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

 

Date:

Time:

Meeting Room:

Venue:

 

Thursday, 15 November 2018

6.00pm

Manurewa Local Board Office
7 Hill Road
Manurewa

 

Manurewa Local Board

 

OPEN AGENDA

 

 

 

MEMBERSHIP

 

Chairperson

Angela Dalton

 

Deputy Chairperson

Stella Cattle

 

Members

Joseph Allan

 

 

Sarah Colcord

 

 

Angela Cunningham-Marino

 

 

Rangi McLean

 

 

Ken Penney

 

 

Dave Pizzini

 

 

(Quorum 4 members)

 

 

 

Sarah Butterfield

Democracy Advisor - Manurewa

 

8 November 2018

 

Contact Telephone: 021 195 8387

Email: sarah.butterfield@aucklandcouncil.govt.nz

Website: www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz

 

 


 

 


Manurewa Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 

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

8.1     Deputation - Kai from Sai (Meals with Love)                                                     6

9          Public Forum                                                                                                                  6

10        Extraordinary Business                                                                                                6

11        Manurewa Youth Council Update                                                                                9

12        Manurewa Ward Councillors Update                                                                         13

13        Members' Update                                                                                                         15

14        Chairperson's Update                                                                                                 19

15        Auckland Transport Update to the Manurewa Local Board – November 2018    21

16        Trial of online voting at the 2019 local elections                                                     47

17        Local government elections 2019 – order of names on voting documents         61

18        New community lease to Manukau Beautification Charitable Trust at Holmes Road Ground, 38 Holmes Road, Manurewa                                                                        71

19        Auckland Council’s Quarterly Performance Report: Manurewa Local Board for quarter one, 1 July – 30 September 2018                                                                  79

20        Auckland Regional Pest Management Plan consultation feedback and recommended changes                                                                                            115

21        Feedback on proposed topics for inclusion in the Auckland Water Strategy   149

22        Draft Contributions Policy                                                                                        167

23        Additions to the 2016-2019 Manurewa Local Board meeting schedule              227

24        For Information: Reports referred to the Manurewa Local Board                       229

25        Manurewa Local Board Governance Forward Work Calendar - November 2018 231

26        Manurewa Local Board Achievements Register 2016 - 2019 Political Term      237

27        Manurewa Local Board Workshop Records                                                           249  

28        Consideration of Extraordinary Items 

 

 


1          Welcome

 

The meeting will begin with a Karakia (prayer).

 

 

2          Apologies

 

That the Manurewa Local Board:

a)         accept the apologies from Chairperson Angela Dalton for absence.

 

 

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.

 

 

4          Confirmation of Minutes

 

That the Manurewa Local Board:

a)         confirm the ordinary minutes of its meeting, held on Thursday, 18 October 2018, 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 7.7 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 Manurewa 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.

 

 

8.1       Deputation - Kai from Sai (Meals with Love)

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1.       Yogakumar Arumugarajah will give a deputation about the Kai from Sai (Meals with Love) project. The project provides weekly free meals in seven different areas around Auckland. The project would like to provide a free meal in Clendon. 

 

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Manurewa Local Board:

a)      thank Yogakumar Arumugarajah for his update about the Kai from Sai (Meals with Love) project.

 

 

 

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.”

 

 


Manurewa Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 

Manurewa Youth Council Update

 

File No.: CP2018/20306

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1.       To provide an opportunity for the Manurewa Youth Council to update the Manurewa Local Board on matters they have been involved in.

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2.       The Manurewa Youth Council will provide a verbal update on their actions and achievements in November 2018. 

 

 

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Manurewa Local Board:

a)      receive the Manurewa Youth Council November 2018 update.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Manurewa Youth Council November 2018 Update

11

      

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Author

Sarah Butterfield - Democracy Advisor - Manurewa

Authoriser

Manoj Ragupathy - Relationship Manager Manurewa and Papakura

 


Manurewa Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 


Manurewa Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 

Manurewa Ward Councillors Update

 

File No.: CP2018/20308

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1.       A period of 10 minutes has been set aside for the Manurewa-Papakura ward councillors to update the Manurewa Local Board on regional matters.

 

 

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Manurewa Local Board:

a)      receive the verbal reports from:

i)        Councillor Daniel Newman

ii)       Councillor Sir John Walker

 

 

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.     

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Author

Sarah Butterfield - Democracy Advisor - Manurewa

Authoriser

Manoj Ragupathy - Relationship Manager Manurewa and Papakura

 


Manurewa Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 

Members' Update

 

File No.: CP2018/20309

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1.       To provide an opportunity for members to update the Manurewa Local Board on matters they have been involved in over the last month.

 

 

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Manurewa Local Board:

a)      receive the written update from Member Rangi McLean.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Member Rangi McLean's Written Update - November 2018

17

     

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Author

Sarah Butterfield - Democracy Advisor - Manurewa

Authoriser

Manoj Ragupathy - Relationship Manager Manurewa and Papakura

 


Manurewa Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 


Manurewa Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 

Chairperson's Update

 

File No.: CP2018/20310

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1.       To provide an opportunity for the Manurewa Local Board Chairperson to update the local board on issues she has been involved in.

 

 

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Manurewa Local Board:

a)      receive the verbal report from the Manurewa Local Board Chairperson.

 

 

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.     

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Author

Sarah Butterfield - Democracy Advisor - Manurewa

Authoriser

Manoj Ragupathy - Relationship Manager Manurewa and Papakura

 


Manurewa Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 

Auckland Transport Update to the Manurewa Local Board – November 2018

 

File No.: CP2018/21495

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1.       To provide an update to the Manurewa Local Board on transport-related matters in its area, including Local Board Transport Capital Fund (LBTCF) projects.

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2.       The Manurewa Local Board has three existing LBTCF proposals underway:

·    construction is in progress on the Hillcrest Grove intersection pedestrian improvements

·    the building on the site purchased at 286 Great South Road beside Te Mahia station has been demolished

·    the Manurewa town centre clock has been reinstalled but was not keeping good time.  Precision Ltd has added more weight to the lead weights and will monitor the situation.

 

3.       At its October 2018 business meeting, the board approved over $1.36 million on three new projects for safety improvements within the Wordsworth quadrant, comprising driver feedback signs, raised pedestrian crossings, and detailed design for a residential speed management/area traffic calming project.

4.       In October 2018, the board also approved the installation of photo film wraps on two Exeloos units within the town centre.  The wraps are being printed and it is hoped to install the wrap on the Northcrest unit opposite the cenotaph in time for Armistice Day celebrations.

5.       There remains $38,026 available to allocate in the current political term for new LBTCF projects in the Manurewa area.

6.       At Te Mahia station, Auckland Transport’s platform upgrade works are nearing completion.

7.       Auckland Transport’s Quarterly Report for July to September 2018 is attached to this report.  It details Auckland Transport’s activities and projects during the quarter both in the Manurewa area and regionally.

8.       In 2017, 64 people died on Auckland’s roads.  Auckland Transport has launched a new campaign to get Aucklanders to slow down when driving.

9.       Auckland Transport consulted the Manurewa Local Board on one proposal in its area over the last month, for four mobility parking spaces at the Northcrest car park.

 

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Manurewa Local Board:

a)      receive the report entitled ‘Auckland Transport Update to the Manurewa Local Board – November 2018’.

 

Horopaki / Context

10.     This report addresses transport-related matters in the local board area and includes information on the status of the Local Board Transport Capital Fund (LBTCF) and LBTCF projects.

11.     The LBTCF is a capital budget provided to all local boards by Auckland Council and delivered by Auckland Transport.  Local boards can use this fund to deliver transport infrastructure projects that they believe are important but are not part of Auckland Transport’s work programme.

12.     Any LBTCF projects selected must be safe; must not impede network efficiency; and must be located in the road corridor or on land controlled by Auckland Transport (though projects running through parks can be considered if there is a transport outcome).

13.     Auckland Transport is responsible for all of Auckland’s transport services, excluding state highways.  Auckland Transport reports on a monthly basis to local boards, as set out in the Local Board Engagement Plan.  This monthly reporting commitment acknowledges the important engagement role local boards play within and on behalf of their local communities.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu / Analysis and advice

 

Local Board Transport Capital Fund (LBTCF) update

 

14.     The Manurewa Local Board’s transport capital fund is summarised in the table below.

Total Funds Available in current political term (includes 2019/2020 FY)

$4,010,293

Amount committed to date on projects approved for detailed design and/or construction

$1,972,267

Capped contribution amount for Te Mahia station upgrade project

$2,000,000

Remaining budget left available to allocate by the end of the current political term

$38,026

 

15.     The board’s current LBTCF projects are included in the table below (in which ROC = rough order of costs, and FEC = firm estimate of cost):

ID#

Project Description

Progress/Current Status

353

Hill Road pedestrian link:

A project to improve pedestrian links on Hill Road between Great South Road and the Botanic Gardens

·      FEC = $525,000

·      Spend to date = $431,522

·      Construction approved in November 2015 based on FEC of $575,000 (later reduced to $525,000).

·      Project completed on four of five sites, except the remaining site at the Hillcrest Grove intersection.

 

Project update:

·      Construction at the last site began in mid-October.

·      Defects/cracks that have appeared in the pram crossings on the initial four sites will be replaced at no cost to the board.

546

Te Mahia station upgrade:

A project to work in conjunction with AT to upgrade the station beyond the basic scope of works identified by AT

·      Capped allocation of $2M

·      Spend to date = $1,314,884

·      On 16 November 2017, the board considered and endorsed a package of works to be funded by the LBTCF, and approved a maximum allocation of $2 million.

·      On 19 April 2018, the board resolved to include mana whenua signage at the station within its package.

·      The site at 286 Great South Road (GSR) was purchased on 29 June 2018.

·      The Manurewa Town Centre (MTC) Steering Group is developing options for the site.

 

Project update:

·      The building on 286 GSR has been demolished.  Pool style fencing will be used to block the gaps created, and also replace the sheet iron fencing at the back of the site bordering the station access way to improve visibility and security.

·      An MTC decision is being sought on remediating the building foundation hole (see last photo in Attachment A) and widening the access way.

·      Board and staff reps met on site to discuss short term options until the site can be developed.  Suggestions preferred were a coffee cart, seating, shade, toilets, a wall mural and basketball hoop.

·      MTC reps will meet with AT staff to discuss how the station’s current and future requirements will impact on the site at 286 GSR to better understand what impacts/limitations those projects will have or impose on the board’s aspirations for the site.  A meeting has been scheduled for 12 November 2018.

598

Manurewa town centre clock upgrade and refurbishment

A project to upgrade and return the clock to good working order

·      FEC = $36,437

·      Spend to date = $315

·      On 19 Apr 2018, the board approved construction on a project to refurbish the Manurewa town centre clock and to upgrade with new clock case, dials, electrical and lighting, and replace glass viewing-panels at clock base.

·      The work is being undertaken by Precision watch and clock repair specialists and managed through the existing maintenance contract.

 

Project update:

·      The clock has been reinstalled and the works were connected to the dials on 25 October 2018.  However, it has not been keeping good time.

·      Precision Ltd has attended further and advised the problems being experienced are directly related to the clock being upsized.

·      To remedy, they have started by adding more weight to the lead weights.  If this does not address the issue they will work through other options until the problem is resolved.

611

Poppy Places of Remembrance project

·      FEC = $8,042

·      Final cost = $2,876

·      Installation was completed on 23 September 2018.

·      Final cost reported as $2,876 as Downer installed the signs for no cost.

622

Blanes-Reremanu walkway bollards

·      Approved budget $1,500

·      Installation completed on 21 September 2018.

·      Final costs to be reported.

639

‘Wordsworth quadrant’ Package 1

A project to reduce speed and improve pedestrian safety in a quadrant bounded by Browns, Roscommon, Weymouth and Russell Roads

·      ROC estimate of $219,328

·      On 18 October 2018, the board approved construction for ‘Package 1’ comprising four solar-powered driver feedback signs on Wordsworth Road and a raised speed table at the existing zebra crossing on Rowandale Avenue outside Rowandale School.

 

Project update:

·      Project set up complete and preliminary design underway.

640

‘Wordsworth quadrant’ Package 2

A project to reduce speed and improve pedestrian safety in the Wordsworth quadrant

·      ROC estimate of $647,294

·      On 18 October 2018, the board requested detailed design on ‘Package 2’ comprising five raised tables/pedestrian crossings at 157 Wordsworth Road and on all legs of the Wordsworth-Rowandale roundabout.

 

Project update:

·      Project set up complete and preliminary design underway.

641

‘Wordsworth quadrant’ Package 3

A project to reduce speed and improve pedestrian safety in the Wordsworth quadrant

·      ROC estimate of $500,000

·      On 18 October 2018, the board approved detailed design on ‘Package 3’ being a residential speed management project for the Wordsworth quadrant.

 

Project update:

·      Project set up complete and data collection and investigation for concept design is underway.

642

Exeloos photo film wrap

A project to enhance the appearance of two public facilities on AT-controlled land

·      FEC = $21,000

·      On 18 October 2018, the board authorised installation of two photo film wraps based on the quote of $10,500 each ($21,000 total) supplied by Exeloos.

·      AT staff admin costs may need to be added into the final cost.

 

Project update:

·      Selected photos and acknowledgments were supplied to Exeloos by the board, and final image proofs have been supplied and approved and passed to the printer.

·      At the board’s request, it is planned to focus on installing the wrap on the unit near the cenotaph first, prior to Armistice Day if at all possible.

643

Various bus shelters

(requests for ROCs do not incur any cost unless the board determines to proceed further)

·      On 18 October 2018, the board requested rough costs for the installation of bus shelters at the following bus stops:

a.   Stop 2125 – 123 Weymouth Road

b.   Stop 2276 – 2 Riverton Drive

c.   Stop 6796 – Wattle Farm Road (opp Ranger Place)

d.   Stop 2314 – 4 Turnberry Drive

e.   Stop 2273 – 59 Browns Road

f.    Stop 2178 – 96 Browns Road

g.   Stop 2171 – opposite 98 Browns Road

h.   Stop 6383 – 41 Redoubt Road

i.    Stop 2457 – 99 Shifnal Drive.

 

Project update:

·      ROCs will be provided by AT.

 

 

Local projects and activities

 

Te Mahia station upgrade

16.     Auckland Transport’s upgrade of Te Mahia station includes platform drainage improvements; a new station shelter; lighting, public announcement system, passenger information and CCTV improvements; and perimeter fencing and upgrades to the pedestrian level crossing.  The improvements will bring the station up to full Auckland Transport Code of Practice (ATCOP) standards.

17.     An extended shelter has been installed on the platform utilising funding allocated by the Manurewa Local Board.  The new shelter has been reviewed by Auckland Transport and some defects observed, including a leak.  The contractor is investigating and making repairs.

18.     New CCTV cameras and a public announcement system have been installed on the platform.

19.     A station information and name sign is still to be installed during November.

20.     Automatic pedestrian level crossing gates are due to be installed at the rail level crossing in March 2019.

21.     Attachment A includes progress photos taken of the platform at the beginning of November 2018.

 

Quarterly Report for July-September 2018

22.     Auckland Transport has also committed to providing more detailed information to local boards on its activities in both the local area and regionally every quarter, comprising:

·    Attachment B – report from Auckland Transport departments on their activities in the Manurewa Local Board area and regionally over the last quarter

·    Attachment C – report on Travelwise Schools activities in the Manurewa Local Board area over the last quarter.

 

Other transport news

 

New campaign to slow down

23.     On 26 October, Auckland Transport launched a campaign to get Aucklanders to slow down when driving.  The campaign features radio, cinema, social media, outdoor and bus ads, shows the scale of the devastation wrought on whānau, friends and communities across Auckland.

24.     Last year 64 people died on Auckland’s roads.  That number comprised 26 drivers, 17 passengers, nine pedestrians, two people on bikes and 10 motorcyclists.

25.     Since 2014, there has been a 78% increase in deaths and 68% increase in serious injuries on Auckland’s roads – three times that of any other region in New Zealand.

26.     Safety is the key focus for Auckland Transport and the Government, through the investment of $700 million over the next decade to make local roads safer and change the behaviour of Auckland drivers at high-risk locations across the transport network.

 

Building survival speeds

27.     Auckland Transport is currently consulting on a proposal to make the streets safer by installing speed calming measures in the Rosehill area in Papakura, bordered by Chichester Drive, Park Estate Road, Rosehill Drive and Great South Road.  The proposal includes installing a number of speed tables, speed humps and raised intersections.

28.     Auckland Transport wants to make residential streets safer for everyone, whether they walk, ride bikes or motorcycles, or drive.  If a person is hit by a vehicle travelling at 50 km/h, the risk of death is 80%, whereas if they are hit at 30 km/h, that risk reduces to 10%.

29.     The project is part of Auckland Transport’s commitment to reducing death and serious injuries on Auckland roads by 60% over the next 10 years.  The residential speed management programme is part of Auckland Transport’s $700 million investment in improving road safety and is part-funded by the Regional Fuel Tax.

30.     The proposed speed calming measures will also enable the speed limit in the project area to be reduced to 30 km/h or 40 km/h in the future as part of Auckland Transport’s speed management programme.

31.     Auckland Transport is also working with the Manurewa Local Board to develop a similar residential speed management project in Manurewa, in the ‘Wordsworth quadrant’ area bounded by Browns, Roscommon, Weymouth and Russell Roads (see project ID 641 in the Local Board Transport Capital Fund table earlier in this report).

Ngā whakaaweawe ā-rohe me ngā tirohanga a te poari ā-rohe / Local impacts and local board views

32.     Auckland Transport provides the Manurewa Local Board with the opportunity to comment on transport projects being delivered in the local board area.

33.     The local board’s views on any proposed schemes are taken into account during consultation on those proposals.

 

Auckland Transport consultations

34.     Consultation documents for the following proposals have been provided to the Manurewa Local Board for its feedback.  The proposals are summarised below, as is any feedback received, and any response to that feedback, if available at the time of writing.

35.     Proposed mobility parking spaces, 13 Maich Road carpark, Manurewa – at the request of the Manurewa Local Board, Auckland Transport is proposing to install four mobility parking spaces in the Northcrest carpark to supplement the mobility spaces in the area.  Proposed P180 time restrictions will ensure that there is turnover of the space and regular availability can be maintained.

 

Traffic Control Committee (TCC) report

36.     There were no resolutions passed by the TCC during the month of October 2018 affecting the Manurewa Local Board area.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori / Māori impact statement

37.     The proposed decision of receiving the report has no impacts or opportunities for Māori.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea / Financial implications

38.     The proposed decision of receiving the report has no financial implications.

Ngā raru tūpono / Risks

39.     No significant risks have been identified.

Ngā koringa ā-muri / Next steps

40.     Auckland Transport provides the Manurewa Local Board with the opportunity to comment on transport projects being delivered in the local board area.

41.     Auckland Transport will provide another update report to the board next month.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Te Mahia Station upgrade: progress photos taken on 2 November 2018

29

b

Auckland Transport activities in the Manurewa Local Board area and regionally for the July-September 2018 quarter

31

c

Travelwise Schools activities in the Manurewa Local Board area for the July-September 2018 quarter

43

     

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Author

Jenni Wild – Elected Member Relationship Manager (South); Auckland Transport

Authorisers

Jonathan Anyon – Manager Elected Member Relationship Unit, Auckland Transport

Manoj Ragupathy – Relationship Manager, Auckland Council

 


Manurewa Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 


 


Manurewa Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Manurewa Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 


 


 


Manurewa Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 

Trial of online voting at the 2019 local elections

 

File No.: CP2018/20550

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1.       To seek local board feedback on:

·        the trial of online voting at the 2019 local elections

·        the subset of voters to participate in the online voting trial.

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2.       The postal system is declining. The frequency of postal deliveries is decreasing and the cost of sending mail is surging. An alternative method to postal voting must be put in place to secure the future of local democracy over time. Online voting is the natural progression following the overall trend of transactions and activities moving online. It will increase convenience and accessibility for voters and has the potential to increase voter turnout.

3.       On 24 May 2018 the Governing Body gave its in-principle support for an online voting trial at the 2019 local body elections. Auckland Council has now entered into a collaborative agreement with eight other councils to work together towards the trial.

4.       The project comprises three phases. The first phase, from now to December 2018, involves  a procurement process aimed at selecting a preferred provider and all participating councils approving the trial based on a full business case.

5.       The security of the online voting solution is paramount. The participating councils are committed to offering a similar or higher level of security than postal voting. The solution will fulfil stringent security requirements and will be designed, implemented and tested with the assistance of external Information and Communications Technology (ICT) security experts.

6.       In the case of Auckland Council, only a subset of electors will be able to participate in the online voting trial. The other eight councils intend to offer online voting to all their voters. In all cases, voters will retain the ability to vote by post.

7.       The Local Electoral Matters Bill states that the specified class of electors can be defined according to one or a combination of geographical areas or another common factor, like overseas residence or disability.

8.       The size of the subset is still to be confirmed by the Minister of Local Government, but will likely include between 10 and 30 per cent of Auckland’s voting population.

9.       The subset needs to be representative of the overall voting population. Staff have conducted an analysis of the population across the 21 local board areas based on a range of criteria. The preliminary results are provided in Attachments A and B and show that no individual area is perfectly representative and that a combination of several areas will increase the representativeness of the sample of electors.

10.     Staff recommend also including in the subset voters that are most disproportionately impacted in their ability to participate with the sole postal method, i.e. the overseas and disabled voters.

11.     This paper seeks local board feedback on the participation of Auckland Council in the trial and on the subset of voters eligible to participate in the trial.


 

 

 

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Manurewa Local Board:

a)      provide feedback on:

i)        the trial of online voting at the 2019 elections

ii)       the subset of voters to participate in the trial.

 

 

Horopaki / Context

12.     For several years, Auckland Council has been supportive of trialling online voting for local body elections. At its December 2016 meeting, the Finance and Performance Committee resolved to ‘request the Minister of Local Government to explore a pilot trial of an electronic voting system including by-elections’ [resolution number FIN/2016/164].

13.     On 27 July 2017, the Governing Body approved the council’s submission on the previous parliament’s Justice and Electoral Select Committee inquiry into the 2016 local authority elections (which has not concluded yet). The submission advocated for councils to be able to trial online voting [resolution number GB/2017/83]. Local boards provided feedback and input into the submission, with several boards expressing support for online voting.

14.     At its 24 May 2018 meeting, the Governing Body agreed in principle to an online voting trial for the 2019 local body elections, subject to the following conditions:

·        the costs being acceptable

·        the legislation and regulations being in place on time

·        identified risks being manageable

·        the council giving its final approval to proceed.

15.     The Local Electoral Matters Bill, which amends the Electoral Act 1993 and the Local Electoral Act 2001 to enable the conduct of trials of new voting methods is still before Parliament. Councillor Richard Hills and staff made an oral presentation to the Justice Select Committee on Auckland Council’s submission on the bill on 29 August 2018. The select committee is due to report back on 9 November 2018.

16.     The enabling regulations are being drafted. The Department of Internal Affairs (DIA) released an exposure draft of the regulations on 19 October 2018, which was open for consultation until 2 November 2018. Two engagement events for community representatives and stakeholders have been organised in Wellington on 26 October 2018 and Auckland on 31 October 2018.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu / Analysis and advice

Why online voting?

Future-proofing local democracy

17.     The internet has become an integral part of everyday life. Many of the transactions that used to be carried out by post have long been replaced by online options, to the extent that people expect online facilities for their day-to-day activities. Online voting is therefore a natural progression and constitutes an opportunity to modernise the operation of local democracy in New Zealand.

18.     The current postal voting method relies entirely on New Zealand Post providing an effective and reliable service. It is a reality that the postal service is declining. Fewer New Zealanders choose to communicate via post, particularly first time and younger voters, many of whom have never posted a letter. The frequency of delivery is decreasing and the cost of sending mail is surging. The postal cost for the 2019 Auckland local elections will increase by an estimated 77 per cent compared with 2016, because of a postage price increase of almost 60 per cent and an increase in the number of electors of approximately 70,000.

19.     It will become increasingly difficult to deliver postal voting effectively and affordably. Therefore, it is crucial to have a viable alternative to postal voting in place, and online voting is the obvious choice.

Online voting has the potential to increase voter turnout

20.     Voter turnout has been dropping in both national and local elections in New Zealand. In the Auckland 2016 local elections, the voter turnout was 38.5 per cent. This means that almost two out of three eligible electors did not vote.

21.     Online voting has the potential to enhance participation in elections. Auckland Council conducted voter awareness research after the 2016 local elections[1]. The results strongly indicate that if online voting was available, electors would be more inclined to vote.

22.     When asked ‘If you had the choice of online voting or postal voting in the future, which would you prefer?’, 74 per cent of the respondents across all age groups in the 2016 survey said they would prefer online voting to postal voting. Focusing on the non-voter group alone, 82 per cent of respondents said they would prefer online voting to postal voting and 25 per cent said online or app-based voting would make them more likely to vote.

23.     The results reflect an appetite for online voting, particularly when faced with the inconvenience of postal voting. For instance 13 per cent of non-voters (4 per cent of all respondents) completed voting papers but did not post them. Factors such as not knowing where to find a post box, the additional effort of physically taking papers to a post box and the confusion caused by the postal deadline and the actual close of the voting period a few days later, created further barriers to voter participation. Removing these barriers alone would potentially have pushed the overall voter participation in Auckland’s 2016 local elections from 38.5 per cent to 42.5 per cent.

24.     International experience and research demonstrates the positive effect that online voting can have on voter turnout. Some non-voters and infrequent voters are drawn to internet voting in Canada and European countries such as Estonia and Switzerland. This means that some electors who have not voted previously voted for the first time, or on a more regular basis, because online voting was an option.

25.     In Estonian parliamentary elections, turnout has increased by 2.3 per cent since online voting was introduced in 2005. Post-election surveys in Estonia show a large proportion of people indicated they wouldn’t have voted if online voting wasn’t offered.

26.     At the municipal level in Canada, researchers examining online voting over time found that internet voting increased voter turnout by 3.5 per cent.

27.     The introduction of electronic voting for overseas military voters in various United States  jurisdictions has resulted in significant improvements in turnout. In Cook County, one of the largest electoral jurisdictions in the US, turnout increased from 11 per cent to 53 per cent after the introduction of internet voting in 2012.

Online voting improves accessibility

28.     Currently, a large part of the disability community requires support to complete and post voting papers. People with vision impairment, for example, cannot vote secretly and without the assistance of a support person. Online voting, coupled with screen-reading technology, would allow them to vote unaided.

29.     International postal timeframes can make it difficult for overseas voters to submit their votes in time. For them as well, online voting would make it easier to participate in the New Zealand local elections.

Online voting offers a better voting experience

30.     Online voting will make the voting process easier and faster, increase the speed and accuracy of results and reduce costs of local elections over time.

31.     Estonia, where online voting has been used in elections from 2005 and is now well established nationwide, has attempted to quantify the efficiency gain for using online voting as opposed to booth voting. It calculated that, in the Estonian parliamentary elections of 2011, the cumulative time savings in online voting were 11,000 working days, or €504,000 ($890,000) in average wages.[2]

32.     Online voting offers the potential to reduce voter errors. Technology can help prevent a voter from accidentally spoiling their ballot or submitting an incorrect or invalid vote.

33.     International experience suggests that a real tangible benefit of online voting is to substantially improve the voting experience of voters, making it more convenient to vote when, where and how they want.

34.     Online voting also offers potential for greater information and engagement. It provides end-to-end verifiability so that a voter is able to verify that their vote was received. These benefits will improve the experience of those who were already intending to vote and has the potential of addressing some of the barriers for non-voters.

Booth voting is not a viable option

35.     Booth voting is provided for in the Local Electoral Act 2001 and is authorised under regulations. However, reverting to booth voting on a single election day as an alternative or complementary option to postal voting is not a viable solution.

36.     Election day is increasingly losing its meaning for people as they want the convenience to vote when it suits them, as shown by the growth in advance voting in recent years’ general elections, with a significant 47 per cent of advance voting at the 2017 general election compared with 29 per cent in 2014 and 15 per cent in 2011.[3]

37.     A third argument against using booth voting for local elections is the complexity of the local election voting process. Compared with parliamentary elections, voting in local government elections takes more thought and more time, making booth voting impractical.

 

38.     In Auckland for instance, electors need to vote for the Mayor, one or two councillors for their ward, between five and eight local board members, as well as District Health Board (DHB) members and, in some cases, licensing trust members. Using an actual example from the 2016 local elections, a Waitākere Ward/Henderson-Massey Local Board elector had to make a choice between 74 candidates standing for 21 positions, as follows:

·        Mayor: 19 candidates for one position

·        Waitākere Ward: nine candidates for two positions

·        Henderson-Massey Local Board: 24 candidates for eight positions

·        Waitākere Licensing Trust (Ward 2): six candidates for three positions

·        Waitematā DHB: 16 candidates for seven positions.

Making the trial happen

39.     To organise the trial, Auckland Council is partnering with eight other councils. They are Gisborne District Council, Marlborough District Council, Matamata-Piako District Council, Palmerston North City Council, Selwyn District Council, Hamilton City Council, Tauranga City Council and Wellington City Council.

40.     The nine councils have obtained in-principle political and executive approval to trial online voting at the 2019 elections, have formally entered into a participation agreement and have formed an Online Voting Working Party.

41.     The working party is working closely with the DIA to ensure the necessary legislative and regulatory framework is in place on time to enable the proposed trial in 2019.

42.     The working party is following a three-phase approach to organise the trial, as detailed below.

Phase 1 – July to December 2018

43.     The working party is currently developing a business case, which will define the scope and costs of the proposed trial, and explain how any risks to the security and integrity of the solution will be managed. The business case will also outline how the nine councils will share the costs of the trial.

44.     As part of the business case development, the working party issued a request for a proposal to potential suppliers in September 2018. Responses are being evaluated by a panel of representatives from the working party and ICT experts. A preferred provider will be selected by mid-November 2018.

45.     Based on the business case, the governing bodies of the nine councils will be asked to confirm their participation in the trial in December 2018.

46.     In the case of Auckland Council, the business case and paper seeking the approval of the Governing Body will be presented at the 13 December 2018 meeting and will include feedback from local boards.

47.     During this phase, the participating councils are also engaging with the parties that will be involved in the trial, including regional councils, DHBs and licensing trusts. Auckland Council staff have started engaging with representatives from all Auckland DHBs and licensing trusts. Overall, their reaction to the trial has been positive but the additional costs will ultimately be a decisive factor in securing their support.

Phase 2 – January to ‘go/no-go’ date

48.     After the list of participating councils has been confirmed, the councils will enter into an agreement with the provider and start developing the online voting solution.

 

49.     The trial can only proceed if the regulatory framework is in place on time, otherwise there will be insufficient time to be ready by October 2019. The working party and the supplier will agree the date by which regulations need to be in place for the trial to proceed – the ‘go/no‑go’ date.

50.     If the decision is ‘no-go’, the working party will negotiate with the supplier how to proceed. Options will be to either continue to develop a system to use for any by-elections, or shelve the work for a future trial.

Phase 3 – ‘Go’ date to October 2019

51.     If regulations are in place on time, phase 3 will include:

·        development, testing and audit of the online voting solution

·        deployment of the solution for the elections

·        evaluation of the trial after the elections. 

How it will work in practice

52.     Full details of how the online solution will work and how it will integrate with the election providers’ systems to ensure the integrity of the whole election process is maintained will only be available once the tender process is completed and a vendor has been selected.

53.     The chart below provides an overview of the experience of an elector choosing to cast their vote online:


 

Security and integrity

54.     No information technology (IT) or voting system is 100 per cent secure, but the Online Voting Working Party is committed to developing an online voting solution that will guarantee a similar or higher level of security than currently offered by postal voting.

55.     The request for proposal to vendors includes stringent requirements to ensure that the integrity and security of the online voting solution will be maintained at all times.

56.     The solution will be independently audited by international IT security experts.

57.     The participating councils are assisted by the former Chief Information Officer for the New South Wales Electoral Commission, which has been using online voting in their state elections, as well as ICT security experts from the Government Chief Digital Office. The participating councils have also enlisted additional external ICT security resources to assist with the evaluation of the vendors’ proposals and, in a later stage, with the design, implementation and testing of the online voting solution.

Selecting a subset of electors eligible to vote online

Why a subset, and what subset

58.     Any new voting system must meet the test of being free, fair and regular, provide for universal, equal and secret suffrage, and be fully trusted by voters. It therefore needs to be robustly tested and trialled.

59.     A trial will also increase public awareness of online voting and enable users to become familiar with the new technology, thereby building trust and credibility in the system. Building trust and gaining support is one of the most critical parts of the process. Without trust, the system will be unusable, and the integrity of the whole electoral system could be called into question.

60.     The Government considers that trialling online voting for the whole Auckland electorate, equalling approximately a third of the New Zealand electorate, is too big a risk. Auckland Council will only be allowed to trial online voting with a subset of electors. Choosing a representative sample of eligible voters is therefore important to ensure that evaluation of the trial is robust.

61.     The other eight councils participating in the trial intend to offer online voting to all their voters. In all cases, voters will retain the ability to vote by post.

62.     The Local Electoral Matters Bill states that it is the regulations that will authorise the use of online voting by a specified class of elector for the trial. The bill defines a class of electors as:

·        an area or subdivision in which the specified class of electors is eligible to vote, or

·        any other characteristic that makes online voting suitable for the specified class of electors.

63.     The recommendation to the Governing Body will be to ask the Government that the subset of Auckland electors eligible to vote online be made of:

·        overseas voters

·        people with a disability

·        voters in specific local board areas.

Selection parameters for the subset

Size

64.     The first consideration for defining the subset is its size. The subset should be of reasonable size for implementation and risks to be manageable, but significant enough to enable testing, research and a robust evaluation.

65.     The initial thinking presented to the Governing Body was to include in the sample approximately 110,000 voters, or 10 per cent of the voting population. Estimating the potential uptake based on overseas experience with online voting, it is believed a maximum of 30 per cent of voters within the subset would actually use the solution and vote online. This means an online voting solution would be built for a potential 33,000 voters using the solution; only 3 per cent of the overall Auckland electorate.

66.     It is now being considered to increase the size of the subset to approximately 330,000 voters, or 30 per cent of the voting population. With the same estimated uptake of 30 per cent, approximately 99,000 voters would use the online voting solution; about 9 per cent of the overall Auckland electorate.

67.     Confirmation is pending from the DIA as to how large a subset the Minister of Local Government would allow Auckland Council to include in the trial.

68.     For comparison purposes, the other larger participating councils are the Wellington city and Hamilton city councils, with respectively an approximate 153,000 and 103,000 voters eligible to participate in the online voting trial.

Accessibility

69.     It is considered the trial should benefit those who are most disproportionately impacted in their ability to participate with the single postal method. Therefore, it is recommended having overseas and disabled voters as part of the subset. This group constitutes an estimated 30,000 voters.

70.     Because overseas and disabled voters will be enrolled across the Auckland region, they will potentially vote online for all the wards and local boards.

Representativeness

71.     The subset must be defined in such a way that it cannot call into question the neutrality and integrity of the electoral process or of the elections results.

72.     It needs to be representative of the Auckland voting population, based on a range of criteria that correlate with voter turnout. These include:

·        age

·        ethnicity

·        income

·        education level.

73.     Having a representative sample will also help conduct a more robust evaluation of the trial.

Other considerations

74.     The cost and ease of implementation of the solution must also be considered. The more voters take part in the trial, the higher the cost. Offering online voting as an option to a subset of electors will also require a targeted communication campaign. A complex subset will make communication and logistics costlier and has the potential to confuse voters. Therefore, it is preferable to avoid geographical areas where the boundaries between wards and local boards are no longer aligned, following the review of representation arrangements which is to be implemented for the 2019 local elections.

 

75.     It was considered whether internet accessibility needed to be a criterion. The most recent data available, which comes from the State of the Internet report released by Internet New Zealand in 2017, shows that 93 per cent of New Zealanders have access to the internet, either at home, work or both. Therefore, internet accessibility is unlikely to be an issue for Auckland, except for Great Barrier Island.

Selecting the geographic area(s)

76.     The council’s Research and Evaluation Unit (RIMU) has conducted in-depth statistical analysis of the population across Auckland’s 21 local boards. The analysis compares the population in each local board area against the overall Auckland population using age, ethnicity, income and qualification levels. The results of the analysis are included in Attachments A and B.

77.     The analysis considered the average voter turnout in each area compared to Auckland overall, but this added parameter did not impact the results, so it was removed from the graphs provided for simplicity purposes.

78.     The analysis shows that certain local board areas have a more diverse population make up than others, and that no single board is perfectly representative of the overall Auckland population. The subset will therefore need to be made up of a combination of local board areas, allowing larger discrepancies to cancel each other out and making the sample representative as a whole.

79.     The final combination will depend on the total number of voters allowed in the subset and will be finalised once DIA confirms that number.

80.     The final recommendation on the subset will be presented to the Governing Body at its 13 December 2018 meeting. As part of this paper, local board feedback is being sought on the possibility of this local board area being included in the final subset, to be reported to the Governing Body when they are considering the final recommendation.

Ngā whakaaweawe ā-rohe me ngā tirohanga a te poari ā-rohe / Local impacts and local board views

81.     Trialling online voting will impact elections in all local boards areas.

82.     Local board feedback will be reported to the Governing Body for consideration when making its final decision regarding the selection of the subset and the continued participation in the trial.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori / Māori impact statement

83.     Voting turnout has historically been lower among Māori than non-Māori. Māori who are younger and less well-off are the least likely to vote.

84.     Findings from a recent qualitative research project focusing on Pacific and Māori revealed that online voting was popular among a large majority of participants. Participants did not express concerns about online voting and some saw the solution as more secure than postal voting.

85.     A representative sample of the Auckland Māori population will be included in the subset to participate in the trial as Māori ethnicity is one of the criteria used to choose the geographic subset.

86.     At this stage, no formal engagement has been conducted with Māori groups and community.  Staff will engage with communities and stakeholders, including Māori, as part of the development of an online voting system should a trial be confirmed to proceed for the 2019 local elections.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea / Financial implications

87.     The full costs of implementing an online voting solution will be known after the tender process is completed and a vendor selected.

88.     The budget for the online voting trial is not included in the long-term plan and will require approval from the Governing Body, as the financial decisions relating to election costs is part of its responsibilities. A business case detailing the costs and benefits of participating in the trial will be presented to the Governing Body at its 13 December 2018 meeting.

Ngā raru tūpono / Risks

89.     Risks and mitigation measures are covered in the analysis section of this paper.

Ngā koringa ā-muri / Next steps

90.     Feedback from the local boards will be reported to the meeting of the Governing Body on 13 December 2018.

 

 

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Relative percentage differences to Auckland for selected Census 2013 variables: Local boards A-M

57

b

Relative percentage differences to Auckland for selected Census 2013 variables: Local boards O-W

59

     

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Author

Elodie Fontaine - Advisor - Democracy Services

Authorisers

Marguerite Delbet - General Manager Democracy Services

Manoj Ragupathy - Relationship Manager Manurewa and Papakura

 


Manurewa Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 

PDF Creator


Manurewa Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 

PDF Creator


Manurewa Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 

Local government elections 2019 – order of names on voting documents

 

File No.: CP2018/20975

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1.       To provide feedback to the Governing Body on how names should be arranged on the voting documents for the Auckland Council 2019 elections.

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2.       The Local Electoral Regulations 2001 provide a local authority the opportunity to decide by resolution whether the names on voting documents are arranged in:

·        alphabetical order of surname

·        pseudo-random order, or

·        random order.

3.       Pseudo-random order means names are listed in a random order and the same random order is used on every voting document.

4.       Random order means names are listed in a random order and a different random order is used on every voting document.

5.       The order of names has been alphabetical for the 2010, 2013 and 2016 Auckland Council elections. An analysis conducted on these election results shows there is no compelling evidence that candidates being listed first were more likely to be elected. The analysis is contained in Attachment A.

6.       Staff recommend that the current approach of alphabetical printing is retained for the 2019 council elections, as the benefits to the voter outweigh any perception of a name order bias.

 

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Manurewa Local Board:

a)      recommend to the Governing Body that candidate names on voting documents should be arranged in alphabetical order of surname.

 

Horopaki / ContextOptions available

7.       Clause 31 of The Local Electoral Regulations 2001 states:

(1)       The names under which each candidate is seeking election may be arranged on the voting document in alphabetical order of surname, pseudo-random order, or random order.

(2)       Before the electoral officer gives further public notice under section 65(1) of the Act, a local authority may determine, by a resolution, which order, as set out in subclause (1), the candidates' names are to be arranged on the voting document.

(3)       If there is no applicable resolution, the candidates' names must be arranged in alphabetical order of surname.

(4)       If a local authority has determined that pseudo-random order is to be used, the electoral officer must state, in the notice given under section 65(1) of the Act, the date, time, and place at which the order of the candidates' names will be arranged and any person is entitled to attend.

(5)       In this regulation,—

pseudo-random order means an arrangement where—

(a) the order of the names of the candidates is determined randomly; and

(b) all voting documents use that order

random order means an arrangement where the order of the names of the candidates is determined randomly or nearly randomly for each voting document by, for example, the process used to print each voting document.

Previous elections

8.       In 2013, the council resolved to use alphabetical order of names. A key consideration was an additional cost of $100,000 if the council chose the random order.

9.       In 2016, there was only a minimal additional cost to use random order due to changes in printing technology. An analysis of the 2013 election results was conducted to assess whether there were any effects due to being listed first. The analysis showed there was no compelling evidence of bias towards those listed first. Most local board feedback was to continue listing candidates alphabetically and the Governing Body resolved to use alphabetical order.

10.     All district health boards in the Auckland Council area decided to use random order of names. In the voting pack that Auckland electors received, voting documents for Auckland Council elections were alphabetical and voting documents for district health board elections were random.

11.     The following table shows the order decided by city and regional councils for the 2016 elections:

Auckland Council

Alphabetical

Hawke's Bay Regional Council

Alphabetical

Invercargill City Council

Alphabetical

Manawatu-Wanganui Regional Council

Alphabetical

Northland Regional Council

Alphabetical

Southland Regional Council

Alphabetical

Taranaki Regional Council

Alphabetical

Upper Hutt City Council

Alphabetical

West Coast Regional Council

Alphabetical

Bay of Plenty Regional Council

Random

Christchurch City Council

Random

Dunedin City Council

Random

Canterbury Regional Council

Random

Hamilton City Council

Random

Hutt City Council

Random

Napier City Council

Random

Nelson City Council

Random

Otago Regional Council

Random

Palmerston North City Council

Random

Porirua City Council

Random

Tauranga City Council

Random

Waikato Regional Council

Random

Wellington City Council

Random

Wellington Regional Council

Random

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu / Analysis and advice

Options for 2019

Pseudo-random order and random order

12.     Random order printing removes the perception of name order bias, but the pseudo-random order of names simply substitutes a different order for an alphabetical order. Any perceived first-name bias will transfer to the name at the top of the pseudo-random list. The only effective alternative to alphabetical order is random order.

13.     A disadvantage to both the random printing options is voter confusion as it is not possible for the supporting documents such as the directory of candidate profile statements to follow the order of a random voting paper. Making voting more difficult carries the risk of deterring the voter from taking part.

Alphabetical order

14.     The advantage of the alphabetical order printing is that it is familiar, easier to use and to understand. When there is a large number of candidates competing for a position, it is easier for a voter to find the candidate the voter wishes to support if names are listed alphabetically.

15.     It is also easier for a voter if the order of names on the voting documents follows the order of names in the directory of candidate profile statements accompanying the voting document. The directory is listed in alphabetical order. It is not possible to print it in such a way that each copy aligns with the random order of names on the accompanying voting documents.

16.     The disadvantage of alphabetical printing is that there is some documented evidence, mainly from overseas, of voter bias to those at the top of a voting list.

Analysis of previous election results

17.     An analysis of the council’s election results for 2010, 2013 and 2016 is contained in Attachment A. It shows that any bias to those at the top of the voting lists is very small. The analysis looked at:

·        impact on vote share (did the candidate at the top of the list receive more votes than might be expected?)

·        impact on election outcome (did being at the top of list result in the candidate being elected more often than might be expected?).

18.     The analysis shows that for local boards, being listed first increased a candidate’s vote share by approximately 1 percentage point above that which would be expected statistically if voting was random. There was no detectable impact of being listed first on the share of votes received in ward elections.

19.     There is no compelling evidence that candidates being listed first were more likely to be elected in the last three elections.

20.     Staff recommend that the current approach of alphabetical printing is retained for the 2019 council elections, as the noted benefits to the voter outweigh any perception of a name order bias problem that analysis of previous election results show does not exist. 

Online voting

21.     Auckland Council intends to offer online voting to specified classes of electors for the 2019 elections. An online voting solution has the potential to improve the voting experience, even if names are ordered randomly.

22.     Online voting should present the same voting document to users as the paper equivalent. If names are in random order on the voting document, then the same random order will need to be presented to the online user. This could increase the complexity of the voting solution.

23.     On balance, staff consider that alphabetical order of names is preferable for an online voting trial.

Ngā whakaaweawe ā-rohe me ngā tirohanga a te poari ā-rohe / Local impacts and local board views

24.     Feedback from local boards will be reported to the Governing Body when the Governing Body is asked to determine the matter by resolution.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori / Māori impact statement

25.     The order of names on voting documents does not specifically impact on the Māori community. It is noted that candidates can provide their profile statements both in English and Māori.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea / Financial implications

26.     There are no financial implications associated with the options for order of names.

Ngā raru tūpono / Risks

27.     If names are ordered alphabetically, there is the risk of perceived bias. If names are randomised, there is the risk of increasing the complexity of the voting experience and deterring voters. The analysis that has been conducted shows that the risk of bias is very small.

Ngā koringa ā-muri / Next steps

28.     The feedback from the local board will be reported to the Governing Body.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Order of names on voting documents

65

     

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Author

Warwick McNaughton - Principal Advisor - Democracy Services

Authorisers

Marguerite Delbet - General Manager Democracy Services

Manoj Ragupathy - Relationship Manager Manurewa and Papakura

 


Manurewa Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Manurewa Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 

New community lease to Manukau Beautification Charitable Trust at Holmes Road Ground, 38 Holmes Road, Manurewa

 

File No.: CP2018/20427

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1.         To seek approval to grant a new community lease to Manukau Beautification Charitable Trust at Holmes Road Ground, 38 Holmes Road, Manurewa.

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2.         Manukau Beatification Charitable Trust held a community lease with Auckland Council commencing 20 August 2007 for a term of three years to 19 August 2010. The lease contained two three year right of renewals with final expiry on 19 August 2016. The lease is currently rolling over on a month-by-month occupancy.

3.         The council owns the building and improvements on the site. At the expiry of a lease for a council owned building it is good practice to review alternatives for the use of the premises. An expression of interest process can be undertaken to gauge interest and alternative use. If the incumbent group is required in the area and is performing well, the Manurewa Local Board has the authority to grant a new community lease to the group without undergoing an expression of interest process.

4.         On 16 April 2016, Manukau Beautification Charitable Trust indicated to council that it wishes to continue its use of the building.

5.         Engagement with iwi identified as having an interest in the site has been undertaken. Their views support the granting of a new community lease to Manukau Beautification Charitable Trust.

6.         Under the Local Government Act 2002, Auckland Council must publicly notify its intention to grant a new community lease. This cost will be borne by Auckland Council Community Facilities department.

7.         This report recommends the Manurewa Local Board grant a new community lease to Manukau Beautification Charitable Trust for a term of five years with one five year right of renewal in accordance with the terms and conditions of the Community Occupancy Guidelines 2012 and the Local Government Act 2002.

 

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Manurewa Local Board:

a)      approve public notification of Auckland Council’s intention to grant a new community lease to Manukau Beautification Charitable Trust for the building at Holmes Road Ground, 38 Holmes Road, Manurewa.

b)      delegate to the Manurewa Local Board Chair the authority to appoint a hearings panel to consider any submissions or objections received and for the panel to reach a decision.

c)      approve, subject to any objections to the lease being resolved, a new community lease to Manukau Beautification Charitable Trust for the building at Holmes Road Ground, 38 Holmes Road, Manurewa as shown in Attachment A subject to the following terms and conditions:

i)        term - five years from 20 December 2018 with one five-year right of renewal effecting final expiry on 19 December 2028

ii)       rent - one dollar ($1.00) plus GST per annum if demanded

iii)      rent review - on the renewal date of 20 December 2023

iv)      permitted use - for those purposes reasonably necessary in order to achieve a graffiti reduction programme and associated services, and to manage the city’s beautification projects and initiatives

v)      maintenance fee - one thousand dollars ($1,000.00) plus GST per annum

vi)      the approved Manukau Beautification Charitable Trust Community Outcomes Plan (Attachment B) be attached as a schedule to the lease document

d)      all other terms and conditions to be in accordance with the Community Occupancy Guidelines 2012 and the Local Government Act 2002.

 

 

Horopaki / Context

The Land and Building

8.         The parcel of land at 38 Holmes Road, Manurewa is legally described as Lot 31 Deposited Plan 317391. The land is held in fee simple by Auckland Council and subject to the Local Government Act 2002.

9.         The building known as the Holmes Ground Depot is owned by Auckland Council. The Trust will be responsible for the interior maintenance of the leased area, however, the exterior, common areas and structural maintenance will be undertaken by council.

Manukau Beautification Charitable Trust

10.      Manukau Beautification Charitable Trust registered as an incorporated society on 31 December 2001. The vision of the Trust is “together, with our community, beautifying and enriching our living environment”. The Trust promotes, supports and undertakes programmes, actions and initiatives to beautify Auckland.

11.      In 2001, the former Manukau City Council established Manukau Beautification Charitable Trust and charged it with dealing with the graffiti in the region. The Trust is a former council-controlled organisation.

12.      The Trust’s proven record of efficient and effective graffiti removal has resulted in an expansion of territory under Auckland Council's management. The Trust is contracted by council to remove graffiti in the city's six southern local board areas.

13.      The Trust’s main activities include:

removal of graffiti to the six southern local board areas

environmental education to children and coordinating community events

town centre clean up

facilitating community murals, art works and sculptures

rail corridor clean up contracted to KiwiRail

landscape maintenance.

14.      The Trust also runs a workshop called “Boomer Business” for retirees to socialise and carry out community projects. Current programmes include wood and metal workshops, sewing classes, quilting, crochet, knitting, computer classes, cooking, art and making raised vegetable garden beds. Additionally, an early onset dementia group supports community projects such as painting.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu / Analysis and advice

Assessment of application

15.      The Trust’s application was assessed against the criteria contained in the Community Occupancy Guidelines 2012 and the priorities set by the Manurewa Local Board Plan 2017.

16.      When a lease expires for a council owned building an expression of interest process can be undertaken to gauge interest and best use. If the existing group is required in the area and continues to provide services to the community, the Manurewa Local Board has the authority to forego the expression of interest process and grant a new community lease.

17.      Manukau Beautification Charitable Trust is financially viable and audited accounts show proper accounting records have been kept.

18.      The Trust indicated the premises is occupied 24 hours a day, seven days a week and the office is open to visit by appointment Monday to Friday from 7:30am to 4:30pm.

Community Lease

19.      This report recommends that a lease be granted to the Manukau Beautification Charitable Trust following assessment against the criteria contained in the Community Occupancy Guidelines 2012. Staff recommend a term of five years with one five-year right of renewal in accordance with the guidelines.

20.      A community outcomes plan has been negotiated with the Trust that identifies the benefits the trust will provide to the community. This will be attached as a schedule to the lease document.

Ngā whakaaweawe ā-rohe me ngā tirohanga a te poari ā-rohe /
Local impacts and local board views

21.      The assessment of the application was provided to the Manurewa Local Board at its workshop on 16 March 2018. The local board gave informal support for the proposed new community lease to the Trust for a term of five years with one five year right of renewal without the need to seek expressions of interest.

22.      The recommendations in this report fall within local board’s allocated authority to grant leases within local community facilities in line with the Community Occupancy Guidelines 2012.

23.      The recommendations support the Manurewa Local Board Plan 2017 outcome five: Our community spaces are part of a first-class network. They are popular gathering places used for a variety of activities led by diverse local communities with many interests. They offer choices for people from different cultures and life-stages to take part in local life. It also aligns with the Manurewa Local Board Plan 2017 outcome one: Our communities work together to create spaces and places that meet the diverse aspirations of our community, support participation in activities, and make new connections.

24.      The proposed lease will benefit the local community in driving initiatives promoting graffiti eradication, environmental education to children, coordinating community events such as rubbish removal and landscape maintenance.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori / Māori impact statement

25.      Auckland Council is committed to meeting its responsibilities under Te Tiriti o Waitangi and its broader legal obligations to Māori. Support for Māori initiatives and outcomes are detailed in Whiria Te Muka Tangata, Auckland Council’s Māori Responsiveness Framework.

26.      The services that are offered by Manukau Beautification Charitable Trust provide benefit to the local community, including Māori living in the Manurewa Local Board area.

27.      Staff presented the proposed lease at the regional Mana Whenua forum on 27 June 2018. Iwi did not raise any concerns at the forum. Staff also emailed iwi representatives and received a response from Ngāi Tai Ki Tāmaki who have no interest in this application.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea / Financial implications

28.      All costs involved in the preparation of lease documents are borne by Auckland Council.

Ngā raru tūpono / Risks

29.      Should the Manurewa Local Board not grant a new community lease to the Trust, it will inhibit the Trust’s ability to:

apply for funding

develop programmes

continue to deliver its services to the community.

Ngā koringa ā-muri / Next steps

30.      Subject to the local board’s approval, public notification will follow allowing one month for the public to make submissions. Provided that no submissions or objections are received, staff will work with the Trust to finalise the lease documentation.

31.      Should any submissions or objections be received, the Manurewa Local Board Chair is to appoint a hearings panel and for the panel to reach a decision.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Site plan

75

b

Community Outcomes Plan

77

     

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Author

Tai Stirling - Community Lease Advisor

Authorisers

Rod Sheridan - General Manager Community Facilities

Manoj Ragupathy - Relationship Manager Manurewa and Papakura

 


Manurewa Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 


Manurewa Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 


 


Manurewa Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 

Auckland Council’s Quarterly Performance Report: Manurewa Local Board for quarter one, 1 July – 30 September 2018

 

File No.: CP2018/20868

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1.       To provide the Manurewa Local Board with an integrated quarterly performance report for quarter one, 1 July – 30 September 2018.

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2.       This report includes financial performance, progress against work programmes provided in Attachment A, key challenges the board should be aware of and any risks to delivery against the 2018/2019 work programme.

3.       The work programme is produced annually and aligns with the Manurewa Local Board Plan outcomes.

4.       The key progress activity updates from this quarter are:

·    the Rangatahi Youth Scholarships and Lifelong Learning Fund

·    various renewals transitioning towards delivery

·    the introduction of over 4200 new trees and plants by volunteers

·    initiatives responding to waste minimisation and illegal dumping

·    work underway in both Clendon and Manurewa town centres

·    a positive trend in participation and facility usage at local community facilities.

5.       All operating departments with agreed work programmes have provided a quarterly update against their work programme delivery. Most activities are reported with a status of green (on track), amber (some risk or issues, which are being managed) or grey (cancelled, deferred or merged). There are no activities with a red status this quarter.

6.       The financial performance report compared to budget 2018/2019 can be found as Attachment B. There are some points for the local board to note.

·    Financial operating performance for Manurewa local board area is 4% unfavourable year to date.

·    Operating expenditure is only 0.6% over budget, with the RIMA facilities contract slightly over budget following winter storms and ACE and Leisure operations underspent.

·    Operating revenue is overall 12% behind budget, with Nathan Homestead programmes exceeding budget, and ECE, aquatics and leisure centres all under budget.  Capital spend is behind budget, with delivery mainly being the continuation of work in progress. Capital deferrals from Y18 will be added into the budget refresh during October.

 

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Manurewa Local Board:

a)      receive the performance report for the financial quarter ending 30 September 2018.

 

 

 

 

 

Horopaki / Context

7.       The Manurewa Local Board has an approved 2018/2019 work programme for the following operating departments:

·    Arts, Community and Events; approved on 21 June 2018

·    Parks, Sport and Recreation; approved on 21 June 2018

·    Libraries and Information; approved on 21 June 2018

·    Community Facilities: Build Maintain Renew; approved on 16 August 2018

·    Community Leases; approved on 19 July 2018

·    Infrastructure and Environmental Services; approved on 21 June 2018

·    Local Economic Development; approved on 21 June 2018

·    Plans and Places; approved on 19 July 2018.

8.       Work programmes are produced annually, to meet the Manurewa Local Board outcomes identified in the three-year Manurewa Local Board Plan. The local board plan outcomes are:

·    People in Manurewa are actively connecting everywhere, every day

·    A prosperous local economy supporting local people

·    Manurewa is well-connected and easy to move around

·    Our environment is a source of pride and enjoyment for the community

·    Manurewa is our home, our community.

9.       The graph below shows how the work programme activities meet Local Board Plan outcomes. Activities that are not part of the approved work programme but contribute towards the local board outcomes, such as advocacy by the local board, are not captured in this graph.

 

Graph 1: work programme activities by outcome

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu / Analysis and advice

Local Board Work Programme Snapshot

10.     The work programme activities have two statuses; RAG status which measures the performance of the activity (amber and red show issues and risks); and activity status which shows the stage of the activity. These two statuses create a snapshot of the progress of the work programmes.

11.     The graph below identifies work programme activity by RAG status (red, amber, green and grey). It shows the percentage of work programme activities that are on track (green), in progress but with issues that are being managed (amber), and activities that have significant issues (red) and activities that have been cancelled, deferred or merged (grey).

Graph 2: Work Programme by RAG status

12.     The graph below identifies work programme activity by activity status and department. The number of activity lines differ by department as approved in the local board work programmes. 

Graph 3: Work programme activity by activity status and department

 

Capital expenditure carry forwards

13.     The Community Facilities capital expenditure carry forwards were approved by the Finance and Performance Committee on 17 October 2018. A list of the carry forwards has been provided as Attachment C. However as this was after the end of quarter one, commentary was not able to be provided. Commentary on these will be included in the quarter two update.

Key activity updates from quarter one

14.     The following are key activity updates from quarter one. These are aligned to outcomes in the Manurewa Local Board Plan.

People in Manurewa are actively connecting everywhere, every day

·    During this quarter, Nathan Homestead received a total of 14,033 visitors, delivered 43 programmes with 400 participants, and delivered 2 performances that that were attended by 125 people. Highlights included the Winter Warmer Jazz that included a live performance from the Maria O'Flaherty and Ben Fernandez Quartet.

·    Basketball programming Manurewa Leisure Centre has grown to include the delivery of coaching lessons at the Wiri Central School, to 192 students. At the South Side Slam Junior Basketball competition Manurewa was represented by 10 junior basketball teams. All other programmes are on track with facility hireage up by 15% for the quarter. Customer feedback (measured by Net Promoter Score survey) remains high at 100% with no detractor comments.

·    Staff completed a service review of Wiri local park and playspace provision and the findings workshopped in September. Priority outcomes identified at the workshop will assist Panuku with their development of a new playspace in the Wiri Stream Reserve.

·    Detailed design is currently in progress for the comprehensive renewal at the Te Matariki Clendon Community Centre. These will include an exterior building refurbishment, fenced carpark for centre/staff vehicles, outdoor seating replacement, reception/office refit, roof replacement and cladding refixing, stadium court divider installation, stadium repaint, storeroom extension, upgrade security system, Whare Kai floor replacement, Youth Zone shade sail installation and kitchen upgrade.

·    The detailed design for renewals at Totara Park is near completion with the next step to commence the tender documentation. Works include renewing the base course, boardwalk, carpark, fences, gate, paths, retaining wall, rubbish bins, seats, signs, steps and toilet block.

A prosperous local economy supporting local people

·    The Manurewa Rangatahi Youth Scholarships 2018/2019 opened in quarter one and will close on 2 November 2018. Staff will provide ongoing workshops and support to applicants on request. In quarter two, a panel will meet to review the applications.

·    Staff completed a funding agreement for the Manurewa Business Association with placemaking included as a key deliverable for the association. Negotiations on a funding agreement for Clendon Business Association have progressed. An interim funding and support package for Clendon Pride has been finalised.

·    The focus of activities for the Manurewa Town Centre Steering Group include progress with Te Mahia Station and supporting Clendon town centre in addition to Manurewa town centre. Budget for the year will potentially be focused on providing support to Clendon and the creative Manurewa initiative.

·    The Clendon Community Centre Reserve skate park concept design was presented and approved, with next step as tendering for the design and build of the skatepark.

 

Our environment is a source of pride and enjoyment for the community

·    Te Awa Ora Trust has been contracted to carryout door knocking in all hot spot areas in Manurewa to provide waste education and assistance with booking into the inorganic collection. The Manukau Beautification Charitable Trust has been engaged to work with Clendon Pride, Manurewa Marae, Talking Trash and Housing New Zealand Corporation to support Clendon residents to minimise their waste, reduce illegal dumping and build local pride.

·    Three thousand plants were introduced around the Puhinui Stream. A community planting day in September (during Conservation Week) included an educational session on inanga conservation. A rabbit control operation is currently underway to protect the new plantings. The next stage of the project will involve setting up a bait station network to protect the inanga spawning area from rats and mice.

·    The ecological volunteers and environmental programme saw 488 volunteer hours recorded for quarter one, with 700 plants planted. In addition, a school planting at Orford Reserve was held with Hillpark school on 7 September 2018 with a further 500 plants introduced. 

Manurewa is our home, our community

·    Staff reviewed the 2017/2018 financial year Lifelong Learning grant round process and criteria. The Life Long Learning Fund for the 2018/2019 financial year opens on 1 October 2018 to coincide with International Day of Older Persons 2018.

·    Uike Katoanga’i ‘o e Lea Faka-Tonga: Tongan Language Week and Te Epetoma o te Reo Māori Kūki ‘Airani: Auckland Libraries Cook Islands Language Week were celebrated and run in conjunction with local Early Childhood Centres who provided entertainment in songs and dances and also supplied refreshments for audiences. Staff from Clendon shared their Cook Island language and music skills for Wriggle and Rhyme attendees at Manurewa.

·    Staff completed a service review of Keith Park and the findings workshopped in September. Planning is underway for engagement with the community on the impending playground renewal, toilet block renewal and additional park developments.

Activities with significant issues

15.     There are no activities with significant issues.

Activities on hold

16.     The following work programme activities have been identified by operating departments as on hold:

·    David Nathan Park - renew park assets: Project on hold as consideration of the reserve management plan and conservation plan is required which may potentially change original scoping.

·    Manurewa Association Football Club building - renew building exterior and roof: Project on hold as awaiting further instructions regarding local board advocacy.

·    Manurewa Community Centre development: Project is currently in strategic assessment phase awaiting the strategic report due April 2019. Once report has been issued, progress project to planning and scoping.

·    War Memorial Park, 16R Gibbs Road, Manurewa: Lease to Manurewa Association Football Club Incorporated: The Community and Social Policy team are developing a business plan for the local board’s consideration with regards to the War Memorial Park redevelopment, which includes the clubroom building. This lease project is on hold until quarter four.

Changes to the local board work programme

Deferred activities

16.     These activities are deferred from the 18/19 work programme:

·    Community Volunteer Awards – Manurewa: the event is not scheduled for delivery in the 2018/2019 financial year.

Cancelled activities

17.     There are no activities that have been cancelled.

 

Activities merged with other activities for delivery

18.     There are no activities that have been merged with other activities for efficient delivery.

Ngā whakaaweawe ā-rohe me ngā tirohanga a te poari ā-rohe /
Local impacts and local board views

19.     This report informs the Manurewa Local Board of the performance for the quarter ending 30 September 2018.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori / Māori impact statement

20.     Staff supported the tikanga for the July 2018 mana whenua – local board hui at Manukau Institute of Technology marae. This was an action from the Improving Māori Input into Local Board Decision Making project. The purpose of the hui was for local boards to increase their knowledge and understanding of mana whenua aspirations.

21.     A funding agreement will be completed in the second quarter for Otara Health Charitable Trust to continue their administration of the Maori Input into Local Board Decision Making project on behalf of the Manurewa, Otara-Papatoetoe, Mangere-Otahuhu, and Papakura Local Boards.

22.     At the 19 July 2018 business meeting the board approved 130 local parks to invite mana whenua to provide a Māori name and narrative for dual naming. Mana whenua representatives Josy Peita-Ngāti Te Ata; Kathleen Wilson-Te Ākitai Waiōhua and Martin Te Moni -Ngāti Whanaunga spoke to the local board in support for the business report. Mana whenua will progress their process to identify Māori names for the approved local parks.

23.     Staff supported Manurewa Marae with the planning of their successful Building Partnerships hui. The purpose of the hui was for the marae to present their strategic plan to a range of stakeholders and invite partnerships on mutual outcomes.

24.     As part of Celebrating Te Ao Māori and strengthening responsiveness to Māori, Libraries staff celebrated Māori Language Week and Matariki by integrating Māori tikanga into all regular library activities and events. Oscar Kids played games introducing Māori vocabulary, Wriggle and Rhyme attendees sang songs and rhymes in te reo, Tutubugs After School Club made poi and takakau (Maori bread) and kaimoana hot-pot, and the colouring group worked on Māori patterns and designs.

25.     The job coaching project delivered by The Southern Initiative has continued to support young people in the area. Of the 58 young people coached and being supported into employment from across South Auckland, 38 live and reside in Manurewa. Young people were referred by whanau/aiga, word of mouth, tertiary education providers enrolment data for Māori and Pacific Trades Training and through established local networks. Of the 38 young people, 16 were supported into employment and/or tertiary education and continue to be supported.

Financial Performance

26.     Operating expenditure in Asset Based Services (ABS) expenditure is $45k below budget. ACE and Leisure services are underspent $106k, grants are $50k behind budget, and facility contracts are $111k (10%) over budget mostly in response repairs following some winter storm damage. Operating expenditure in Locally Driven Initiatives (LDI Opex) is $56k underspent in environmental and ATEED, while community services are ahead of budget by $81k. 

27.     Operating Revenue was behind budget by $118k. Nathan Homestead revenue has exceeded budget by $29k, mostly for OSCAR approved and WINZ supported school holiday programmes. In Leisure services, revenues behind budget are ECE by $40k overall, aquatics by $24k, mainly in hireage, and fitness and recreation by $80k, mainly in entrance fees.

28.     Capital spend is behind budget, with delivery mainly being the continuation of work in progress.  Capital expenditure revised budget does not yet include any deferrals of last year’s capital works in progress. These figures which will be refreshed for the next quarter results.

29.     Locally Driven Initiative (LDI) Capex unallocated budget balance at 30 September for the years 2019-2021 is $2.1 million.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea / Financial implications

30.     This report is for information only and therefore there are no financial implications associated with this report.

Ngā raru tūpono / Risks

31.     While the risk of non-delivery of the entire work programme is rare, the likelihood for risk relating to individual activities does vary. Capital projects for instance, are susceptible to more risk as on-time and on-budget delivery is dependent on weather conditions, approvals (e.g. building consents) and is susceptible to market conditions.

32.     Information about any significant risks and how they are being managed and/or mitigated is addressed in the ‘Activities with significant issues’ section.

Ngā koringa ā-muri / Next steps

33.     The local board will receive the next performance update following the end of quarter two, December 2018.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Manurewa Q1_Attachment A WP Update

87

b

Manurewa Q1_Attachment B Financial Report

105

c

Manurewa Q1_Attachment C Capex carry forwards

113

     

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Author

Sarah McGhee - Senior Local Board Advisor

Authoriser

Manoj Ragupathy - Relationship Manager Manurewa and Papakura

 



Manurewa Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 


Manurewa Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 


Manurewa Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 


Manurewa Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 


Manurewa Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 


Manurewa Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 


Manurewa Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 


Manurewa Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 


Manurewa Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 


Manurewa Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 


Manurewa Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 


Manurewa Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 


Manurewa Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 


Manurewa Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 


Manurewa Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 


Manurewa Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 


Manurewa Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 


Manurewa Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 


Manurewa Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Manurewa Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 


Manurewa Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 

Auckland Regional Pest Management Plan consultation feedback and recommended changes

 

File No.: CP2018/20958

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1.       To receive a summary of consultation feedback from local board residents on the Proposed Regional Pest Management Plan, and to provide feedback on recommended changes to the document.

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2.       Auckland Council is currently developing a new Regional Pest Management Plan. This plan is prepared under the Biosecurity Act 1993, and describes the pest plants, animals and pathogens that will be managed in Auckland. It provides a framework to minimise the spread and impact of those pests and manage them through a regional approach. Once operative, the Regional Pest Management Plan will provide a regulatory framework to support the council’s biosecurity activities, including those funded through the natural environment targeted rate.

3.       The Proposed Regional Pest Management plan was approved for public consultation by the Environment and Community Committee in November 2017 (resolution numbers ENV/2017/161 to ENV/2017/167) and consulted on in February and March 2018 alongside the Long-term Plan 2018-2028.

4.       A workshop was held with the board on 27 September 2018 to discuss the consultation feedback and proposed staff responses.

5.       Manurewa Local Board residents provided 18 submissions on the plan, representing one percent of overall submissions. The views of local board residents were similar to regional views, with high levels of support across all topics excluding the addition of cats as a pest. The extent of cat control resulting from the plan is likely to be less extensive than the concerns noted in many submissions. Staff are exploring options to mitigate submitter concerns in the wording of the final plan.

6.       This report requests the board’s formal feedback on recommended changes to the Proposed Regional Pest Management Plan arising from key submission themes. Submission themes and corresponding changes are summarised in Attachment A.

 

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Manurewa Local Board:

a)      receive a summary of consultation feedback from Manurewa residents on the Proposed Auckland Regional Pest Management Plan

b)      provide feedback on the recommended changes to the Proposed Regional Pest Management Plan based on consultation feedback.

 

Horopaki / Context

7.       Auckland Council is currently reviewing its 2007 Regional Pest Management Strategy. The new Regional Pest Management Plan will prescribe council’s approach to pest management to reflect best practice and changes to various pest plants and animals in the Auckland region. The review is also in direct response to, and compliant with, the National Policy Direction for Pest Management 2015.

8.       The review of the Regional Pest Management Plan began with an issues and options paper discussed with elected members, followed by a public discussion document which was used as a basis for engagement with mana whenua, stakeholders and elected members.

9.       At its November 2017 meeting, the Environment and Community Committee approved the proposed Regional Pest Management Plan for public consultation alongside the Long-term Plan 2018-2028 (resolution numbers ENV/2017/161 to ENV/2017/167).

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu / Analysis and advice

10.     Consultation on the proposed Regional Pest Management Plan took place in February to March 2018 alongside consultation on the Long-term Plan and other statutory planning documents. A total of 1,262 submissions were received, which represents a significant increase on the approximately 400 submissions that were received on the 2015 discussion document. The breakdown by submission type is shown in Table 1 below.

Table 1: Proposed Regional Pest Management Plan breakdown by submission type (Auckland-wide)

Submission type

Number of submissions

Percentage of submissions

Online form

1035

82%

Hardcopy form

183

15%

Non-form (e.g. email, letter)

44

3%

11.     Of the 1,262 submissions received, 23 were pro-forma submissions from Forest and Bird. The number of submission received by local board area is shown in Table 2.

Table 2: Breakdown of Proposed Regional Pest Management Plan submissions by local board area

Local board

Number of submitters

Percentage of submitters

Albert-Eden

116

9%

Devonport-Takapuna

53

4%

Franklin

50

4%

Great Barrier

24

2%

Henderson-Massey

46

4%

Hibiscus and Bays

85

7%

Howick

52

4%

Kaipātiki

98

8%

Māngere-Ōtāhuhu

17

1%

Manurewa

18

1%

Maungakiekie-Tāmaki

51

4%

Ōrākei

64

5%

Ōtara-Papatoetoe

7

1%

Papakura

21

2%

Puketāpapa

12

1%

Rodney

162

13%

Upper Harbour

41

3%

Waiheke

37

3%

Waitākere Ranges

87

7%

Waitematā

51

4%

Whau

41

3%

Regional

5

0%

Not Supplied

69

5%

Outside Auckland

55

4%

Total

1,262

 

 

12.     The consultation feedback form included eight questions relating to key programmes in the Proposed Regional Pest Management Plan that were described in a summary document.  Attachment B provides details on each of the proposed approaches. The responses received for each question from residents of the Manurewa Local Board area are summarised below in Table 3, and show a high level of support across all these topic areas.

Table 3: Feedback from Manurewa residents on the Proposed Regional Pest Management Plan

Question

Response

Percentage of submissions local board

Percentage of submissions regional

1. What is your view on the proposed approach to pest plant management in parks?

Full support

11%

26%

Partial support

16%

17%

Partial do not support

0%

3%

Full do not support

0%

2%

Other comments

74%

53%

2. What is your view on the proposed approach to managing kauri dieback?

Full support

23%

27%

Partial support

15%

29%

Partial do not support

0%

5%

Full do not support

0%

2%

Other comments

62%

37%

3. What is your view on the proposed approach to prevent the spread of pests to the Hauraki Gulf Islands?

Full support

56%

46%

Partial support

0%

19%

Partial do not support

11%

12%

Full do not support

0%

2%

Other comments

33%

21%

4. What is your view on the proposed approach to managing pests on Aotea/Great Barrier?

Full support

17%

44%

Partial support

17%

20%

Partial do not support

0%

4%

Full do not support

0%

2%

Other comments

67%

30%

5. What is your view on the proposed approach to managing pests on Kawau Island?

Full support

57%

43%

Partial support

14%

23%

Partial do not support

0%

7%

Full do not support

0%

4%

Other comments

29%

23%

6. What is your view on the proposed approach to managing pests on Waiheke Island?

Full support

57%

44%

Partial support

0%

21%

Partial do not support

0%

5%

Full do not support

0%

3%

Other comments

43%

28%

7. What is your view on the proposed approach to the management of rural possums?

Full support

30%

38%

Partial support

20%

28%

Partial do not support

0%

7%

Full do not support

10%

4%

Other comments

40%

23%

8. What is your view on the proposed approach to the management of freshwater pests?

Full support

63%

46%

Partial support

0%

23%

Partial do not support

0%

4%

Full do not support

0%

3%

Other comments

38%

25%

 

13.     In addition to the eight themed questions covered in Table 3, a further open-ended question elicited responses about a wide range of other topics covered in the proposed plan.

14.     The most commonly raised topic in the open-ended question was the issue of cat management. A wide range of views on this topic were expressed, including requests for increased cat management beyond that in the proposed plan. The majority of submissions on this topic voiced concerns about cats being included as pests. These submitters cited animal welfare issues and concerns that domestic cats throughout Auckland would be at risk under the proposed plan. Staff are exploring options for mitigating these concerns, which in many cases reflect a perception of more extensive cat control than was envisaged in the plan. Options for mitigating concerns include clarifying the spatial extent of the proposed approach in the final plan, and alternatives to the use of the term ‘pest cat’.

15.     Staff have worked through submissions to determine any changes to be recommended for the final plan. Attachment A identifies key themes where amendments to pest management programmes in the proposed plan were sought by submitters, along with proposed staff responses. Feedback themes have been grouped according to the questions in Table 3 (above), along with an ‘other’ category to capture feedback related to other topics.

16.     This report seeks formal feedback from the board at its November 2018 business meeting on the recommended changes to the Proposed Regional Pest Management Plan in response to consultation feedback.

Ngā whakaaweawe ā-rohe me ngā tirohanga a te poari ā-rohe /
Local impacts and local board views

17.     During engagement on the issues and options paper, and wider public consultation on the discussion document, key issues were raised in relation to cats, possums, widespread pest plants, and the ban of sale of some pest species. In addition to these regional issues, the Manurewa Local Board provided feedback on locally specific issues of importance to the area, including pigeons, weeds on council land, rabbits, and the importance of education around pests.

18.     At its August 2017 business meeting the board provided formal feedback on these proposed management approaches. A copy of this feedback is appended in Attachment C.

19.     A recent workshop with the board was held on 27 September 2018 to discuss the consultation feedback and the recommended amendments to the plan, as set out in Attachment A.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori / Māori impact statement

20.     Section 61 of the Biosecurity Act requires that a Regional Pest Management Plan set out the effects that implementation of the plan would have on the relationship between Māori, their culture, their traditions and their ancestral lands, waters, sites, maunga, mahinga kai, wāhi tapu, and taonga.

21.     Engagement has been undertaken with interested mana whenua in the Auckland region during development of the plan, and formal submissions were received from the mana whenua groups listed below:

·        Mana Whenua Kaitiaki Forum

·        Te Kawerau ā Maki

·        Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Whātua

·        Te Uri o Hau

·        Te Tira Whakamātaki -  Māori Biosecurity Network.

In addition, staff are working closely with mana whenua on the development and implementation of a range of biosecurity programmes, providing opportunities for mana whenua to exercise kaitiakitanga, through direct involvement in the protection of culturally significant sites and taonga species.

22.     Submissions were largely supportive of the approaches set out in the proposed plan, and key themes noted in feedback from mana whenua included:

·        the need to enhance rather than protect ecosystem function and resilience

·        the need to recognise ecological value outside Significant Ecological Areas

·        the need to identify performance measures to enable people to readily evaluate success

·        the need to adopt management strategies that incentivise good management approaches

·        the importance of community education and involvement in pest management

·        mana whenua participation in pest management in collaboration with Auckland Council.

23.     Staff have prepared a summary of mana whenua feedback, including proposed staff responses. This document will be circulated to mana whenua submitters for their consideration in November and December 2018. This content will be included in the final submission summary that is reported to the Environment and Community Committee in March 2019, alongside the final plan. This content will be made available to all local boards prior to the committee meeting.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea / Financial implications

24.     The Proposed Regional Pest Management Plan presents a major change in pest management in Auckland, and therefore requires a significant increase in investment. As part of consultation on the Long-term Plan 2018-2028, the council sought community views on two options for increased investment in the natural environment funded by a targeted rate.

25.     On 31 May 2018 the Governing Body approved the introduction of a natural environment targeted rate to raise $311 million for environmental initiatives. These initiatives include addressing kauri dieback and targeted ecological protection (resolution GB/2018/91).

26.     This level of investment allows substantial (approximately 80 per cent), but not full, implementation of the Proposed Regional Pest Management Plan. Some changes to the proposed plan will be made to fit the funding envelope, most notably reducing the spatial extent of parks supported by pest plant control in buffer zones, and removing the moth plant good neighbour rule from the Hauraki Gulf Islands. These changes are addressed in further detail in Attachment A.

Ngā raru tūpono / Risks

27.     There are no significant risks arising from the board giving feedback on the Proposed Regional Pest Management Plan at this time. However, if the board chooses not to give feedback this would create a risk that their views will not be reflected in the final Regional Pest Management Plan.

28.     If adoption of the Regional Pest Management Plan is delayed, this will create significant risks to the council’s ability to achieve targets for protecting native biodiversity, through effectively regulating the control of pest plants, animals and pathogens.

Ngā koringa ā-muri / Next steps

29.     Attachment A has been prepared to facilitate local board feedback on the recommended changes to the proposed Regional Pest Management Plan.

30.     Staff will progress development of the final Regional Pest Management Plan in line with the process and indicative timeframes outlined in Table 4 below. A copy of the final plan and supporting information (including a full submissions analysis report and staff recommendations) will be provided to local boards for information prior to Environment and Community Committee adoption in March 2019.

Table 4: Timeframes for the finalisation of the Regional Pest Management Plan

Action/Milestone

Indicative timeframe

Mana whenua engagement to address changes proposed in submissions

September – October 2018

Local boards resolve formal feedback at business meetings

November – December 2018

 

Environment and Community Committee workshop

November 2018

Staff draft final plan

December 2018 – February 2019

Environment and Community Committee adopt plan

March 2019

 

Closing the loop with local boards and submitters

April – May 2019

 

 


 

 

 

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Key submission themes and recommended amendments to the Proposed Regional Pest Management Plan consultation feedback

123

b

Proposed Regional Pest Management Plan 2018 - Summary Document

133

c

Manurewa Local Board feedback on the Proposed Regional Pest Management Plan

145

     

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Author

Dr Imogen Bassett – Biosecurity Principal Advisor

Authorisers

Gael Ogilvie – General Manager Environmental Services

Barry Potter - Director Infrastructure and Environmental Services

Louise Mason - GM Local Board Services

Manoj Ragupathy - Relationship Manager Manurewa and Papakura

 


Manurewa Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Manurewa Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Manurewa Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 


 


 


 


Manurewa Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 

Feedback on proposed topics for inclusion in the Auckland Water Strategy

 

File No.: CP2018/21087

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1.       To provide formal feedback on the proposed topics for inclusion in the Auckland Water Strategy.

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2.       Both freshwater and marine environments in Auckland are under pressure from historic under-investment, climate change and rapid growth. The Auckland Plan 2050 identifies the need to proactively adapt to a changing water future and develop long-term solutions.

3.       In response to these challenges, the Environment and Community Committee approved the scope of a strategy for Auckland’s waters at its June 2018 meeting (resolution ENV/2018/78). The strategy will provide strategic direction for the council group to meet the challenges and opportunities for improved management for water in all its forms. It will establish the outcomes needed for Auckland’s waters, as part of implementation of the Auckland Plan.

4.       Staff from across Auckland Council, Watercare and Auckland Transport have started developing the draft Auckland Water Strategy by first identifying Auckland’s water issues.

5.       A comprehensive engagement programme has also commenced. This has included mana whenua engagement through the Mana Whenua Kaitiaki Forum as well as separate workshops with operational kaitiaki.

6.       Staff have also attended workshops with all 21 local boards, the Governing Body and subject matter experts to present the progress of the strategy, and to introduce key topics to be addressed in the strategy.

7.       A draft discussion document is now being developed. This document will set out the key water topics, and propose a framework for the water strategy, for public feedback. 

8.       This report provides an update on the development of the strategy and requests formal feedback from the local board on the proposed topics for inclusion in the strategy as outlined in Attachment A. A template to guide local board feedback has been included as Attachment B to this report.

9.       Feedback from local boards will be summarised as part of a report to the Environment and Community Committee in December 2018, seeking approval of a water strategy discussion document. Public consultation will take place from February to April 2019.

 

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Manurewa Local Board:

a)      provide feedback on the proposed topics for inclusion in the Auckland Water Strategy as outlined in Attachment A

b)      note that local board feedback on proposed topics for inclusion in the Auckland Water Strategy will be included in a report to the Environmental and Community Committee in December 2018, seeking approval of the draft Auckland Water Strategy discussion document for public consultation in early 2019.

 

Horopaki / Context

10.     The health of Auckland’s waters is a significant issue. Decades of pressure have had negative impacts on water quality, and on freshwater and marine environments. This pressure will continue to increase if changes are not made to the way that water is valued and managed. Population growth and climate change will further amplify the challenges, with greater demand for water services, and an increased risk of flooding and coastal inundation.

11.     The Auckland Plan notes a key challenge of ‘environmental degradation’ and identifies the need to proactively adapt to a changing water future and develop long-term solutions (focus area five of the Auckland Plan’s environment and cultural heritage outcome). Other focus areas of the Auckland Plan speak to the need to future-proof Auckland’s infrastructure, make sustainable choices, and fully account for past and future impacts of growth.

12.     The Environment and Community Committee agreed to the development of the Auckland Water Strategy at its 12 September 2017 meeting. The committee noted that water is often described and managed in categories, such as stormwater, wastewater and drinking water. An overarching strategy for Auckland’s waters, in all their forms, was identified as a way of ensuring the full range of desired outcomes for water are defined and achieved in an integrated way.

13.     Several drivers give weight to the timely development of this strategy. These include heightened public awareness of water quality risks, and strong support from the public for improvements to water quality through the ten-year budget, central government initiatives (such as the National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management and the Department of Internal Affairs review of three waters outcomes) and the need to update existing strategies due to significant population growth. It also responds to mana whenua aspirations surrounding te mauri o te wai.

14.     Since the strategy’s initiation in September 2017, staff have undertaken preliminary analytical work and engagement across the council group. This includes resolving the intersection of the strategy with the section 17A three waters review, mapping the council group’s current water-related activities, and analysing the public feedback on the proposed Auckland Plan and 10-year budget.

15.     An extensive local board and mana whenua engagement programme has been undertaken. In September and October 2018, staff presented the proposed topics to be addressed through the water strategy to all 21 local boards. Mana whenua have been engaged at both a governance and operational level. The Mana Whenua Kaitiaki Forum provided strategic direction while operational kaitiaki provided direction on the values. Subject matter experts from across the council group, local boards and the governing body have also provided feedback on the key topics.

16.     This report provides a progress update on the development of the strategy, and also provides an opportunity for the local board to provide formal feedback on the proposed topics for inclusion in the strategy (Attachment A).

 

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu / Analysis and advice

Purpose and proposed topics for inclusion in the Auckland Water Strategy

17.     The Auckland Water Strategy will provide strategic direction for the council group in how meet the challenges and opportunities for improved water management. It is expected that the strategy will define the approaches taken around water in other strategies and plans as they are subsequently developed and reviewed.

18.     The proposed topics for inclusion in the Auckland Water Strategy (see Attachment A) were developed through the review of the existing policies and strategies, and through a series of workshops and discussions with staff from Auckland Council family, including Watercare and Auckland Transport.

19.     Attachment A describes the current strategic context, purpose, vision, values, issues, processes and principles that are proposed to inform the development of the discussion document for the draft Auckland Water Strategy.

Request for local board feedback

20.     Further to the workshops held with local boards in September and October 2018, local boards are formally requested to provide feedback on the draft topics for inclusion in the Auckland Water Strategy, ahead of the Environment and Community Committee’s consideration in December 2018. Attachment B provides a template to guide local board feedback.

21.     The draft vision for inclusion in the Auckland Water Strategy is ‘Te mauri o te wai – the life supporting capacity of water – is protected and enhanced’. Local boards are requested to provide feedback on whether this vision is right for the communities they represent.

22.     The draft values for inclusion in the strategy are detailed below. Local boards are requested to provide feedback around whether these values cover the aspects of water that are most important to the boards:

·    ecology

·    water use

·    culture

·    recreation and amenity

·    resilience.

23.     The draft issues to be addressed through the strategy are detailed below. Local boards are requested to provide feedback on whether these categories capture the issues that are of greatest concern to them:

·    cleaning up our waterways

·    meeting future water needs

·    growth in the right places

·    adapting to a changing water future.

24.     The draft processes to be worked on through the strategy are detailed below. Local boards are requested to provide feedback on whether these categories capture the processes that they are most concerned with:

·    creating our water future together

·    setting priorities for investment

·    achieving net benefits for catchments

·    applying a Māori world view.

25.     The draft principles to be included in the strategy are detailed below. Local boards are requested to provide feedback on whether or not they agree with these principles:

·    recognise that water is a taonga

·    work with natural ecosystems

·    deliver catchment scale thinking and action

·    focus on achieving the right-sized solutions with multiple benefits

·    work together to plan and deliver better water quality outcomes

·    look to the future.

26.     As the development of the strategy has progressed, it has become clear that it will need to be developed in stages. Many of the water challenges that have been identified require more analysis and public engagement before a strategy can be agreed. For this reason, the discussion document that is proposed to be released early 2019 will be focused on identifying and agreeing the water issues that Auckland faces within a proposed framework of vision, values and principles. From there, the Governing Body will be able to review and agree a staged programme that builds on the framework towards a final strategy.

27.     Local board feedback on the draft topics outlined in Attachment B will be summarised as part of the report to the Environment and Community Committee in December 2018, requesting approval of a draft discussion document for public consultation. A further update on the Auckland Water Strategy will be provided to local boards in February 2019.

Ngā whakaaweawe ā-rohe me ngā tirohanga a te poari ā-rohe /

Local impacts and local board views

28.     Local boards have a strong interest in improving water quality across the Auckland region and currently fund many local projects focused on restoration of local waterways.

29.     Staff attended a local board chairs’ meeting on 13 November 2017 to introduce the concept of the strategy and expected range of activities arising from the strategy. Board chairs indicated their interest in continued involvement.

30.     Staff presented the scope, summary and the progress on the strategy’s development to all 21 local boards between 30 August 2018 and 23 October 2018. Key themes in the feedback provided by local boards at these workshops included the need to:

·    acknowledge water as being a precious commodity that needs to be preserved as the population grows

·    increase the focus on the health of Auckland’s harbours

·    identify future drinking water sources

·    educate people around resilience, water usage, and the impacts of their activities on the environment

·    strengthen regulation and compliance to protect waterways.

31.     This report presents the proposed topics for inclusion in the Auckland Water Strategy, and seeks a formal feedback from the local board ahead of Environment and Community Committee approval of a discussion document in December 2018 for public consultation in early 2019. Key questions to guide local board feedback have been included as Attachment B.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori / Māori impact statement

32.     Mauri (life force) is a fundamental concept of the Māori world view. The state of mauri is an indicator of overall environmental, cultural and social wellbeing. All water sources have an inherent mauri that can be diminished or enhanced.

33.     Enhancing the mauri of waterways is of key significance to mana whenua in their role as kaitiaki of Auckland’s waters. Early engagement with mana whenua to promote kaitiakitanga and embed mana whenua values into this work will be critical to the success of the actions outlined in this report.

34.     The development of the Auckland Water Strategy has been guided by the strategic advice provided by the Mana Whenua Kaitiaki Governance Forum. The forum has determined it will provide its own strategic advice, to ensure that core mana whenua principles and values are given the attention they need. The forum requested that one of their members be included on the governance group for the development of the strategy. This has been achieved with the Auckland’s Water Political Reference Group, and recognises the longstanding whakaaro and kōrero that mana whenua have provided on this kaupapa.

 

 

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea / Financial implications

35.     The budget to develop the Auckland Water Strategy was included as part of the Long-term Plan 2018-2028. This budget covers operational expenses, primarily staff time, and will be used to support public engagement.

36.     The budget required to deliver any actions arising from the strategy will be sought through the Long-term Plan 2021-2031 process. 

 

Ngā raru tūpono / Risks

37.     An initial risk assessment for the programme has been carried out, as shown in Table 1 below.     

 

Table 1: Auckland Water Strategy work programme risks and proposed mitigations

Risk type

Risk description

Consequence description

Rating

(High-Medium-Low)

Mitigation/Control

Scope expansion

Water is a broad subject, and the level of detail and number of topics to cover can grow and change rapidly

Unable to deliver to time and cost

Medium

Guidance from the Political Reference Group and Executive Steering Group

Central government changes to legislation and policy

There are several central government work programmes focusing on water underway such as the Department of Internal Affairs Three Waters review and the Office of the Auditor General’s Water Programme. The strategy will need to adapt to any changes in direction from central government.

Unable to deliver to time and cost

Medium

Anticipate where possible, communication plans to include government stakeholders

Inconsistent practices and adoption of the strategy

The strategy is not adopted and reflected in the plans of the operational and delivery organisations of the council group

Outcomes of the strategy are not delivered, substantive actions to deliver the strategy are not undertaken

Medium

Ensure that the delivery teams of the council group are engaged in the development of the strategy

 


 

Ngā koringa ā-muri / Next steps

38.     The next steps in the development of the Auckland Water Strategy have been outlined in Table 2:

 

Table 2. Timeframes for the development of the Auckland Water Strategy

Activity

Expected timeframe

Formal local board feedback sought on proposed topics of the Auckland Water Strategy for the discussion document

November 2018

Internal discussions on the topics for inclusion in the draft discussion document, and presentations to the Watercare and Auckland Transport boards

November-December 2018

Draft discussion document reported to Environment and Community Committee for approval ahead of public consultation

December 2018

Public consultation on the Auckland Water Strategy discussion document

February-April 2019

Public engagement feedback presented to elected members

April 2019

Draft options for the finalisation of the Auckland Water Strategy, and associated work programmes to be presented to the Environment and Community Committee

June 2019

 

39.     Local boards will receive a further update on the Auckland Water Strategy in February 2019.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Proposed topics for inclusion in the Auckland Water Strategy

155

b

Local board feedback template for proposed topics for inclusion in the Auckland Water Strategy

163

     

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Author

Andrew Chin – Auckland Waters Portfolio Manager

Authorisers

Barry Potter - Director Infrastructure and Environmental Services

Louise Mason - GM Local Board Services

Manoj Ragupathy - Relationship Manager Manurewa and Papakura

 


Manurewa Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Manurewa Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 


 


 


Manurewa Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 

Draft Contributions Policy

 

File No.: CP2018/20741

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1.       To seek feedback from local boards on the draft Contributions Policy 2019.

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2.       It is estimated that the Auckland region is short 45,000 dwellings to meet current demand for housing. A further 313,000 dwellings and work places to support 250,000 jobs will be required by 2050 to meet expected growth. To manage this growth the council has identified the:

i)        location and nature of growth - through the Auckland Plan and Unitary Plan

ii)       location and type of infrastructure required to support growth - through the Development Strategy and structure plans

iii)      when and where it will invest $7.2 billion of growth-related infrastructure in the next ten years to support development - through the Long-term Plan 2018-2028 (10-Year Budget).

3.       Growth related capex has risen from $5.1 billion in the Long-term Plan 2015-2025 to $7.2 billion in the current 10-Year Budget.  We have also updated our projection of development growth across the next ten years.  The council will repay the borrowing raised to pay for the investment in infrastructure through general rates, targeted rates, user charges, third party funding (like New Zealand Transport Agency (NZTA) subsidies) and development contributions.

4.       A review has been undertaken of the current contributions policy and the council has adopted a draft Contributions Policy 2019 provided in Attachment A for consultation which includes a number of changes.

5.       To recover the increased investment in growth related infrastructure, the indicative urban development contribution price rises from around $21,000 to $26,000 (excl. GST).  As a result, the development contribution revenue the council expects to collect will rise to $2.7 billion from $2.23 billion under the current policy.

6.       The demand placed on transport by different types of development has been reviewed.  The analysis shows that retail and commercial development place substantially higher demand on transport infrastructure than is reflected in the current policy.  The draft policy includes higher unit of demand factors for transport, and hence prices, for retail and commercial development with smaller decreases for other development types.  This would more fairly reflect the demand different development types place on the need to invest in infrastructure.

7.       The draft Contributions Policy 2019 also proposes:

·        extending the timeframe for the payment of development contributions on residential construction.  This will better align the time that residential builders pay their DCs with the time when they sell their developments

·        refining and changing funding areas to better match investment with beneficiaries, including adding areas for:

i)    transport to reflect areas where significant local infrastructure investment is planned

ii)   reserves to provide more detail on projects and their location

·        minor amendments including changes to development types.

8.       Consultation on the draft Contributions Policy 2019 is taking place from 19 October until 15 November 2018 including:

·        five have your say events held across the region

·        engagement with Mana Whenua Kaitiaki Forum

·        opportunity for submitters to personally present their feedback to councillors on 23 November 2018.

9.       Local board meetings in November will consider the draft Contribution Policy 2019 and provide their feedback to inform the Governing Body’s decision making in December.

10.     Consultation is supported by a consultation document and supporting information which are provided in Attachments B and C respectively, and set out:

·        an overview of how the council is responding to growth and how development contributions fit within this context

·        describes how we set development contributions charges

·        details the key changes in the draft Contributions Policy and the reasons they have been proposed.

 

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Manurewa Local Board:

a)      provide feedback on the draft Contributions Policy 2019.

 

 

Horopaki / Context

11.     The Contributions Policy 2015 (Variation A) reflects the Long-term Plan (LTP) 2015-2025. Development contributions have recovered approximately $400 million of funding for growth projects in the last three years.

12.     Council reviewed the current policy and recommended that it be amended to reflect changes to capital expenditure in the 10-Year Budget. At its meeting on 30 April 2018 the Governing Body agreed to consult on the draft Contributions Policy 2019 in May 2018.

13.     Feedback from the development community requested more detailed supporting information and a longer period for consultation on the draft policy. In response, at its meeting on 27 June 2018 the Governing Body agreed to extend the current policy until 31 January 2019 so that additional supporting information for the policy could be prepared and further consultation on the 2019 policy undertaken.

14.     The policy has been reviewed in accordance with the following principles:

·        purpose and principles of development contributions under the Local Government Act 2002

·        equitable sharing of costs of growth between ratepayers, developers and other members of the community having regard to such matters as who causes the costs and who receives the benefits

·        equitable sharing of costs of growth between different types of development and different funding areas

·        revenue predictability for the council and cost certainty for developers

·        administrative simplicity

·        ensuring legislative compliance.

15.     Schedule Five to the attached draft Contributions Policy 2019 considers the appropriateness of development contributions as a funding source in accordance with the requirements of section 101(3) of the Local Government Act 2002. Council’s Revenue and Financing Policy sets out how the council will fund capital and operating expenditure for each of its activities including its decisions to use DCs to fund growth related capital expenditure.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu / Analysis and advice

Capital expenditure and funding for Auckland’s growth

Capital investment and development contribution revenue

16.     The table below sets out the changes in development contribution (DC) revenue by activity between the current policy and the draft Contributions Policy 2019.

DC revenue by activity ($ billion)

Current DC policy

Draft DC policy 2019

 Transport

0.7

1.1

 Stormwater

0.5

0.5

 Parks and community infrastructure

1.0

1.1

Total

2.2

2.7

 

Contributions pricing

17.     The 10-Year Budget assumes that a Contributions Policy 2019 will be adopted reflecting the Revenue and Financing Policy position that growth-related infrastructure investment should be funded from development contributions.  The 10-Year Budget assumes that the policy will provide for DCs to recover $2.7 billion of the cost of the planned investment in growth infrastructure.

18.     The indicative urban DC will rise from around $21,000 to $26,000 (excl. GST).  DCs vary widely depending on the type of development and the infrastructure needed to support growth in different locations.

19.     Some infrastructure investments provide benefits across the region or respond to cost pressures driven by growth irrespective of location.  Under the proposed policy to recover these costs every development would pay $8,090 per Housing Unit Equivalent (HUE) for regional infrastructure.  However, the sub-regional and local requirements for infrastructure vary depending on the infrastructure required to support growth in that area and the capacity of existing infrastructure.  As a result, DC prices would vary across the region e.g.

·        Manurewa-Papakura - new DC price will be $42,182 to reflect increase in stormwater and parks investment

·        Manukau Central - new DC price will be $22,572 as there is capacity available in existing network infrastructure.

 

Impact of increasing DC price

20.     Raising the price of DCs:

·        better aligns DCs with actual cost of infrastructure

·        increases certainty that infrastructure will be delivered

·        encourages developers to more accurately price land purchased for development to reflect future DC costs

·        negatively impacts developers who have paid for land based on current DC prices.

 

21.     Economic research indicates that increasing the DC price does not generally increase house prices.  House prices are determined by the balance of supply and demand.   Development is only cost plus where the value of land for housing is the same as its value in alternative uses i.e. agriculture.  The price of land that can be developed for housing or business use in Auckland is much higher than its value in agricultural use.

22.     Developers generally establish the price they will pay for land based on:

Expected sale price of finished house (as set by the market – supply and demand)

-    Land development costs

-    Construction costs

-    Council cost including DCs

-    Profit margin

=   Price paid for land

Alternative options considered

23.     There are two alternatives to the proposed increase in development contributions;

·        defer or halt planned capital projects supporting growth

·        increase ratepayer funding of these projects.

24.     The increase in development contributions price over period of the 10-Year Budget is forecast to provide an additional $500 million of revenue.  Without this revenue the council would need to reduce its planned capital expenditure by between $1 billion and $4 billion depending on which projects were prioritised.  This sum exceeds the loss in revenue because development contributions make up varying proportions of the funding of individual projects[4].  This option was not adopted as these investments are vital to:

·        maintaining service levels in the face of growth pressures

·        supporting making land available for new development in both the greenfields and brownfields.

25.     To maintain the planned level of investment without increasing development contributions would require an increase in rates funding of between $50 million and $200 million per annum.  This is equivalent to an additional general rates increase of between 3 and 13 per cent.  Land owners, developers and the owners of new construction are the beneficiaries of the portion of investment in infrastructure that supports growth.  This option was not proposed as it is appropriate that the growth share of funding comes from the beneficiaries via development contributions and not general ratepayers.

Possible legislative changes to funding of Community Infrastructure

26.     Central government has recently introduced the Local Government (Community Well-being) Amendment Bill which would restore the Council’s ability to use DCs to fund a broader range of community infrastructure (including, for example, public swimming pools and libraries).  If the legislation passes, the council can consider changing its capital budgets and amending the policy to include the growth component of any qualifying expenditure.

Unit of demand factors

27.     Different types of development place different demands on infrastructure.  The council uses unit of demand factors to fairly share the cost of infrastructure across development types.

28.     Demand factors are set relative to the standard residential dwelling of between 100m2 and 249m2.  A standard residential dwelling is referred to as a household equivalent unit (HUE).  For example a retirement unit is charged 30 per cent of the rate for transport that a residential dwelling pays i.e. 0.3 HUE.

Non-residential transport

29.     Transport demand factors are calculated using data on the daily volume of trips generated from each development type.  For residential development the demand factor is adjusted for relative occupancy levels between residential development types.

30.     A review of the statistical trip generation data shows that retail and commercial developments generate substantially more trips than residential and other development types.  These results are consistent with officers’ experience of case by case analysis undertaken by the former councils of the transport impacts of this type of development.

31.     The transport demand factors proposed are set out in the tables below.  Because non-residential developments are usually larger than residential dwellings the demand factors are translated into HUEs per 100m2.

Units of demand per 100m2

Development Type

Current DC Policy

Draft DC Policy 2019

Commercial

0.37 HUE

0.73 HUE

Retail

0.47 HUE

2.79 HUE

Education and Health

0.37 HUE

0.37 HUE

Production and Distribution

0.29 HUE

0.10 HUE

Other non-residential not specified above

0.36 HUE

1.00 HUE

32.     These transport demand factors are comparable with those for other councils. Hamilton sets the rate for high demand non-residential at 2.75 HUEs (which includes retail) and Queenstown 2.83.  Christchurch and Wellington also use higher factors for commercial and retail development.

33.     The demand factors derived from the analysis above produce substantial price changes for retail and commercial development.  As this type of development represents a small proportion of overall development the price reduction for other development types is lower.

34.     As the transport component of DCs varies across the region based on the need for investment in each area the exact price effects will vary.  In broad average terms, the DC transport price for retail will rise by $18,000 per 100m2 and $2,900 for commercial if the proposed demand factors are used in comparison to the current factors.  It will fall by $1,450 per 100m2 for production and $500 for a standard residential dwelling.  The impact is illustrated with examples based on two recent developments below

·        5,000m2 retail mall development in the North would pay $1.3 million under the proposed demand factors whereas they would have paid $224k under the current demand factors.

·        50,000m2 production development in the South would pay $410k under the proposed demand factors whereas they would pay $1.15 million under the current demand factors.

35.     Two alternative options to making the changes to non-residential transport unit of demand factors were considered:

·        retaining the status quo

·        move to the new factors in equal steps over a three year period.

36.     Retaining the status quo was rejected on the basis that the evidence clearly shows that transport demand is much higher for retail and commercial development than for other development types.  At present other development is effectively subsidising retail and commercial development.  Large developers operating nationwide will be aware of these differences in DC prices.

 

 

37.     As the price increases are substantial the council could consider a three year transition.  This option was rejected as it would extend the current subsidisation.  The price changes are substantial however the subsidisation is also large.  It is likely that developers operating nationwide will have been expecting this change for some time.

38.     It was also noted that a transition could create administration issues and present revenue risks that may be difficult to forecast.  Developers often lodge consents early when they become aware of pending changes to contributions prices.  A transition of this nature would create incentives for all development types around the staging of transitional price changes.  Retail developers may try to lodge consents prior to the date of changes and others may delay applications.  This is likely to have implications for both our revenue forecasts and our consenting and DC assessment teams.

Reserves acquisition, reserve development and community facilities

39.     The council’s unit of demand factors for reserves acquisition, reserve development and community facilities are based primarily on the relative occupancy of different types of residential development compared to a standard residential dwelling.

40.     Officers are reviewing the relative use of reserves and community facilities by the occupants of different residential development types.  Part of this review involves undertaking an extensive survey of usage of reserves and community facilities by Aucklanders.  To ensure this survey provides the best information it needs to cover Aucklanders’ use across seasons.

41.     The results of the survey are expected to be available early next year.  Officers will report the results of the review, including the survey data, in the first quarter of next year.  If the review suggests changes should be considered to the units of demand for reserves acquisition, reserve development and community facilities the policy can be amended at that time following consultation, if appropriate.

Remissions for Māori development and social housing

42.     The current contributions policy does not provide for remissions or waivers of DCs.  Feedback from Māori and social housing developers is that the requirement to pay DCs is an additional challenge to overcome that presents a further barrier to development.  Iwi have raised the many difficulties associated with developing Māori land, as well as noting their recent gifting of land for parks and the historic confiscation of land for public works.

43.     Officers do not recommend the use of DC remissions.  Support for Māori development and social housing is better made transparently from a fixed grant budget or considered on a case by case basis.  Grants enable the council to make decisions on the relative merits of individual proposals rather than automatically supporting or rejecting applications on predetermined criteria.

44.     The council currently offers support for DCs for Māori development through the Marae and Papakāinga grant made available through the Māori Cultural Initiatives Fund.  The policies governing the fund are currently being reviewed and will be considered by the Community Development and Safety Committee later this year.

45.     Council does not currently offer a regional grant scheme that enables funding of DCs for social housing.  The council’s position to date has been that social housing is a government responsibility.  However, the council did provide a one-off grant of $475,000 to the City Mission for the development of the HomeGround facility.  The grant was based on an estimate of DCs and consenting costs.  Staff recommend that if the council wishes to consider extending support for DCs for social housing then this should be through the development of a grants scheme as part of the Annual Plan 2019/2020.  A grant can be used to fund any development costs and not just council fees, as was the case with the HomeGround grant.

 

46.     DCs are set to recover the cost of planned growth infrastructure from developers. Any remission of DCs would reduce revenue. The loss of revenue from a remission scheme cannot be recovered from other developers as they are only required to pay the cost of the demand they place on infrastructure.  Remissions of DCs for some developers do not change the level of demand for infrastructure from other developers.

47.     Revenue would instead need to be made up by reductions in expenditure or increases in general rates.  Remissions administered under the Contributions Policy would need to provide for automatic trigger tests and hence an unconstrained budget.

48.     Further discussion of remissions for Māori development and social housing is set out in Attachment D.

Payment timing

49.     Developers prefer to pay development contributions as close as possible to the potential realisation of their investment e.g. sale of land or buildings.  The current payment timing for the main development types (other triggers make up a very small proportion of development contributions) are at the issue of:

·        land title for subdivisions – around one year before sale

·        building consent for residential development – around six to twelve months before sale

·        code compliance certificate for non-residential development – around time of sale.

50.     DCs invoiced on building consent for residential development are approximately 25 per cent of total DC revenue.  Residential developments are currently required to pay DCs when the building consent is issued. Officers propose to adjust the payment timing for residential developments as follows:

·        a consent that creates five or more dwelling units will be treated as non-residential development. This will allow the DCs to be invoiced at time the Code Compliance Certificate (CCC) is applied for. This will extend the time until council receives payment by an average of 12 months.

·        all other residential consents will be invoiced six months after building consent is issued.

51.     This change will support residential developers by better aligning the requirement to pay DCs with developers’ cash flows. Reducing the amount of capital investment required prior to construction will make it easier for developers to finance and progress residential projects.  This proposal formed part of consultation on the draft Contributions Policy 2019 in May and was supported by all of the 17 submissions that commented on it.

52.     The proposed changes will lead to a one-off reduction in the council’s DC revenue of $10 million for 2018/2019.  The council can manage this change within its present budget.  The change is not material over the 10-Year Budget period as all developments will still pay, just slightly later.

53.     The council includes the interest cost of the difference between the receipt of DCs and the timing of investment in growth related projects.  The cost of receiving DC payments on residential building development slightly later will be factored into the DC price.  The proposal will increase the DC price by between $100 and $200 (or less than 1 per cent) on average depending on the units of demand used for transport.

54.     Considered was also given to retaining the status quo.  However, preference was given to the easing of cash flow demands on residential builders rather than land developers focusing on subdivision and non-residential builders.  Residential builders are often operating at a smaller scale with more limited access to capital.  Providing them additional time eases their cash flow demands and supports the dwelling construction the council is seeking.

 

55.     Neither the proposal or the status quo present any risk to the council in terms of payment security.  The council has statutory powers to recover unpaid DCs, including registering a statutory charge on property where DCs have not been paid.  While the council has some aged DC debt this is a very small proportion of the DCs invoiced over the last 8 years.  In this time the council has written off less than $100,000 of DC debt out of $740 million invoiced.

56.     Two administrative changes are also proposed to payment timing and enforcement.  Developers who require a land use consent but cannot be assessed for DCs on a resource consent or building consent will be required to pay on land use consent.  At present non-residential developments are required to pay on issue of a code of compliance certificate (CCC) or certificate of public use (CPU).  Some developments do not require a CCC or CPU to operate and are avoiding payment.  It is proposed that all non-residential developments will be required to pay at the latest 24 months of issue of a building consent.  This provides sufficient time for developers to realise their investment whilst ensuring securing of payment for council.

Other proposed changes to the Policy

Funding areas

57.     The draft Contributions Policy 2019 includes seven additional funding areas for transport. These funding areas allocate the cost of transport infrastructure to the priority growth areas in Northwest, Dairy Flat/Wainui/Silverdale, Greater Tamaki and Albany, and transport infrastructure, solely, mainly road sealing, for the benefit of rural areas in the North, West and South.

58.     Changes have also been made to the funding areas for reserves to provide a more refined allocation of these costs to development areas.  The Greenfield, Urban and Rural funding areas have been replaced with Northern Greenfield, Southern Greenfield, Northwest Greenfield and Urban funding areas. As a result the DC costs better reflect the differences in investment required to meet the needs of future growth.  A new funding area has also been created for reserves and community facilities in Greater Tamaki to reflect the specific needs and plans for that area.

59.     Two new stormwater funding areas have also been added where investment is now planned - Hauraki Gulf Islands and Omaha/Matakana.

Development Types

60.     Amendments are also proposed to the following development types to better reflect the demand they place on infrastructure or clarify definitions.  Maintaining the status quo for these areas was rejected to ensure an appropriate level of cost was recovered and reduce the administration costs associated with customer confusion.

Student accommodation

61.     Create a new ‘student accommodation units’ category for student accommodation (administered by schools/universities).  This category will have a lower price for transport and open space than a standard residential dwelling because of lower occupancy.

Small ancillary dwelling units

62.     Change the ‘size’ definition of small ancillary dwelling units to those with a gross floor area less than or equal to 65m². This aligns the Contributions Policy with the definition in the Unitary Plan to avoid customer confusion.

Retirement villages

63.     Amend the definition of a ‘Retirement Village’ to align with the Unitary Plan to avoid customer confusion.

 

 

Accommodation units for short term rental

64.     Amend the definition of Accommodation Units to clarify that they include properties used for short term rental.  Long-term rentals will continue to be treated as dwelling units.

A long-term view of growth infrastructure costs

65.     The 10-year Budget 2018-2028 includes over $26 billion of investment for Auckland including significant investment to support new development over the next 10 years. This investment is not, however, sufficient to enable all the future urban areas to be developed now or all of the intensification projects to proceed immediately.

66.     The proposed contributions policy seeks to recover a fair share of the infrastructure costs currently planned from developments that are enabled by, or benefit from, this planned infrastructure. In areas that already have sufficient infrastructure, or it is planned within the next ten years, the policy describes the contribution to the cost of this infrastructure that will be charged to different types of development.

67.     For areas where the infrastructure provision is not already provided or scheduled for the 2018-2028 period development cannot yet proceed due to the infrastructure constraints. We will continue to work on determining the cost and funding arrangements for the infrastructure required. The development charges for these areas included in the draft Contributions Policy 2019 do not yet fully reflect the true cost of providing infrastructure in those areas. For some of these development areas, particularly greenfield areas, the council infrastructure cost per house has been estimated at around $70,000. Once the costs and funding arrangements are clear, growth charges will be updated to ensure they are paying their fair share when the areas are able to be developed.

68.     Limits on the council’s ability to borrow mean that additional investment, even if it is eventually funded by developers, would require new or alternative financing mechanisms. Staff are continuing to work on new ways to partner with others to build and finance infrastructure. If this can be done successfully, it will enable more development areas to be supported earlier.

Public Consultation

69.     Public consultation will run from 19 October to 4pm on 15 November.

70.     Five Have Your Say Events (HYSE) have been planned to take place during the public consultation period:

·        South - Manukau

·        North - Takapuna

·        Central – CBD

·        Retirement village developers - CBD

·        Western Springs Garden Hall (evening).

71.     The location and timing of HYSE are scheduled to provide for developers and the public to engage with the council at locations and timings organised to suit their needs and preferences.  These five HYSE events provide an opportunity for developers and other interested parties to learn more about the draft policy and provide feedback.  All comments will be captured and reported through to the Finance and Performance Committee to help inform decision-making on the final policy.

72.     Those providing written feedback will be asked if they would like to register their interest in personally presenting their feedback to councillors on Friday 23 November.  This will provide time for 30 presentations allowing 15 minutes for each presentation including questions.  Seventeen submitters expressed an interest to be heard following the May consultation.  The invitation will note that it may not be possible to make time to hear everyone if the event is over-subscribed given the need to manage costs and limitations on councillors’ available time.  If necessary, slots would be allocated on a “first come, first served” basis.

Ngā whakaaweawe ā-rohe me ngā tirohanga a te poari ā-rohe /
Local impacts and local board views

73.     The DC price varies by location depending on the cost of infrastructure required to support development in an area. The funding areas are set out in the attached policy documents.

74.     Officers provided briefings on the draft Contributions Policy 2019 to local board cluster meetings in October. 

75.     Local boards have a statutory responsibility for identifying and communicating the interests and preferences of the people in its local board area in relation to the context of the strategies, policies, plans, and bylaws of Auckland Council. This report provides an opportunity for the local board to give input on the draft Contributions Policy 2019.

76.     Local board decisions and feedback are being sought in this report to inform the Governing Body’s consideration of the adoption of the Contribution Policy 2019 in December.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori / Māori impact statement

77.     Council does not hold information on the ethnicity of developers.  The impact on Māori will be similar to the impact on other developers.

78.     Feedback from Māori received in the May consultation has been considered as part of the development of the revised draft Contributions Policy 2019. Key issues raised were that the Contributions Policy should:

·        reflect the Auckland Plan 2050 outcome to support Māori identify and wellbeing, for example by exempting (remitting) DCs for Māori developments 

·        include specific development types for Māori development.

79.     The remission of DCs for Māori development is discussed in this report.

80.     Development types are created based on evidence that different types of development generate different levels of demand for infrastructure. The policy does not currently contain specific Māori development types. Māori developments are categorised under broader development types based on the demand they generate. For example, kaumātua housing is treated the same as retirement villages, and marae fall under community facilities. As more Māori developments occur, evidence of demand generation can be used to reclassify developments or create new development types.

81.     Māori have expressed aspirations for their land that includes new forms of development that may not fit into existing development types. Legislation provides for the reconsideration of DC assessments for individual developments where evidence is available to show that the demand it will generate is less than its classification under the existing policy. Council also proactively reviews the availability of evidence for demand, and amends the Contributions Policy for new or adjusted development types and demand factors as evidence becomes available.  Council will continue to work with Māori to ensure that the Contributions Policy, in its design and its application, appropriately reflects the realities of Māori development.

82.     Feedback from iwi on the draft Contributions Policy 2019 will be sought as part of public consultation and via engagement with the Mana Whenua Kaitiaki Forum.  Mana Whenua will also be invited to present their feedback to the councillors through the formal engagement for stakeholders referred to in the public consultation section above.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea / Financial implications

83.     The financial implications are set out in the report.

Ngā raru tūpono / Risks

84.     Investment in DC funded growth related infrastructure carries the risk of development projections, and therefore DC revenue, not being met. These risks will be managed through monitoring consent applications and DC revenue.

Ngā koringa ā-muri / Next steps

85.     Public consultation on the draft Contributions Policy 2019 is to be held from 19 October to 15 November 2018 as above.  Feedback would be reported to the Governing Body workshop on 29 November.  Officers will seek the adoption of the final policy at the 13 December meeting of the Governing Body.

 

 

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Draft Contributions Policy 2019 (Under Separate Cover)

 

b

Consultation Document

179

c

Supporting information

201

d

Remissions of development contributions for Maori development and social housing

221

     

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Authors

Felipe Panteli - Senior Policy Advisor

Beth Sullivan - Principal Advisor Policy

Andrew Duncan - Manager Financial Policy

Authorisers

Ross Tucker - Acting General Manager, Financial Strategy and Planning

Louise Mason - GM Local Board Services

Manoj Ragupathy - Relationship Manager Manurewa and Papakura

 


Manurewa Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Manurewa Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Manurewa Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 


 


 


 


 


Manurewa Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 

Additions to the 2016-2019 Manurewa Local Board meeting schedule

 

File No.: CP2018/20976

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1.       To seek approval for a meeting date to be added to the 2016-2019 Manurewa Local Board meeting schedule in order to accommodate the Annual Plan 2019/2020 timeframes.

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2.       The Manurewa Local Board adopted the 2016-2019 meeting schedule on 17 November 2016.

3.       At that time the specific times and dates for meetings for local board decision making in relation to the local board agreement as part of the Annual Plan 2019/2020 were unknown. 

4.       The board is being asked to approve one meeting date as additions to the Manurewa Local Board meeting schedule so that the Annual Plan 2019/2020 timeframes can be met.

 

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Manurewa Local Board:

a)      approve one meeting date to be added to the 2016-2019 Manurewa Local Board meeting schedule to accommodate the Annual Plan 2019/2020 timeframes as follows:

i)        Thursday, 6 June 2019, 6.00pm.

b)      note the venue for this meeting will be the Meeting Room, Manurewa Local Board Office, 7 Hill Road, Manurewa.

 

 

Horopaki / Context

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

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

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

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

7.       The Manurewa Local Board adopted its business meeting schedule at its 17 November 2016 business meeting.

8.       The timeframes for local board decision making in relation to the local board agreement which is part of the Annual Plan 2019/2020 were unavailable when the meeting schedule was originally adopted.

9.       The board is being asked to make decisions in mid-December and early June to feed into the Annual Plan 2019/2020 process.  These timeframes are outside the board’s normal meeting cycle. 

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu / Analysis and advice

10.     The board has two choices:

i)        Add the meeting as an addition to the meeting schedule.

or

ii)       Add the meeting as extraordinary meeting.

11.     For option one, statutory requirements allow enough time for these meetings to be scheduled as additions to the meeting schedule and other topics may be considered as per any other ordinary meeting. However there is a risk that if the Annual Plan 2019/2020 timeframes change or the information is not ready for the meeting there would need to be an additional extraordinary meeting scheduled anyway.

12.     For option two, only the specific topic Annual Plan 2019/2020 may be considered for which the meeting is being held. There is a risk that no other policies or plans with similar timeframes or running in relation to the Annual Plan 2019/2020 process could be considered at this meeting.

13.     Since there is enough time to meet statutory requirements, staff recommend approving these meetings as additions to the meeting schedule as it allows more flexibility for the board to consider a range of issues.

Ngā whakaaweawe ā-rohe me ngā tirohanga a te poari ā-rohe /
Local impacts and local board views

14.     This report requests the board’s decision to schedule an additional meeting and consider whether to approve it as extraordinary meeting or additions to the meeting schedule.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori / Māori impact statement

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

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea / Financial implications

16.     There are no financial implications in relation to this report apart from the standard costs associated with servicing a business meeting.

Ngā raru tūpono / Risks

17.     There are no significant risks associated with this report.

Ngā koringa ā-muri / Next steps

18.     Implement the processes associated with preparing for business meetings.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.     

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Author

Sarah Butterfield - Democracy Advisor - Manurewa

Authoriser

Manoj Ragupathy - Relationship Manager Manurewa and Papakura

 


Manurewa Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 

For Information: Reports referred to the Manurewa Local Board

 

File No.: CP2018/20311

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1.       To provide an opportunity for the board to receive reports and resolutions that have been referred from Governing Body committee meetings, CCOs, forums or other local boards for information.

2.       The following information was circulated to the local board:

 

No.

Report Title

Item no.

Meeting Date

Governing Body Committee

or Forum or Local Board

 

1

Regional Facilities Auckland – Fourth Quarter Report 2017 -2018

N/A

N/A

Regional Facilities Auckland

 

 

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Manurewa Local Board:

a)      note the information from the following Governing Body committee meetings, CCOs, forums or other local board meetings:

 

No.

Report Title

Item no.

Meeting Date

Governing Body Committee

or Forum or Local Board

 

1

Regional Facilities Auckland – Fourth Quarter Report 2017 -2018

N/A

N/A

Regional Facilities Auckland

 

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.     

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Author

Sarah Butterfield - Democracy Advisor - Manurewa

Authoriser

Manoj Ragupathy - Relationship Manager Manurewa and Papakura

 


Manurewa Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 

Manurewa Local Board Governance Forward Work Calendar - November 2018

 

File No.: CP2018/20312

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1.       To present to the Manurewa Local Board the six months Governance Forward Work Calendar.

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2.       This report outlines the Governance Forward Work Calendar which is a schedule of items that will come before local boards at business meetings and workshops over the next six months. The Governance Forward Work Calendar for the Manurewa Local Board is included in Attachment A.

3.       The calendar aims to support local boards’ governance role by:

i)    ensuring advice on agendas and workshop material is driven by local board priorities

ii)   clarifying what advice is required and when

iii)   clarifying the rationale for reports.

4.       The calendar will be updated every month, be included on the agenda for business meetings and distributed to relevant council staff. It is recognised that at times items will arise that are not programmed. Board members are welcome to discuss changes to the calendar.

 

 

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Manurewa Local Board:

a)      note the Governance Forward Work Calendar as at 2 November 2018.

 

 

Horopaki / Context

5.       The council’s Quality Advice Programme aims to improve the focus, analysis, presentation and timeliness of staff advice to elected representatives. An initiative under this is to develop forward work calendars for Governing Body committees and local boards. These provide elected members with better visibility of the types of governance tasks they are being asked to undertake and when they are scheduled.

6.       There are no new projects in the Governance Forward Work Calendar. The calendar brings together in one schedule reporting on all of the board’s projects and activities that have been previously approved in the local board plan, long-term plan, departmental work programmes and through other board decisions. It includes Governing Body policies and initiatives that call for a local board response.

7.       This initiative is intended to support the board’s governance role. It will also help staff to support local boards, as an additional tool to manage workloads and track activities across council departments, and it will allow greater transparency for the public.

 

 

8.       The calendar is arranged in three columns, “Topic”, “Purpose” and “Governance Role”:

i)    Topic describes the items and may indicate how they fit in with broader processes such as the annual plan.

ii)   Purpose indicates the aim of the item, such as formally approving plans or projects, hearing submissions or receiving progress updates

iii)   Governance role is a higher-level categorisation of the work local boards do. Examples of the seven governance categories are tabled below:

Governance role

Examples

Setting direction / priorities / budget

Capex projects, work programmes, annual plan

Local initiatives / specific decisions

Grants, road names, alcohol bans

Input into regional decision-making

Comments on regional bylaws, policies, plans

Oversight and monitoring

Local board agreement, quarterly performance reports, review projects

Accountability to the public

Annual report

Engagement

Community hui, submissions processes

Keeping informed

Briefings, cluster workshops

 

9.       Board members are welcome to discuss changes to the calendar. The calendar will be updated and reported back every month to business meetings. Updates will also be distributed to relevant council staff.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu / Analysis and advice

10.     This report is an information report providing the governance forward work programme for the next six months.

Ngā whakaaweawe ā-rohe me ngā tirohanga a te poari ā-rohe /
Local impacts and local board views

11.     All local boards are being presented with a Governance Forward Work Calendar for their consideration.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori / Māori impact statement

12.     The projects and processes referred to in the Governance Forward Work Calendar will have a range of implications for Māori which will be considered when the work is reported.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea / Financial implications

13.     There are no financial implications relating to this report.

Ngā raru tūpono / Risks

14.     This report is a point in time of the Governance Forward Work Calendar. It is a living document and updated month to month. It minimises the risk of the board being unaware of planned topics for their consideration.

Ngā koringa ā-muri / Next steps

15.     Staff will review the calendar each month in consultation with board members and will report an updated calendar to the board.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Manurewa Local Board Governance Forward Work Calender - November 2018

235

     

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Author

Sarah Butterfield - Democracy Advisor - Manurewa

Authoriser

Manoj Ragupathy - Relationship Manager Manurewa and Papakura

 



Manurewa Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 


Manurewa Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 


Manurewa Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 

Manurewa Local Board Achievements Register 2016 - 2019 Political Term

 

File No.: CP2018/20315

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1.       To provide an opportunity for members to record the achievements of the Manurewa Local Board for the 2016 – 2019 political term.

 

 

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Manurewa Local Board:

a)      request the following additions be added to the Manurewa Local Board Achievements Register for the 2016 - 2019 political term.

 

 

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Manurewa Local Board Achievements Register 2016 - 2019

239

     

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Author

Sarah Butterfield - Democracy Advisor - Manurewa

Authoriser

Manoj Ragupathy - Relationship Manager Manurewa and Papakura

 


Manurewa Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Manurewa Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 

Manurewa Local Board Workshop Records

 

File No.: CP2018/20316

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1.       To note the Manurewa Local Board record for the workshops held on 4, 12, and the 25 October 2018.

 

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary guidance

2.       Under Standing Order 1.4.2 and 2.15 workshops convened by the local board shall be closed to the public. However, the proceedings of a workshop shall record the names of members attending and a statement summarising the nature of the information received, and nature of matters discussed.  Resolutions or decisions are not made at workshops as they are solely for the provision of information and discussion. This report attaches the workshop record for the period stated below.

 

 

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Manurewa Local Board:

a)         note the Manurewa Local Board records for the workshops held on 4, 11, and 25            October 2018.

 

 

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

20181004 Workshop Record

251

b

20181011 Workshop Record

255

c

20181025 Workshop Record

257

     

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Author

Sarah Butterfield - Democracy Advisor - Manurewa

Authoriser

Manoj Ragupathy - Relationship Manager Manurewa and Papakura

 


Manurewa Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 


 


 


 


Manurewa Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 


 


Manurewa Local Board

15 November 2018

 

 


 


 


 

    

    

 



[1] Awareness of and attitudes towards voting in the 2016 Auckland Council elections, by Auckland Council, Citizen Insight and Engagement, 2017. Available on http://www.knowledgeauckland.org.nz/publication/?mid=1657&DocumentType=1&

[2] Frequently Asked Questions on i-voting, https://e-estonia.com/wp-content/uploads/faq-a4-v02-i-voting-1.pdf

[3] Report of the Electoral Commission on the 2017 General Election: Provided in accordance with section 8(1) of the Electoral Act 1993 (April 2018) p.13

[4] The proportion of DC funding differs for different projects i.e. reserve acquisitions are primarily DC funded whereas transport projects have a mix of general rates, NZTA and DC funding.  Lower DC funding for parks would reduce capex by a similar amount.  Lower DC funding for transport would remove projects of a higher value as we would lose access to the associated NZTA funding.