framework Review and they were supportive of local boards holding this decision-making.

19.     The current allocation has one specific allocation for the Governing Body on acquisition and disposals - ‘acquisition and divestment of all park land, including the disposal of surplus parks.’ This was introduced to the allocation table in 2012 to provide clarity of decision-making responsibility in this space. This allocation would conflict with the new allocation given to local boards (disposal and reinvestment of property assets in line with the Service Property Optimisation Policy). In order to retain clarity an amendment has been made to the parks allocation to make it clear that the Governing Body’s responsibility for acquisition and divestment of parks does not apply in the case of the Service Property Optimisation Policy applying.

20.     Other minor changes to wording include:

·        Amending ‘Auckland-wide’ to ‘regional’ in several instances to maintain consistency throughout the allocation table.

·        Updating various names (such as Panuku Development Auckland and various parks and maunga) to bring them into line with Auckland Council style.

·        Updating descriptions of governance arrangements for several reserves to more accurately describe the current arrangements.

·        Renaming themes and activity groups to bring them in to line with the new LTP nomenclature.

·        Updating the planning language to bring it in line with Auckland Plan refresh nomenclature.

21.     Whilst not part of the allocation of decision-making, the preamble to the allocation table that describes what powers have been delegated to local boards has also been updated to note the recent decision to delegate certain Reserves Act powers to local boards. This delegation was an outcome of the Governance Framework Review.

Consideration            

Local board views and implications

22.     Local board views on the proposed allocation are being sought via this report.

23.     There was extensive consultation with local boards about their decision-making roles and powers during the Governance Framework Review. This included:

·        workshops with each local board during the independent review phase;

·        workshops and one business meeting with each local board during the response phase.

24.     The review found that the allocation table was generally working well and no substantive changes to the allocation were recommended. This was specifically discussed with local boards during workshops. Feedback from local boards was generally supportive of this position.

Māori impact statement

25.     There are no particular impacts to Maori in relation to this report.

Implementation

26.     As the changes proposed to the decision-making allocation are not significant it is not necessary to publicly consult on them. Local board feedback will be reported to the Governing Body in 2018. Changes to the allocation would come into effect on 1 July 2018.

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Proposed allocation of decision-making for local board feedback

61

     

Signatories

Authors

James Liddell - Portfolio Manager

Authorisers

Carol McKenzie-Rex - Acting General Manager Local Board Services

Eric Perry - Relationship Manager

 


Kaipātiki Local Board

13 December 2017

 

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Kaipātiki Local Board

13 December 2017

 

 

Local Board Services Monthly Report - December 2017

 

File No.: CP2017/25972

 

  

 

Purpose

1.       The purpose of this report is to provide an update on the key activities of the Kaipātiki Local Board during November 2017, and to provide recommendations for matters requiring attention.

2.       The updates in this report relate to the following areas:

·          Community Services;

·          Parks, Sport and Recreation; and

·          Governance.

Executive summary

3.       The Kaipatiki Community Facilities Trust (KCFT) indicated through its quarter one report that they were unable to proceed with planning the Marlborough Christmas gala due to the recent site works at the park. KCFT have provided its proposal for the repurposing the Marlborough Christmas gala budget of $5,000 to a Celebration of Families in Marlborough event to be held on 3 February 2018 (refer Attachment A).

4.       During a recent workshop session on the Kaipatiki Connections Network Plan held on 11 October 2017, feedback was provided by local board members on the possibility of revisiting current project priorities funding allocation. A formal request should be made to staff to report back with a review of current projects with a view to possible reallocation.

5.       Pest Free Kaipatiki (PFK) is developing a small grants scheme to further encourage volunteers and community groups to become active in pest free activities. PFK would like to use part of the funds previously granted by the board for community engagement to aspects of the proposed grants scheme.

6.       The board has now considered appointments to all but one of the community organisations that receive annual grants from the local board. Kaipātiki Youth Development Trust has been considering whether or not to accept the board’s offer to make a liaison and has indicated that it would like a liaison appointment to be made.

 

Recommendation/s

That the Kaipātiki Local Board:

a)      agree to repurpose $5,000 within the 2017/2018 ‘KFCT Delivered Events - Kaipātiki project line’ of its work programme to the Celebration of Families in Marlborough event as the Marlborough Park Christmas Gala was unable to be delivered in 2017 with the park unavailable due to site works.

b)      request staff report back at the earliest opportunity with a review of the current Kaipātiki Connection Network Plan projects at the consent and construction phase, with a view to possible reallocation of funding.

c)      endorse the use of funding provided by Kaipātiki Local Board as part of its 2017 'Allocation of response funds' to support the Pest Free Kaipātiki proposed grants scheme for volunteers and community groups. 

d)      appoint a liaison representative to Kaipātiki Youth Development Trust.

 

Comments

7.       In November 2017, the Kaipātiki Local Board held two workshops. Records of these workshops are attached to a separate report on this agenda.

8.       The following regional and sub-regional briefings/meetings took place in November 2017:

·          Finance and Performance Committee Workshop LTP 2018-2028 – 1 November 2017;

·          Local Board Chairs Forum – 13 November 2017;

·          Finance and Performance Committee and Planning Committee Workshop – 15 November 2017;

·          Local Boards Traffic Calming Seminar – 16 November 2017;

·          Planning Committee Auckland Plan Refresh Workshop – 16 November 2017;

·          Input into Regional / sub-regional decision making [Central] and [South] –  20 November 2017;

·          Joint Governing Body / Local Board Chairs Meeting – 22 November 2017;

·          Input into Regional / sub-regional decision making [North] –  27 November 2017; and

·          Weed Management Political Advisory Group – 30 November 2017.

9.       The board's December workshop is scheduled for 6 December 2017.

Community Services

Repurpose of Marlborough Park Gala funds

10.     The board funds Kaipatiki Community Facilities Trust (KCFT) through the Arts, Community and Events work programme – approved by the board at its 19 July 2017 business meeting (resolution number KT/2017/91).

11.     One of the events supported by the local board is the Christmas Gala at Marlborough Park. Through its quarter one report KCFT indicated that they were unable to proceed with planning the gala due to the recent site works at the park associated with the junior playspace and footpath upgrade. The project was planned to be completed in September however overrun the schedule by three months.

12.     The Christmas Gala at Marlborough Park event had a budget of $5,000.

13.     At its 15 November 2017 business meeting, the board requested a proposal on the repurpose of funding from the Marlborough Christmas gala to a community open day at Marlborough Park (resolution number KT/2017/167). KCFT have provided its proposal for the repurposing to a Celebration of Families in Marlborough event to be held on 3 February 2018, refer Attachment A.

Parks, Sport and Recreation

Kaipātiki Connections Network Plan update

14.     The Kaipātiki Connections Network Plan (Connections Plan) is high level concept plan identifying a network of existing and future walking and cycling connections – both within the road corridor and within parks and other open spaces.

15.     The Connections Plan was originally developed and adopted in 2012. A review was undertaken in 2015/16 to ensure the plan continued to meet community needs. A revised plan was approved September 2016

16.     The final portion of available budget, totalling $1.124 million, was allocated concurrently with adopting the revised plan. The following allocation was based on a prioritised list of projects:

Project #

Project location

Project description

Priority

Connections Plan component

2

Tuff Crater

upgrade of existing track around perimeter of crater to accommodate a wider range of users

1

$146,000

16

Eskdale Reserve Network

upgrade of existing track along spine to accommodate a wider range of users

2

$238,000

3

Tuff Crater

connection between Tuff Crater and Onepoto Domain via Sylvan Ave slip road

3

$30,000

7 C

Kauri Glen Reserve

upgrade of main track through reserve to allow for wider range of users

4

$150,000

8

Le Roys Bush - Fairfax Ave connection

upgrade of existing track to accommodate a wider range of users

5

$30,000

36

Dudding Park

new connection across Dudding Park to connect to existing track network in Le Roys Bush

6

$35,000

27

Rangatira Reserve

new north-south connection through reserve

7

$165,000

28

Rangatira Reserve

upgrade of existing east-west connections through reserve

7

$285,000

11

Kauri Point Centennial Park

upgrade of existing walkway from Chelsea Estate Heritage Park to Kendall Bay

8

$45,000

 

 

Total

 

$1,124,000

17.     The local board was provided with an update on the above projects at a workshop on 11 October 2017. In addition, the workshop was an opportunity for local board members to provide feedback on priorities for the next tranche of projects to be progressed to consenting and construction.

18.     During the workshop session on 11 October 2017, feedback was provided by local board members on the possibility of revisiting project priorities and the current allocation of funding. Should the local board wish to have this option investigated, it is recommended that the local board formally resolve a request to review current projects with a view to possible reallocation. It should be noted that some projects may be beyond reallocation of funds due to contractual obligations.

Pest Free Kaipātiki – clarification of funding support

19.     At its 17 May 2017 business meeting, the Kaipātiki Local Board, allocated $95,000 (resolution number KT/2017/54) for Pest Free Kaipātiki (PFK) as part of its consideration of ‘Allocation of response funds’. The funding was supplied to:

“Partner with and enable community groups to implement the Pest Free Kaipātiki Strategy developed to protect and enhance the local board’s ecological diversity and natural treasure. Funding to go towards the Pest Free Kaipātiki Coordinator salary, engagement with local communities, schools advice and grants for projects by local school groups, and monitoring”.

 

20.     At the same board meeting, the board considered its ‘Kaipātiki local grants round two 2016/17 grants applications’. In declining one application (resolution number KT/2017/48), the reason provided by the board was:

“Grant round has been oversubscribed and item requested can seek funding through Pest Free Kaipātiki”

 

21.     It is understood that in the period since the 17 May business meeting, individual board members have directed other community groups to PFK as a source of possible grants.

22.     At the time this decision was made, PFK did not exist as a separate legal identity and a funding agreement was entered into with the Kaipatiki Project to hold and manage the majority of the funds provided by resolution number KT/2017/54. In the period since May 2017, PFK has evolved and is now an incorporated society - the Pest Free Kaipātiki Restoration Society Incorporated (registration number 2685672). As part of the many activities that are occurring to implement the PFK strategy, the management of the society has started to develop a ‘Strategic Improvement Project Grants Scheme’ (SIPG scheme) for volunteer workshops and other biodiversity projects. The aim of the scheme is stated as:

“These PFK funds aim to support our local volunteers to achieve the objectives of the Pest Free Kaipātiki Strategy to help restore native biodiversity in Significant Ecological Areas (SEAs) on public and private land across Kaipatiki by providing access to advice and support, tools and other resources and training.

·       The funding available is to provide advice and support for planning and undertaking projects such as weed and predator control and monitoring, as well as to provide the equipment, training and other resources required. Consideration will also be given to projects involving seating, interpretive signage that will help the public understand, protect and enjoy our natural heritage etc.

·       Where a project can be covered by an alternative funding source, such as the Parks Volunteer Ranger, the PFK restoration team will advise you.

·       The projects will aim to integrate with work done by the Parks Department, Pest Free Auckland, Council contractors and other agencies. The application provides for groups to apply for projects where volunteers are supported by restoration advisers at working bees or other pest control activities. In some circumstances, the advisers may recommend additional pest control work outside of the time spent with volunteers.”

23.     The aspect of the SIPG scheme providing technical advice falls within the ambit of funding currently provided by another PFK funder.

24.     The resolution granting the funding provided by the Kaipātiki Local Board in May 2017 refers to funding being provided for “… engagement with local communities…”. The funding provided doesn’t specifically refer to grants, other than to school groups. The funding agreement implementing this resolution refers to PFK giving “people the tools and networks needed to free their homes, schools, local parks, business premises and all green spaces from any harmful pest” and that the project “will also increase community awareness, education, involvement and neighbourhood connectivity, collaboration and ecological linkages”.

25.     The proposed SIPG scheme is seen by PFK as one means of better engaging with the Kaipātiki community by providing advice and support to pre-existing and nascent volunteer groups. It is considered that the proposed SIPG scheme does have value in progressing; the PFK strategy and encouraging volunteerism and local place-making (all local board plan objectives). It is also an example of a ‘bottom up’ empowered communities approach in action.

26.     The issue is being brought to the board’s attention at this stage, prior to the SIPG scheme commencing, so that the board has the opportunity of clarifying whether the proposed use of funds falls within the board’s intentions as resolved on 17 May 2017.

Governance

Appointments to outside organisations

27.     At its June 2017 business meeting, the Kaipātiki Local Board considered a report on appointments to outside organisations. At that time, two organisations receiving annual grants (Kaipātiki Project and Kaipātiki Youth Development Trust (KYDT)) receiving annual grants were still considering whether or not to accept the board’s offer to make a liaison appointment from amongst board members.

28.     At its September 2017 business meeting, the board appointed a liaison to Kaipātiki Project as was requested.

29.     KYDT have now also indicated that it would like a liaison appointment to be made. For KYDT, this appointment would be to identify the ‘go to’ board member for any matters relating to KYDT. The appointee would also be expected to attend the annual general meeting of KYDT and, on occasions, attend the KYDT board meetings.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

30.     Local board views are sought via this report.

Māori impact statement

31.     There are no specific impacts on Māori arising from this report.

Implementation

32.     There are no implementation issues arising from this report.

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Marlborough Christmas Gala funding repurpose proposal

81

     

Signatories

Authors

Paul Edwards - Senior Local Board Advisor - Kaipatiki

Authorisers

Eric Perry - Relationship Manager

 


Kaipātiki Local Board

13 December 2017

 

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Kaipātiki Local Board

13 December 2017

 

 

Governing Body and Independent Maori Statutory Board Members' Update

 

File No.: CP2017/25773

 

  

 

Executive summary

An opportunity is provided for Governing Body and Independent Maori Statutory Board members to update the board on Governing Body or Independent Maori Statutory Board issues, or issues relating to the Kaipātiki Local Board.

 

Recommendation/s

That the Kaipātiki Local Board:

a)      note the Governing Body and Independent Maori Statutory Board members’ verbal updates.

 

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.     

Signatories

Authors

Blair Doherty - Kaipatiki Local Board Democracy Advisor

Authorisers

Eric Perry - Relationship Manager

 


Kaipātiki Local Board

13 December 2017

 

 

Kaipatiki Local Board Chairperson's Report

 

File No.: CP2017/25774

 

  

 

Purpose

1.       Attached for members’ information is an update from the Kaipātiki Local Board chairperson.

Executive summary

2.       The Kaipātiki Local Board chairperson has provided a report on recent activities for the information of the members.

 

Recommendation/s

That the Kaipātiki Local Board:

a)      note the chairperson’s report.

 

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Chairs report Danielle Grant December 2017

87

     

Signatories

Authors

Blair Doherty - Kaipatiki Local Board Democracy Advisor

Authorisers

Eric Perry - Relationship Manager

 


Kaipātiki Local Board

13 December 2017

 

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Kaipātiki Local Board

13 December 2017

 

 

Members' Reports

 

File No.: CP2017/25775

 

  

 

Executive summary

1.         An opportunity is provided for members to update the Kaipātiki Local Board on the projects and issues they have been involved with since the last meeting.

2.         Member Anne-Elise Smithson has submitted a written report (refer Attachment A).

 

Recommendation/s

That the Kaipātiki Local Board:

a)         note the report from Member Anne-Elise Smithson.

b)         note any verbal reports of members.

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Members report - Anne-Elise Smithson

93

     

Signatories

Authors

Blair Doherty - Kaipatiki Local Board Democracy Advisor

Authorisers

Eric Perry - Relationship Manager

 


Kaipātiki Local Board

13 December 2017

 

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Kaipātiki Local Board

13 December 2017

 

 

Governance Forward Work Calendar

 

File No.: CP2017/25776

 

  

 

Purpose

1.       To provide an update on reports to be presented to the board over the next 12 months.

Executive summary

2.       The governance forward work calendar was introduced in 2016 as part of Auckland Council’s quality advice programme. The calendar aims to support local boards’ governance role by:

·          ensuring advice on meeting agendas is driven by local board priorities;

·          clarifying what advice is expected and when; and

·          clarifying the rationale for reports.

3.       The calendar also aims to provide guidance for staff supporting local boards and greater transparency for the public. The calendar is updated monthly, reported to local board business meetings, and distributed to council staff.

4.       The December 2017 governance forward work calendar for the Kaipātiki Local Board is provided as Attachment A.

 

Recommendation/s

That the Kaipātiki Local Board:

a)      note the Kaipātiki Local Board governance forward work calendar – December 2017.

 

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Governance forward work calendar – December 2017

99

     

Signatories

Authors

Blair Doherty - Kaipatiki Local Board Democracy Advisor

Authorisers

Eric Perry - Relationship Manager

 


Kaipātiki Local Board

13 December 2017

 

 

PDF Creator


Kaipātiki Local Board

13 December 2017

 

 

Workshop Records - Kaipātiki Local Board, held on 8 and 22 November 2017

 

File No.: CP2017/25777

 

  

 

Purpose

1.       The purpose of this report is to record the Kaipātiki Local Board workshops held on Wednesday 8 November 2017, and Wednesday 22 November 2017.

Executive Summary

2.       At the workshop held on Wednesday 8 November 2017, the Kaipātiki Local Board had briefings on:

·          Wai Ora – Healthy Waterways Programme;

·          Development of the Waste Management and Minimisation Plan 2018;

·          Community Facilities monthly update;

·          Quarter 1 performance report;

·          Remuneration Authority consultation; and

·          Maori Naming of Reserves programme.

3.       At the workshop held on Wednesday 22 November 2017, the Kaipātiki Local Board had briefings on:

·          Local Board Agreement workshop 3; and

·          Community Facilities Investigation and Design discussion.

4.       The workshop records are attached to this report.

 

Recommendation/s

That the Kaipātiki Local Board:

a)      note the records for the Kaipātiki Local Board workshops held on Wednesday 8 November 2017, and Wednesday 22 November 2017.

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Kaipātiki Local Board workshop record - Wednesday 8 November 2017

103

b

Kaipātiki Local Board workshop record - Wednesday 22 November 2017

107

    

Signatories

Authors

Blair Doherty - Kaipatiki Local Board Democracy Advisor

Authorisers

Eric Perry - Relationship Manager

 


Kaipātiki Local Board

13 December 2017

 

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Kaipātiki Local Board

13 December 2017

 

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Kaipātiki Local Board

13 December 2017

 

 

Revising the local board Standing Orders

 

File No.: CP2017/26344

 

  

 

Purpose

1.       To consider and adopt revised Standing Orders for local board meetings.

Executive summary

2.       Standing Orders are the rules for conduct and procedure at meetings. They are used to help meetings run smoothly and in accordance with relevant legislation, to ensure the integrity of the decision-making process, and to help elected members and members of the public understand how they can participate.

3.       The current local board Standing Orders (SOs) were set by the Auckland Transition Agency on 27 October 2010. It is now timely to revise them to ensure they remain a clear, relevant and practical tool for local board meetings. 

4.       At its meeting on 28 May 2015, the Governing Body resolved to amend its Standing Orders on the basis of work undertaken by a political working party.

5.       The revised Standing Orders have a simplified layout, are written in a plain language style, and contain a summary and process diagram at the front for ease of reference during a meeting. 

6.       A working group of Democracy Advisors has assessed each provision of the current (generic) local board Standing Orders against the corresponding revised governing body Standing Orders. For each local board standing order they considered whether to retain the current wording, use the revised Governing Body wording or to have a combination of the two.

7.       A draft set of revised local board Standing Orders is set out in Attachment A for local boards’ consideration. It is based on the recommendations of the Democracy Advisor working group and follows the revised Governing Body Standing Orders in terms of style. 

8.       The more significant suggested changes include new provisions for electronic attendance at meetings, dealing with conflicts due to the non-financial interests of members, processes for Governing Body and Māori input and enabling use of New Zealand Sign Language at meetings.

9.       This report recommends that local boards consider and adopt the revised Standing Orders in Attachment A.

10.     Any changes to a boards Standing Orders requires a majority vote of not less than 75% of members present.

 

Recommendation/s

That the Kaipātiki Local Board:

a)      adopt the standing orders detailed in Attachment A to the agenda report, entitled “Auckland Council Standing Orders of the Local Board”, in replacement of its current standing orders.

 

 


 

Comments

Background

11.     Standing Orders are the rules for conduct and procedure at meetings. They are used to help meetings run smoothly and in accordance with relevant legislation, to ensure the integrity of the decision-making process, and to help elected members and members of the public understand how they can participate.

12.     The Governing Body Standing Orders were compiled in 2010 by the Auckland Transition Agency from legacy council standing orders and the NZ Standards Model Standing Orders.

13.     Local Board Standing Orders were modelled on the Governing Body Standing Orders.

14.     A political working party was set up in November 2013 to review the Governing Body’s Standing Orders. The working party’s findings were reported back to the Governing Body at its 28 May 2015 meeting (Attachment B).

15.     Recent amendments to the Local Government Act 2002 (the Act) allowed additional changes to be considered by the working party. These changes included a provision to allow members to attend meetings via audio or audiovisual link.

16.     At its 28 May 2015 meeting, the Governing Body adopted an amended set of Standing Orders which have a simplified layout, are written in a plain language style, and contain a summary and process diagram at the front for ease of reference during a meeting.

17.     It was resolved at this meeting to forward the report to all local boards, drawing their attention to the suggestion to provide for councillor participation at local board meetings in their Standing Orders.

18.     Over the last 18 months, a working group of local board Democracy Advisors has assessed each provision of the current (generic) local board Standing Orders against the corresponding revised Governing Body Standing Orders. For each local board standing order they considered whether to retain the current wording, use the revised Governing Body wording or to have a combination of the two.

19.     A revised set of local board Standing Orders has been developed as an outcome of this work (Attachment A) which is in accordance with the recommendations of the Democracy Advisor working group. 

20.     The revised local board Standing Orders follow a similar format to the Governing Body Standing Orders with a simplified layout, a plain language style, and a summary and process diagram at the front for ease of reference during a meeting. 

21.     Key substantive changes from the current local board Standing Orders are summarised below. They aim to ensure the local board Standing Orders are up to date, fulfil Auckland Council’s legal obligations and are practical and useful for business meetings.

22.     Many standing orders reflect provisions in legislation. In some cases the wording of the standing order may have been changed to a plain language style but the intention of the standing order remains the same. These standing orders are usually indicated by a reference underneath to the relevant clause in legislation. These standing orders may not be suspended.


 

Key changes

23.     Key substantive suggested changes from the current local board Standing Orders are set out below. 

 

Issue

 

Suggested changes

Purpose of suggested change

Reference in the revised LB Standing Orders

Quorum

Provision for the Chairperson to extend the 30 minute waiting time for a quorum, at the start of a meeting, by another 10 minutes - where members are known to be travelling to the meeting but are delayed due to unusual weather or traffic congestion.

 

Change in the waiting time for a quorum to be reestablished (where, after a meeting starts, member(s) leave and there is no longer a quorum) from 20 minutes to 10 minutes.

 

Assists smooth running of meeting and ensures

consistency with GB Standing Orders

 

3.1.4 and 3.1.6

 

Record of a workshop

Deletion of the requirement for the chairperson to sign-off the record of a workshop.

 

Record of workshop proceedings will be circulated.

 

Assists smooth running of meeting

12.1.4

 

Public excluded business not to be disclosed

 

Clarification on situations where the duty of non-disclosure of information, at a meeting where the public were excluded, does not apply - namely where:

·      a meeting has resolved to make the information publically available;

·      there are no grounds under the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 for withholding the information when requested; or

·      the information is no longer confidential.

 

Clarification and ensures consistency with GB Standing Orders

7.4.3

Languages

Amendments to allow New Zealand Sign Language (as well as English and Māori) to be used by members and in deputations, presentations and public forum.

 

Two clear working days’ notice must be provided when an address is not in English (this is the same as the notice period required under the current local board Standing Orders and the governing body Standing Orders). 

 

The Governing Body input and Māori input sections also provide for addressing the meeting in New Zealand Sign Language, English or Māori.

 

Recognition of NZ Sign Language as an official language

1.1.2, 5.1.5, 6.1.5, 7.6.1, 7.7.5 and 7.8.4. 

Minutes

Clarification of what meeting minutes are to record.

 

Clarification

8.1.2

Agendas

Clarification that agendas can be sent electronically, and that names of local board and committee members are to be on each agenda.

 

Clarification

2.4.1

7.3.3

Non-financial interests

Suggested new provision regarding procedure for dealing with non-financial interests of members. If a member considers that there is a conflict of interest for an item, they may not take part in the discussions about or vote on the relevant matter.

 

Helps ensure robust, legally defensible decisions and consistent with GB Standing Orders

1.3.8

Repeat Notices of Motion

Suggested amendment that a Notice of Motion that the local board or a committee has considered twice and rejected within the previous six months may be refused by the Chairperson. (There is no longer the option for a further notice - prior to the expiration of the original period of 6 months - where signed by a majority of all members.)

Assists smooth running of meetings and ensures

consistency with GB Standing Orders

 

2.5.8

Procedural motions

Suggested new provision that the Chairperson has discretion about whether to allow any other procedural motion that is not contained in these Standing Orders.

 

Assists smooth running of meeting and ensures

consistency with GB Standing Orders

 

1.7.12

Urgent items

Suggested change in title, from ‘Major items of business not on the agenda may be dealt with (extraordinary business)’ to ‘Urgent items of business not on the agenda may be dealt with (extraordinary business)’.  

 

This provision sets out when items not on an agenda may be considered. The suggested change in title aims to help clarify the types of issues that fall under this provision and better reflect the purpose of the provision.

 

Text has also been added clarifying that extraordinary business may be brought before a meeting by a report of the Chief Executive or Chairperson. Where the matter is so urgent a written report is not practical, the report may be verbal.

 

Clarification

2.4.5 and Appendix D

 

Governing body input

A proposed section on Governing Body input sets out that a Governing Body member may provide input at meetings via speaking rights on items at the discretion of the chair and a report on the agenda for a Governing Body member to provide a general update on matters of interest to the board. This can include reporting on regional matters of interest to the local board or any matter the Governing Body member wishes to raise. 

This section aims to be more flexible than the current local board SO 3.9.14, by applying to Governing Body members in general rather than ward councillors for the local board area.

Whilst the right for Governing Body members to speak as a deputation has also been retained, the Governing Body input section enables a more flexible/permissive option, given it does not require the authorisation of a governing body resolution. Use of the process for Governing Body deputations will be appropriate for more formal circumstances, where the Governing Body member is representing the views of the Governing Body as a whole. 

The suggested notice period is seven clear working days, to enable sufficient time for it to appear on the agenda.  However, this is at the discretion of the Chairperson and can be shortened if necessary.

The suggested speaking time is five minutes, in accordance with provisions in the Governing Body Standing Orders.

More permissive input provisions

Part 5

Order of business

Clarification that the order of business for an extraordinary meeting should be limited to items relevant to the purpose of the meeting. The Chairperson may allow governing body, Māori and public input that is relevant to the purpose of the meeting.

The items listed in this section have been amended to fit with the order of business generated by Infocouncil.

Clarification and ensures consistency with GB Standing Orders

2.4.2

References to working parties and briefings

These have been taken out, as these forums tend to be less formal and not covered by Standing Orders.

Relevance

 

Public forum

Suggested changes clarifying that:

·      public forum may not be required at the inaugural meeting, extraordinary meetings or a special consultative procedure.

·      members may not debate any matter raised during the public forum session that is not on the agenda for the meeting, or take any action in relation to it, other than through the usual procedures for extraordinary business if the matter is urgent. The meeting may refer the matter to a future meeting, or to another committee, or to the Chief Executive for investigation.

·      Māori or New Zealand Sign Language can be used at public forum, as long as two clear working days’ notice is provided. Where practical, council will arrange for a translator to be present.

·      the Chairperson may direct a speaker to a different committee and prohibit a speaker from speaking if he or she is offensive, repetitious or vexatious, or otherwise breaches these standing orders.

 

Clarification

7.8

Suspension of standing orders

A provision has been included for a member to move a motion to suspend standing orders as a procedural motion. The member must name the standing orders to be suspended and provide a reason for suspension. If seconded, the chairperson must put it without debate. At least 75 per cent of the members present and voting must vote in favour of the suspension, and the resolution must state the reason why the SO was suspended.

 

It should be noted that some SOs reflect provisions in legislation so cannot be suspended. These are usually indicated by a reference underneath the SO to the relevant clause in legislation.

 

To assist the smooth running of meetings and ensure consistency with GB Standing Orders

1.7.11

Notice to be seconded

A notice of motion delivered to the Chief Executive must be signed by another member of the meeting as a seconder – unless member is giving notice of motion to revoke or alter a previous resolution.

Consistency with GB Standing Orders

2.5.2

Chairperson discretion

The discretion of the Chairperson has been clarified and made as consistent as possible in Standing Orders relating to Governing Body input, Māori input, public forum and deputations.

Clarification and consistency

Parts 5 and 6, 7.7 and 7.8

Māori responsiveness

Suggested provisions for representatives of Māori organisations to provide input at local board or committee meetings via speaking rights during relevant items. The main purpose of the provisions is to recognise the special status of Māori and increase the council’s responsiveness to Māori. The provisions also provide more flexibility than the deputations process, which restricts the number of deputation members that may address the meeting. 

 

The suggested notice period is seven clear working days, to enable sufficient time for such an item to appear on the agenda.  However, this is at the discretion of the chair and can be shortened if need be.

Recognition of the special status of  Māori and IMSB’s role under section 85 of the Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009

Part 6 and

4.2.2

Working days / clear working days

The term “clear working days” has been used throughout the document, to refer to the number of working days prescribed for giving notice. It excludes the date of service of that notice and the date of the meeting itself.  This is in accordance with legislation (Local Government Act 2002, Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 and the Interpretation Act).

Clarification and consistency

 

Governing body input, Māori input, public forum, deputations

The provisions in these sections have been made as consistent as possible and, where appropriate, in accordance with the Governing Body Standing Orders. 

 

Legal advice has been followed regarding the subjects a speaker may not speak about and the questions which can be put to speakers. 

Clarification

 

New appendices

New appendices have been added, setting out who must leave the meeting when the public is excluded and how business is brought before a meeting. 

 

Provisions in the current local board Standing Orders relating to workshops have been placed in an appendix, given their exemption from Part seven of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1978.

Clarification

Appendices B-D

Electronic attendance at business meetings

Recent changes to the Local Government Act 2002 now allow members to attend meetings by audio or audio-visual means in certain situations.

There are a number of restrictions for this provision in the legislation including that relevant technology is available and of suitable quality, all those participating can hear each other and there is no reduction in accountability or accessibility of the member in relation to the meeting. Members attending meetings by electronic link may vote but are not counted as part of the quorum.

The revised Standing Orders contain provisions to enable members to attend meetings by electronic link, where the member is representing the council at a place that makes their physical presence at the meeting impossible or impracticable, to accommodate the member’s illness or infirmity or in emergencies.

This provision will only apply where the technology is available.

 

Allows members to attend meetings whilst away on council business, or during illness or other emergency.

3.3

Membership of committees

In accordance with section 85 of the Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009, a clause has been included acknowledging that the Independent Māori Statutory Board  must appoint a maximum of two people to sit as members of committees that deal with the management and stewardship of natural and physical resources.

Clarification

4.2.2

Powers of delegation

Clause 36D of schedule 7 of the Local Government Act 2002 identifies who a local board may delegate decision-making to,  and the powers a local board cannot delegate.

This clause does not include the power to delegate to other subordinate decision-making bodies or more than one member of a local board. Therefore references to subordinate decision-making bodies have been removed.

Clarification

Part 4

 

Key differences from the governing body standing orders

24.     The revised local board Standing Orders contain some points of difference with the governing body Standing Orders. Key points of difference are in the areas of refreshment breaks, petitions, notices of motion, and public input.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

25.     This report provides information and a revised set of Standing Orders for local board consideration and adoption.

Māori impact statement

26.     The local board Standing Orders deal with meeting procedure. They provide for Māori to be spoken at business meetings and for deputations, presentations and petitions to be in Māori. They also enable:

·          Māori to participate on local board committees, even if they are not members of the relevant local board. See current local board SO 2.9.2 which states: “members of a committee or subcommittee may, but need not be, elected members of the Local Board”. As such, non-members may be appointed to committees or subcommittees if they have relevant skills, attributes or knowledge.

·          the suspension of Standing Orders, which can be useful to flexibly incorporate tikanga at meetings.

27.     New suggested provisions relating to Māori in the revised Standing Orders include:

·          a section on Māori input, to recognise the special status of Māori and encourage their input at local board meetings. This is in accordance with advice from Te Waka Angamua and work being undertaken by some local boards on a co-design process with mana whenua to improve Māori input into local board decision-making;

·          clarifying that the Independent Maori Statutory Board (IMSB) must appoint a maximum of two people to sit as members of committees that deal with the management and stewardship of natural and physical resources (in accordance with the Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009, section 85); and

·          providing for Māori to be spoken at public forum, and by the governing body or Māori organisations providing input, as long as two clear working days’ notice is given of the intention to do so.

28.     Including these provisions recognises the special status of Māori under Te Tiriti o Waitangi and Local Government Act 2002 requirements to provide opportunities and processes for Māori to contribute to decision-making processes.[3] It is also in accordance with the goals of council’s Māori Responsiveness Framework, Whiria Te Muka Tangata. In particular, to foster more positive and productive relationships between council and Māori, and contribute to Māori well-being by developing strong Māori communities.

Implementation

29.     Changes to Standing Orders requires a majority vote of not less than 75% of members present (s27(3) Schedule 7, Local Government Act 2002).

30.     If approved, the revised Standing Orders will come in to effect immediately.

31.     Copies of the revised Standing Orders will be provided to all local board members, where local boards choose to adopt changes.

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Revised Local Board Standing Orders  (Under Separate Cover)

 

b

Governing Body Political working party’s finding (Under Separate Cover)

 

     

Signatories

Authors

Blair Doherty - Kaipatiki Local Board Democracy Advisor

Authorisers

Carol McKenzie-Rex - Acting General Manager Local Board Services

Eric Perry - Relationship Manager

     

 


Kaipātiki Local Board

13 December 2017

 

 

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

b)                                           

That the Kaipātiki Local Board:

a)      note the confidential status of Attachment D - All community and sporting remissions by local board area to item 18 Local board feedback on rates remission and postponement policy review -.

 

18        Local board feedback on rates remission and postponement policy review - Attachment d - All community and sporting remissions by local board area

 

Ground(s) under section 48(1) for the passing of this resolution

Reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter

s48(1)(b)

The public conduct of the part of the meeting would be likely to result in the disclosure of information which would be contrary to a specified enactment or constitute contempt of court or contempt of the House of Representatives.

In particular, the attachment contains information about arrears, remissions, or postponed rates that are not available for public inspection in accordance with the Local Government Rating Act 2002  Section 38(1)(e).

 

   



[1] The headline rates increase in an annual plan, or long-term plan, is a comparison of the annual rates requirement to the previous years budgeted rates requirement.  Moving a charge against revenue to an expenditure item like grants will increase the council’s costs and inflate the apparent rates increase.  However, remissions and postponements are a cost already borne by those ratepayers not receiving them.  Therefore an adjustment will be made to the 2014/2015 budgeted rates requirement for the purpose of calculating the rates increase proposed for 2015/2016.

 

[2] The Governing Body resolved to delegate this power to local boards. However, this was in error, as it was always intended that the power should be allocated to local boards by Governing Body and it was discussed by the Political Working Party in this context.

[3] Sections 14 and 81.