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

 

Date:

Time:

Meeting Room:

Venue:

 

Wednesday, 28 November 2018

6.00PM

Whau Local Board Office
31 Totara Avenue
New Lynn

 

Whau Local Board

 

OPEN AGENDA

 

 

 

MEMBERSHIP

 

Chairperson

Tracy Mulholland

 

Deputy Chairperson

Susan Zhu

 

Members

Derek Battersby, QSM, JP

 

 

Catherine Farmer

 

 

Duncan Macdonald, JP

 

 

Te'eva Matafai

 

 

David Whitley

 

 

(Quorum 4 members)

 

 

 

Glenn Boyd

(Relationship Manager)

Local Board Services (West)

 

 

Riya Seth

Democracy Advisor - Whau

 

22 November 2018

 

Contact Telephone: (09) 826 5193

Email: riya.seth@aucklandcouncil.govt.nz

Website: www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz

 

 


 

 


Whau Local Board

28 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                                                                                                                    5

9          Public Forum                                                                                                                  5

10        Extraordinary Business                                                                                                6

11        Whau Ward Councillor update                                                                                     7

12        Auckland Transport update report for the Whau Local Board November 2018     9

13        Trial of online voting at the 2019 local elections                                                     27

14        Local government elections 2019 – order of names on voting documents         41

15        Whau Quick Response Round Two 2018/2019 grant allocations                          51

16        New road name in the Transforma Developments Limited subdivision at 26 Havelle Avenue, Titirangi.                                                                                                         91

17        Increasing activation of parks by diverse communities within the Whau            97

18        Māori naming of parks and places in the Whau Local Board Area: An additional park for phase one of the Māori naming and storytelling programme               123

19        Whau Ethnic Peoples Plan                                                                                       127

20        Auckland Council's Quarterly Report: Whau Local Board for quarter one        195

21        Auckland Regional Pest Management Plan consultation feedback and recommended changes                                                                                            229

22        Feedback on proposed topics for inclusion in the Auckland Water Strategy   263

23        Draft Contributions Policy                                                                                        281

24        Governance forward work calendar - November 2018                                          427

25        Confirmation of workshop records - 17 Oct 2018 to 7 Nov 2018                         431  

26        Consideration of Extraordinary Items 

 

 


1          Welcome

 

 

2          Apologies

 

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

 

3          Declaration of Interest

 

Members are reminded of the need to be vigilant to stand aside from decision making when a conflict arises between their role as a member and any private or other external interest they might have.

 

4          Confirmation of Minutes

 

That the Whau Local Board:

a)         confirm the ordinary minutes of its meeting, held on Wednesday, 24 October 2018, as a true and correct record.

b)         confirm the minutes of Whau Local Board Hearings Panel (proposal for revocation of the Reserves Act 1977 status over Saunders Reserve), held on Wednesday, 31 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 Whau Local Board. This means that details relating to deputations can be included in the published agenda. Total speaking time per deputation is ten minutes or as resolved by the meeting.

 

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

 

9          Public Forum

 

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

 

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


 

 

10        Extraordinary Business

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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


Whau Local Board

28 November 2018

 

 

Whau Ward Councillor update

 

File No.: CP2018/21982

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1.       A period of time (10 minutes) has been set aside for the Whau Ward Councillor to have an opportunity to update the Whau Local Board on regional matters.

 

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Whau Local Board:

a)      thank Whau Ward Councillor Ross Clow for his update.

 

 

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.      

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Author

Riya Seth - Democracy Advisor - Whau

Authoriser

Glenn Boyd - Relationship Manager Henderson-Massey, Waitakere Ranges, Whau

 


Whau Local Board

28 November 2018

 

 

Auckland Transport update report for the Whau Local Board November 2018

 

File No.: CP2018/18874

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1.       To respond to requests on transport-related matters, provide an update on the current status of the Local Board Transport Capital Fund (LBTCF), provide a summary of consultation material sent to the board and provide transport related information on matters of specific application and interest to the Whau Local Board and its community.

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2.       In particular, this report:

·     attaches quarterly report material covering Auckland Transport’s activities over the July to September 2018 period.

·     notes consultation information sent to the Board for feedback and decisions of the Traffic Control Committee as they affect the Board area.

 

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Whau Local Board:

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

 

 

Horopaki / Context

3.       This report addresses transport related matters in the Whau local board area.

4.       Auckland Transport is responsible for all of Auckland’s transport services, excluding state highways. It 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

5.       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. Projects must also:

·    be safe

·    not impede network efficiency

·    be in the road corridor (although projects running through parks can be considered if there is a transport outcome).

6.       The Whau Local Board’s funding allocation under the LBTCF was $5,160,346 for the current political term which includes the 19/20 budget. The remaining budget left to allocate is 1,959,047. Below table demonstrates the current status of the fund and projects:

 

 

 

Quarterly report for July to September 2018

7.       The following quarterly report material is attached to this monthly report:

i)        attachment A – report from Auckland Transport departments on their activities in the Whau Local Board area and regionally over the last quarter.

ii)       attachment B – report on Travelwise Schools activities in the Whau Local Board area over the last quarter.

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

Street Signs for Ambrico Place

8.       Auckland Transport has approved the request through the Local Board for a general interest sign to be installed at the intersection of Ambrico Place and Rankin Avenue, New Lynn.  Auckland Transport are not able to use your preferred wording ‘Te Toi Uku Clay Works Crown Lynn Museum’, due to the size of the sign. However, we will facilitate the installation of a museum sign with either the word ceramic, pottery or kiln added.

Local Board Issues Being Investigated

9.       Auckland Transport has high volumes of requests for service at this time. This has made our standard timeframe to process requests longer than usual. The Local board have requested the following issues be investigated and they have been recorded, entered and are in the initial investigation stage:

·    Arran Street Public Safety and Nuisance Issues

This issue is being investigated. Auckland Transport will provide a response once completed.

·    Trent Street, Whakawhiti Loop, Avondale Roading Issues

This issue is being investigated. Auckland Transport will provide a response once completed.

·    Portage Road Transports Parking Issues

This issue is being investigated. Auckland Transport will provide a response once completed.

Consultation documents on proposed improvements

10.     Consultation documents for the following proposals have been provided to the Whau Local Board for its feedback, and are summarised here for information purposes only.

11.     Following consultation, Auckland Transport considers the feedback received and determines whether to proceed further with the proposal as consulted on or amend the proposal if changes are considered necessary:

·       St Georges Road on-street cycle path and shared use path, consultation.

·       A proposal to improve road safety by introducing new pedestrian refuges on Rosebank Road, Avondale.

Auckland Transport’s Traffic Control Committee (TCC) report

12.     Decisions of the TCC during the month of October 2018 affecting the Whau Local Board area are listed below.

Date

Street (Suburb)

Type of Report

Nature of Restriction

Decision

1-October-18

Kay Drive, Bellamy Place, Blockhouse Bay

Permanent Traffic and Parking changes

No Stopping At All Times

CARRIED

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori / Māori impact statement

13.     The proposed decision of receiving the report has no impacts or opportunities for Māori. Any engagement with Māori, or consideration of impacts and opportunities, will be carried out on an individual project basis.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea / Financial implications

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

Ngā raru tūpono / Risks

15.     The forward works programme in the Whau Local Board area could change from the advice provided here if circumstances change.

16.     Auckland Transport has risk management strategies in place for the transport projects undertaken in the local board area.

Ngā koringa ā-muri / Next steps

17.     Auckland Transport will continute to provide updates to the Whau Local Board on transport related projects and issues next month.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Whau Local Board Auckland Transport Activity Report

13

b

Whau School Community Transport Report

25

     

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Author

Owena Schuster, Elected Member Relationship Manager

Authorisers

Jonathan Anyon, Elected Member Relationship Team Manager

Glenn Boyd - Relationship Manager Henderson-Massey, Waitakere Ranges, Whau

 


Whau Local Board

28 November 2018

 

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Whau Local Board

28 November 2018

 

 


 


Whau Local Board

28 November 2018

 

 

Trial of online voting at the 2019 local elections

 

File No.: CP2018/20514

 

  

 

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. Following the overall trend of transactions and activities moving online, online voting is the natural progression. It will increase convenience and accessibility for voters and has the potential to increase voter turnout.

3.       Following the 24 May 2018 Governing Body’s in-principle support for an online voting trial at the 2019 local body elections, Auckland Council has 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, includes a procurement process aimed at selecting a preferred provider and all participating councils, seeking their Governing Body’s approval to proceed with 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 from external Information and Communications Technology (ICT) security experts.

6.       In the case of Auckland Council, only a specified class of electors (a subset) will be offered to participate in the online voting trial. The other eight councils are intending 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 (refer Attachments A and B) 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, the 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 Whau 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 is 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: 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 (US) 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 specified class of electors (a subset). 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, it is not a belief that internet accessibility will 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

37

b

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

39

     

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Author

Elodie Fontaine - Advisor - Democracy Services

Authorisers

Marguerite Delbet - General Manager Democracy Services

Louise Mason - GM Local Board Services

Glenn Boyd - Relationship Manager Henderson-Massey, Waitakere Ranges, Whau

 


Whau Local Board

28 November 2018

 

 

PDF Creator


Whau Local Board

28 November 2018

 

 

PDF Creator


Whau Local Board

28 November 2018

 

 

Local government elections 2019 – order of names on voting documents

 

File No.: CP2018/20875

 

  

 

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 problem. 

 

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Whau 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

45

     

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Author

Warwick McNaughton - Principal Advisor - Democracy Services

Authorisers

Marguerite Delbet - General Manager Democracy Services

Louise Mason - GM Local Board Services

Glenn Boyd - Relationship Manager Henderson-Massey, Waitakere Ranges, Whau

 


Whau Local Board

28 November 2018

 

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Whau Local Board

28 November 2018

 

 

Whau Quick Response Round Two 2018/2019 grant allocations

 

File No.: CP2018/21019

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1.       To fund, part-fund or decline applications received for the Whau Quick Response Grants Round Two 2018/2019.

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2.       The Whau Local Board adopted the Whau Local Grants Programme 2018/2019 on 18 April 2018 (see Attachment A). The document sets application guidelines for contestable community grants submitted to the local board.

3.       This report presents applications received for the Whau Quick Response Grants, Round One 2018/2019 (see Attachment B).

4.       The Whau Local Board has set a total community grants budget of $150,000 for the 2018/2019 financial year.

5.       The Whau Local Board has allocated a total of $33,000 in Local Grants Round One 2018/2019 and a total of $13,888 in Quick Response Round One 2018/2019, leaving a balance of $103,112 for the one remaining local grant round and the two quick response grant rounds in the 2018/2019 financial year.

6.       Eight applications were received for Whau Quick Response Grants Round Two 2018/2019, requesting a total of $12,010.00.

7.       One past application (Royal New Zealand Blind Foundation MB1819-126) is also requesting changes to the condition of the grant allocation.

 

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Whau Local Board:

a)      agree to fund, part-fund or decline each application in Whau Quick Response Round One 2018/2019 applications as outlined in Table One:

Table One: Whau Quick Response Grants Round Two 2018/2019 applications

Application ID

Organisation

Requesting funding for

Amount requested

Eligibility

QR1921-201

Community

Alleviate Poverty and Distress Charitable Trust

Towards travel costs and a weekly wage cost for a twenty-week period from 1 December 2018

$2,000.00

Eligible

QR1921-203

Community

Waitakere Japanese Supplementary School

Towards costs for stationery for term two, 2019 for the Waitakere Japanese Supplementary School.

$500.00

Eligible

QR1921-205

Community

Glendene Community Society Incorporated

Towards costs for signage, lollies, promotion, ice, generator hire, printing and children's gifts for the 2018 Glendene Santa Run.

$635.00

Eligible

Application ID

Organisation

Requesting funding for

Amount requested

Eligibility

QR1921-206

Community

Phoenix and Friends

Towards costs of photography and copy-writing for an on-line neighbourhood guide known as "On the Grid" for the period 1 December 2018 to 1 March 2019.

$1,000.00

Eligible

QR1921-207

Community

Youthline Auckland Charitable Trust

Towards salary costs for the volunteer manager for the period 1 December 2018 to 30 November 2019.

$2,000.00

Eligible

QR1921-209

Environment

Green Bay Community House Incorporated

Towards costs of materials, transport, garden tools and equipment, plants, mulch seeds, printing and art supplies for the period 1 December 2018 to 30 June 2019.

$1,999.00

Eligible

QR1921-211

Environment

Pasifika Migrant Services Charitable Trust

Towards costs for venue hire, nutrition workshops, zero-waste workshops, project planning management fees, overheads, and resources for the Love Food Hate Waste project for the period 14 January 2019 to 31 December 2019.

$1876.00

Eligible

QR1921-215

Community

Merge New Zealand

Towards New Zealand Sign Language (NZSL) resources to enable tutors to work with deaf children

$2,000.00

Eligible

 

 

Total

$12,010.00

 

b)      remove the condition of the grant allocated to the Royal New Zealand Blind Foundation (MB1819-126) for $1,000, for the purchase of audiobooks.

 

 

Horopaki / Context

8.       The local board allocates grants to groups and organisations delivering projects, activities and services that benefit Aucklanders and contribute to the vision of being a world class city.

9.       The Auckland Council Community Grants Policy supports each local board to adopt a grants programme.

10.     The local board grants programme sets out:

·      local board priorities

·      lower priorities for funding

·      exclusions

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

·      any additional accountability requirements.

11.     The Whau Local Board adopted their grants programme for 2018/2019 on 18 April 2018 and will operate three quick response and two local grant rounds for this financial year.

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

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu / Analysis and advice

13.     The aim of the local board grant programme is to deliver projects and activities which align with the outcomes identified in the local board plan. All applications have been assessed utilising the Community Grants Policy and the local board grant programme criteria. The eligibility of each application is identified in the report recommendations.

14.     One previous application (Royal New Zealand Foundation for the Blind MB1819-126) is now requesting a review of the approved grant condition.

15.     The Royal New Zealand Foundation for the Blind were granted $1,000 in local grants round one (MB1819-126) for audiobooks with the condition that the audiobooks be used solely for Whau residents. The foundation have now informed staff that the audiobooks are accessible online and are therefore available to blind people on a national basis and cannot be restricted to use in one local area. Therefore they are requesting that the local board reconsider their grant allocation, without the condition of use.

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

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

17.     The local board is requested to note that section 48 of the Community Grants Policy states “We will also provide feedback to unsuccessful grant applications about why they have been declined, so they will know what they can do to increase their chances of success next time”.

18.     A summary of each application received through Whau Quick Response, Round Two 2018/2019 (see Attachment B) is provided.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori / Māori impact statement

19.     The local board grants programme aims to respond to Auckland Council’s commitment to improving Maori wellbeing by providing grants to individuals and groups who deliver positive outcomes for Maori. Auckland Council’s Maori Responsiveness Unit has provided input and support towards the development of the community grants processes.

20.     Three applicants applying to Whau Quick Response Grants Round Two indicated that their project targeted Māori or Māori outcomes.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea / Financial implications

21.     The allocation of grants to community groups is within the adopted Long-Term Plan 2018-2028 and local board agreements.

22.     The Whau Local Board has allocated a total of $33,000 in Local Grants Round One 2018/2019 and a total of $13,888 in Quick Response Round One 2018/2019, leaving a balance of $103,112 for the one remaining local grant round and the two quick response grant rounds in the 2018/2019 financial year.

23.     Eight applications were received for Whau Quick Response Grants Round One 2018/2019, requesting a total of $12,010.00.

Ngā raru tūpono / Risks

24.     The allocation of grants occurs within the guidelines and criteria of the Community Grants Policy and the local boards programme. The assessment process has identified a low risk associated with funding the applications in this round.

Ngā koringa ā-muri / Next steps

25.     Following the Whau Local Board allocation of funding for quick response grants round two, commercial and finance staff will notify the applicants of the local board’s decision and facilitate payment of the grant.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Whau Local Board Grant Programme 2018/2019

55

b

Whau Quick Response Round Two 2018/2019 grant applications

59

     

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Author

Erin Shin - Community Grants Coordinator

Authorisers

Marion Davies - Grant Operations Manager

Shane King - Head of Operations Support

Glenn Boyd - Relationship Manager Henderson-Massey, Waitakere Ranges, Whau

 


Whau Local Board

28 November 2018

 

 


 


 


Whau Local Board

28 November 2018

 

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Whau Local Board

28 November 2018

 

 

New road name in the Transforma Developments Limited subdivision at 26 Havelle Avenue, Titirangi

 

File No.: CP2018/21440

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1.       To seek approval from the Whau Local Board to name a new private road created by way of subdivision at 26 Havelle Avenue, Titirangi.

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2.       Auckland Council has road naming guidelines that set out the requirements and criteria of the Council for proposed road names. These requirements and criteria have been applied in this situation to ensure consistency of road naming across the Auckland Region.

3.       The Applicant, Transforma Developments Limited, has submitted the following names:

·     Happeace Lane (preferred)

·     Sarawak Lane

·     Whanake Lane

 

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Whau Local Board:

a)      approve a name for the new private road constructed within the subdivision being undertaken by Transforma Developments Limited at 26 Havelle Avenue, Titirangi in accordance with section 319(1)(j) of the Local Government Act 1974.

 

 

Horopaki / Context

4.       Resource consent has been obtained for a 12 lot residential subdivision at 26 Havelle Avenue, Titirangi and the council reference is BUN30516298 & SUB60038686 SUB-2014-1447.

5.       This approved development contains a new private road, in the form of combined rights of way, which require a road name as it services more than 5 lots.

6.       A site plan of the road and development can be found in Attachment A.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu / Analysis and advice

7.       Auckland Council’s road naming criteria typically require that road names reflect:

·         A historical or ancestral linkage to an area;

·         A particular landscape, environment or biodiversity theme or feature; or

·         An existing (or introduced) thematic identity in the area.

·         The use of Maori names is actively encouraged.

8.       The Applicant has proposed the road names listed in the table below, in order of preference.

 

Proposed New Road Name

Meaning

Road Naming Criteria

Happeace Lane (preferred)

The area is peaceful and imparts a feeling of happiness with plentiful of birdlife and insects. Applicant has combined the two words Happy and Peace for road name.

 

Meets criteria – local significance and unique.

Sarawak Lane

 

 

Named after developers origin, where he came from, Sarawak being a state in Malaysia.

 

Meets criteria – unique.

 

Whanake Lane

Maori translation, to move onwards, to move upwards, to grow, to rise.

Meets criteria – unique.

 

 

9.       Land Information New Zealand (LINZ) has confirmed the proposed and alternative name is acceptable and no duplicates exist.

10.     All iwi in the Auckland area were written to and invited to comment.

No replies were received.

11.     The proposed new names are deemed to meet the council’s road naming guidelines.

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

12.     The decision sought for this report does not trigger any significant policy and is not considered to have any immediate impact on the community.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori / Māori impact statement

13.     The applicant has corresponded with local iwi and no replies were received.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea / Financial implications

14.     The applicant has responsibility for ensuring that appropriate signage will be installed accordingly once approval is obtained for the new road name.

Ngā raru tūpono / Risks

15.     There are no significant risks to council as road naming is a routine part of the subdivision development process with consultation being a key part of the process.

Ngā koringa ā-muri / Next steps

16.     Approved road names are notified to Land Information New Zealand who records them on their New Zealand wide land information database which includes street addresses issued by councils.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Diagram for 26 Havelle Avenue Titirangi

95

     

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Author

Dale Rewa - Subdivision Advisor

Authorisers

Trevor Cullen - Team Leader Subdivision

Glenn Boyd - Relationship Manager Henderson-Massey, Waitakere Ranges, Whau

 


Whau Local Board

28 November 2018

 

 


Whau Local Board

28 November 2018

 

 

Increasing activation of parks by diverse communities within the Whau

 

File No.: CP2018/21563

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1.       To receive the Diversity in the Whau Parks Needs Assessment report.

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2.       The Whau is a diverse local board area, home to many new migrants, with just under half of residents born overseas. It is also a local board facing significant growth, with the population expected to increase in the next fifteen years.

3.       In order to provide an appropriate and inclusive park experience for this growing population, we first need to gain better understanding of the open space needs of diverse communities within the Whau.

4.       In FY18/19 the Whau Local Board funded an investigation to engage with a wide range of diverse community groups within the area and gain an understanding of how they value and use the open space available to them and how we could better serve them in future.

5.       This investigation was run parallel to another project with the wider remit to inform the development of an Ethnic Peoples Plan for the Whau, and was carried out between May and August 2018.

6.       A number of themes and recommended actions to improve the use of public open space by diverse communities were identified during this engagement, explained in detail in Attachment A to this report.

7.       Responding to the open space needs and opportunities identified through this investigation will result in a number of benefits to diverse communities within the Whau, including to their health and wellbeing, knowledge and social connectedness.

8.       Findings from this report will help to inform the development of future programmes and projects within parks, as well as input into other plans such as the Whau Ethnic Peoples Plan.

 

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Whau Local Board:

a)      receive the Diversity in the Whau Parks Needs Assessment report, Attachment A, to aid in future decision-making to optimise opportunities for diverse communities within parks in the Whau.

 

Horopaki / Context

9.       The Whau is a diverse local board area, with 42% of the population having been born overseas. This is one of the highest ratios for migrant population in Auckland. The largest groups of people born overseas were from the People’s Republic of China, followed by India, Fiji, Samoa and England.

10.     These groups are often some of the least visible and least engaged during public consultation, with poor representation, a lack of understanding of the function of local government and often reduced proficiency in the English language.

11.     The Whau is also a local board facing significant growth, with the population expected to increase in the next fifteen years. This is expected to be most pronounced at key growth areas in Avondale and New Lynn.

12.     This growth is likely to put pressure on the network of 146 local parks located across the area. As population density increases these parks will become more important as sites for community activity and connectedness.

13.     In order to improve the parks network in the Whau, we have to have to ensure that the needs of its diverse population are catered to. While we know that the ways in which different cultures value and utilise open space can differ, further investigation is required to identify the needs of diverse communities living in this area of Auckland.

14.     The Whau Local Board funded an investigation in FY18/19 to identify the open space needs and opportunities for diverse communities within the local board area.

15.     This investigation aimed to identify and survey a wide range of community groups within the Whau, to gain an understanding of how these communities value and use the open space available to them. Suggestions for how we could better serve these groups were compiled to produce recommendations for the future development and programming of parks and ongoing engagement with the diverse community in the Whau.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu / Analysis and advice

16.     A series of interviews and five workshops were undertaken between May and August 2018 to identify the open space needs of diverse communities in the Whau. This engagement methodology, explained in detail on page 5 of Attachment A, aligns with the empowered communities’ approach of Auckland Council.

17.     The investigation identified five key themes which were consistent across responses from a range of diverse communities for how they value open space. Expanded in detail in Attachment A (pages 6-8), these were:

·        Parks to increase diverse access and ownership of public space.

·        Parks to improve health and wellbeing.

·        Parks as educational spaces for food growing and sustainability.

·        Parks for family and community connectedness.

·        Parks as Multi-use/adaptive space.

18.     The investigation identified a number of actions for how we could better provide for diverse communities within parks. Expanded in detail in Attachment A (pages 9-19), this included:

·        Provision of sporting exchange programme in parks.

·        Expansion of ‘Kai Whau’ into parks and open space.

·        Provision of Pop up covered space/shelter.

·        Provision of ‘Myth and Legends’ Whau storytelling benches.

·        Provision of international subtitled movies in parks.

·        Benefits realisation and program review strategy.

·        Participation in Ethnic people’s community led development forum.

19.     Responding to the open space needs and opportunities identified through this investigation will result in a number of benefits to diverse communities within Puketāpapa. Expanded in detail in Attachment A (pages 6-19), some of these benefits include:

·        Increased use of parks and open spaces by members of diverse communities, resulting in benefits to personal health and wellbeing, including opportunities to engage in both traditional and non-traditional sports.

·        Increased inclusion in parks and open spaces, helping to create safe and fit for purpose spaces for the wider community, and fostering a sense of ownership of public open space.

·        Provide an opportunity for ethnic communities to learn about a Māori world view on the environment and role of kai in inter-ethnic exchange activities.

·        Reduced level of loneliness or social isolation, a common issue raised by members of diverse communities, by creating social connective spaces.

·        Improved understanding and empowerment of diverse communities to engage with local government, including future consultation efforts in their local area.

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

20.     This Whau diversity in parks needs assessment directly responds to three outcomes of the Whau Local Board Plan 2017:

·    Outcome 1 ‘Well-planned towns, facilities and housing’. Specifically, objectives one “the Whau has a network of great community buildings, sports fields and Parks” and two “more people are more active more often”.

·    Outcome 2: ‘Great neighbourhoods with strong community connections, capacity and voices. Specifically, objectives one “our many voices contribute to making our future” and two “Celebrate our diverse communities and their heritages”.

·    Outcome 4: ‘Enhanced natural environment’. All objectives are directly related to improving parks and service provision in the Whau. Parks and open space projects and programmes provide an opportunity for educating our diverse communities about the importance of protecting our natural environment and living more sustainably in urban contexts.

21.     The research also complements the Mental Health Foundation’s Five Ways of Wellbeing, a programme supported by the Whau Local Board. Activating parks for diverse cultural communities connects people through events and activities. In addition, parks are an ideal place to take notice, keeping learning and be active.

22.     Workshops were held with the Whau Local Board to discuss this project on 4 July 2018 and 7 November 2018. The final draft was workshopped with the local board on 7 November 2018, with no edits requested.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori / Māori impact statement

23.     No specific engagement was targeted towards Māori, as this investigation focused on more recent migrant groups in particular. In addition, Council already have in place specific processes to seek the input of mana whenua on all projects and programmes within parks.

24.     This topic was discussed with mana whenua during an early stage at the Park, Sports and Recreation Kaitiaki Forum on 29 November 2017. Mana whenua representatives present agreed that they would like to be involved as partners in the decision making to follow this type of work, as opposed to being engaged specifically as stakeholders in the project.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea / Financial implications

25.     Improved knowledge of the needs of diverse communities within parks in the Whau will help to guide future investment into both public assets and programmes within parks. Funding from the local board may be sought in future years to progress the recommendations from the report.

Ngā raru tūpono / Risks

26.     In preparing this report it has been necessary to make a number of assumptions on the basis of the information supplied to Locis for this research. It is possible that despite the large number of inputs, the viewpoints collected through this research may not accurately reflect the needs of all members of diverse communities. To mitigate this risk, ongoing engagement with diverse community groups in the Whau is recommended as projects and programmes are progressed to delivery.

Ngā koringa ā-muri / Next steps

27.     Parks Services will undertake more detailed feasibility and assessment of recommendations from the report as part of future PSR Work Programme planning.

28.     The key findings of this report will help to inform the development of the Whau Ethnic Peoples Plan in 2018/19, and shape future Active Recreation and ACE programmes.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Diversity in the Whau Parks Needs Assessment

101

     

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Author

Thomas Dixon - Parks & Places Specialist

Authorisers

Mace Ward - General Manager Parks, Sports and Recreation

Glenn Boyd - Relationship Manager Henderson-Massey, Waitakere Ranges, Whau

 


Whau Local Board

28 November 2018

 

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Whau Local Board

28 November 2018

 

 

Māori naming of parks and places in the Whau Local Board Area: An additional park for phase one of the Māori naming and storytelling programme

 

File No.: CP2018/22024

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1.       To add the recently constructed ‘New Lynn Pocket Park’ to the phase one list of parks for Te Kete Rukuruku, a Māori naming and storytelling programme for the Whau Local Board.

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2.       Te Kete Rukuruku is a partnership between the Auckland Council and mana whenua, involving the collection and telling of the unique stories of Tāmaki Makaurau. A subset of this programme is the Māori naming of parks and places which involves the reclamation or identification of new Māori names and narratives across Tāmaki Makaurau.

3.       This programme aims to streamline the naming process for mana whenua through an agreed partnership approach, and responds directly to the Auckland Council Māori Language Policy to enable Māori to see and hear their culture and language being used in their community. This reflects the desire of Auckland Council to showcase a Māori identity that is Auckland’s point of difference in the world.

4.       Following four workshops in 2017/18, the Whau Local Board resolved to invite mana whenua to provide a Māori name and narrative for 99 local parks (Resolution #WH/2018/88) in August 2018. The business report from the August agenda (CP2018/12905) provides comprehensive context and advice regarding the project. The list of resolved phase one parks is included as Attachment A in this report.

5.       Over the course of 2017 and 2018, Auckland Council’s Healthy Waters department undertook significant emergency works to repair critical roading and storm water infrastructure at Great North Road which was damaged during a storm event. As part of this work, a new small pocket park / civic space adjacent to 3107-3109 Great North Road was created above a new large culvert.

6.       Local Board members have noted a possible name of ‘Te Rewa Rewa Park. Members recognise the need for appropriate input from mana whenua.

7.       To confirm a name for this new pocket park in a timely manner while keeping to a single process of naming for mana whenua, it is recommended that it should be added to phase one and flagged as a priority site.

8.       If approved, a name and narrative for this park will be delivered to the local board ahead of other names from phase one, in partnership with mana whenua, in early 2019.

9.       It is suggested that this name be included in the focussed communications approach being developed for the rest of the phase one parks. In addition, the name will be included in signage already funded to be installed at the site, providing immediate visibility to the new name and helping to raise awareness and understanding of the rich Māori history and values in the local board area.

 

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Whau Local Board:

a)      invite mana whenua to provide a Māori name and narrative for the unnamed ‘New Lynn Pocket Park’ in addition to those parks previously resolved and included in phase one of the Māori naming of parks and places.

b)      note it is expected that the gifted name and narrative for this site will be adopted by the local board to enrich the story of this new park, and support the Māori language to be visible, heard, spoken and learnt.

c)      note this site as a high priority, and request that a name is received as soon as possible via the existing process.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Whau Maori Naming Tranche One List

125

     

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Author

Thomas Dixon - Parks & Places Specialist

Authorisers

Mace Ward - General Manager Parks, Sports and Recreation

Glenn Boyd - Relationship Manager Henderson-Massey, Waitakere Ranges, Whau

 


Whau Local Board

28 November 2018

 

 


 


Whau Local Board

28 November 2018

 

 

Whau Ethnic Peoples Plan

 

File No.: CP2018/22216

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1.       To adopt the Whau Ethnic Peoples Plan.

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2.       The Whau Local Board Plan 2017 identified the development of a Whau Ethnic Peoples Plan as a key initiative of outcome two: “great neighbourhoods with strong community connections, capacity and voices”.

3.       This report presents the final plan and key focus areas for consideration and adoption.

4.       Work is already underway to support the implementation of the plan, a Parks Needs Assessment and the development of an engagement strategy for the local board.

 

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Whau Local Board:

a)      adopt the Whau Ethnic Peoples Plan.

 

 

Horopaki / Context

5.       The 2017/2018 Arts, Community and Events work programme included line 599: increase Diverse Participation: Maori, Pacific and Ethnic Voices.

6.       The line has an allocated budget of $25,000 for the development of an ethnic plan in response to the ethnic diversity in the area.

7.       Staff contracted Locis Ltd to develop the plan between May and August 2018 with key stakeholder and ethnic community groups in the Whau area using an empowered communities approach.

8.       The plan is included as Attachment A: Responding to Diversity in the Whau – developing an ethnic peoples plan project report.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu / Analysis and advice

9.       The Whau Ethnic Peoples Plan was developed through interviews and workshops with key stakeholders and ethnic communities to help identify themes and focus areas. 

10.     The four overarching themes and focus areas are:

·        increase access to support and resources

·        facilitate inter-ethnic cultural exchange

·        increase participation and ownership of public space

·        strengthen leadership.

11.     The plan outlines recommended actions that support the focus areas in the short, medium and long term.

12.     It can be challenging to engage diverse ethnic communities and respond to their interests and aspirations due to language and cultural barriers and lower awareness of local government structures, systems and processes.

13.     The plan includes recommendations to support local board engagement and identifies opportunities to improve inclusion and access to programmes, services and facilities for the diverse ethnic community in the Whau.

14.     These include:

·        reviewing access to funding and spaces to strengthen a sense of belonging and ownership

·        support for volunteering and information-sharing between different ethnic groups including Māori

·        supporting ethnic community-led development and ethnic leadership development.

15.     The project team invited staff from council’s grants and parks services teams to make contact and provide information to the community attending the workshops as an early response to one of the key themes: access to spaces and resources. This helped to inform the Parks Needs Assessment that is currently underway.

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

16.     The plan supports outcome one of the local board plan “well-planned towns, facilities and housing” and outcome two “great neighbourhoods with strong community connections, capacity and voices”.

17.     The plan aligns with the following local board plan objectives:

·        our many voices contribute to making our future

·        celebrate our diverse communities and their heritages

·        more people are more active more often

·        our towns and neighbourhood communities are stronger.

18.     The Whau is an ethnically diverse community comprising 45 per cent New Zealand European, 35 per cent Asian, 18 per cent Pacific, 9 per cent Māori, and 2 per cent MELAA (Middle Eastern, Latin American and African). 

19.     The local board provided positive feedback on the plan at a workshop held on 17 October 2018 and asked staff to table the plan at a local board meeting for consideration and adoption.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori / Māori impact statement

20.     Participants involved in developing the plan provided feedback that they were interested in sharing their own culture and engaging more with Māori.

21.     The local board has an opportunity to facilitate inter-ethnic and cultural exchange particularly between Māori and ethnic communities as a key outcome of the plan.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea / Financial implications

22.     The 2017/2018 work programme allocated $25,000 for the development of the plan.

23.     There are no significant financial implications from approving the plan as implementation will be met from within existing budgets and built into the 2018/2019 ACE work programme.

Ngā raru tūpono / Risks

24.     Slow or inadequate response from council could result in a loss of momentum and enthusiasm from key stakeholders and ethnic communities who are keen to get action underway. This has been mitigated by getting a number of key actions underway already, including the Parks Needs Assessment and the development of an engagement strategy for the local board.

Ngā koringa ā-muri / Next steps

25.     Staff will facilitate discussions with key internal and external stakeholders to respond to the plan and will broker opportunities to progress implementation during 2018/2019 and inform the 2019/2020 work programme.

26.     Staff will organise for the local board and community participants to meet following adoption of the plan.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Responding to Diversity in the Whau – developing an ethnic peoples plan project report

131

     

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Author

Monica Sharma: Specialist Advisor – Community Empowerment Unit

Authorisers

Graham Bodman - General Manager Arts, Community and Events

Glenn Boyd - Relationship Manager Henderson-Massey, Waitakere Ranges, Whau

 


Whau Local Board

28 November 2018

 

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Whau Local Board

28 November 2018

 

 

Auckland Council's Quarterly Report: Whau Local Board for quarter one

 

File No.: CP2018/20584

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1.         To provide the Whau 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, 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 Whau Local Board Plan outcomes.

4.         The key activity updates from this quarter are:

·     Opening of pocket park in New Lynn Town Centre

·     Completion of Brains Park upgrades

·     Upgrade of Archibald Park Pontoon completed

5.         All operating departments with agreed work programmes have provided a quarterly update against their work programme. The activities scale used for the updates are:

·        Green - on track

·        Amber - some risk or issues, which are being managed

·        Grey - cancelled, deferred or merged

·        Red - behind delivery, significant risk

There are no activities with a grey or red status this quarter.

6.         The financial performance report compared to budget 2017/2018 is attached [Appendix B]. There are some points for the local board to note.

·        Operating expenditure is $885k above budget. The majority of the over spend relates to the full facility maintenance contract where work in connection with the April storm were still incurred this quarter.

·        Operating revenue is in line with budget.

·        Capital Expenditure of $0.8m is $218k below budget due weather delays in installation of walkway at Holly St to Heron Park which is now due to be completed by end of October and development of sports fields at Sister Renee Shadbolt park which is at procurement phase.

7.  The Whau Local Board Financial performance report is in Appendix B

 

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Whau Local Board :

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

 

Horopaki / Context

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

·        Arts, Community and Events

·        Parks, Sport and Recreation

·        Libraries and Information

·        Community Services: Service, Strategy and Integration

·        Community Facilities: Build Maintain Renew

·        Community Leases

·        Infrastructure and Environmental Services

·        Local Economic Development

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

·        Well-planned towns, facilities and housing

·        Great neighbourhoods with strong community connections, capacity and voices

·        It’s 20 minutes to all we need by walking, cycling and public transport

·        Enhanced natural environment

·        Strong local businesses and more quality local jobs

·        Celebrating our creative edge in our streets, neighbourhoods and communities

·        Our heritage is known, protected and our stories are shared

10.       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

11.       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 the activity. These two statuses create a snapshot of the progress of the work programmes.

12.       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 (see 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.

13.       The graph below identifies work programme activity by RAG status (red, amber, green and grey). has been added to show). 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/merged (grey).

Graph 2: Whau Work Programme by RAG status

14.       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

Key activity updates from quarter one

15.       Opening of pocket park in New Lynn Town Centre – 15 September. In 2017, a major weather event caused significant damage to the roading infrastructure and buildings on the corner of Great North Road and Clark Street, New Lynn and affected the livelihood of many.  Residents, businesses, various departments of Auckland Council and social services as well as the Whau Local Board rallied together to seek better outcomes.  This pocket park is the result. The area around the park has received a significant investment into improved roading, shared path, waterway, park and boardwalk construction.  An interpretive sign will be added soon to share information relevant to the site.  The board is also looking into future projects to improve the Rewarewa Stream water quality. The project has touched on ALL the Whau Local Board Plan 2017 identified outcomes.

16.       Major Brains Park upgrades in Kelston.  Work commenced in the 2016/17 financial year in what has been and complex process that addresses the high level of use and the multi-purpose use of this much-loved local park.  Delivery has included upgrading two existing soil fields to sand carpets; installation of new flood lighting to all fields, improve sand slits drainage and irrigation. The programme of works has increased the quality as well as the level, or the hours of usability of the park.  There is further work to come.

17.       Upgrade of Archibald Park Pontoon, Kelston completed.  This project is a part of the Te Whau Pathway work programme, fully supported by the Whau Local Board.  Whau Coastal Walkway Environmental Trust hosted an on-site community event to mark the opening of the pontoon on 29 September 2019. Whau members were present to share the occasion with residents as well as representatives from the Kelston Intermediate School, Waitakere Outrigger Canoe Club, Kelston Community Hub, EcoMatters, Whau River Catchment Trust and New Lynn Sea.  The board is looking to enhance this open space area by adding a playground, park furniture and shade trees in future.

Activities with significant issues

18.       There are no current projects identified to have significant issues.

Activities on hold

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

·    Rewarewa Pathways – design phase has been put on hold by the Community Facilities’, Build Maintain and Renew team while the Community Services team undertakes a strategic assessment of the project.

·    Due to the Racing Industry announcement that the Avondale Racecourse is likely to go on the market, the planned refurbishment of the underground toilets leased by Auckland Council is currently on hold.

Changes to the local board work programme

Deferred activities

20.       No activities have been deferred from the 18/19 work programme:

Cancelled activities

21.       No activities have been cancelled.

Activities merged with other activities for delivery

22.       No activities 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

23.       This report informs the Whau Local Board of the performance for the quarter ending 30 September 2018.

Key performance indicators

24.       As most of the LTP key performance indicators are annual measures and do not change quarterly, staff have removed them from the quarterly performance report and will present the key performance indicators only once in the annual report at the end of the year.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori / Māori impact statement

25.       Te Auaunga Tohu - The Whau Local Board, in collaboration with the Puketapapa and Albert Eden local boards adopted the tohu in May 2017.  Representatives from Te Akitai Waiohua, Ngati Tamaoho, Ngati Whatua Oreakei, te Kawerau a Maki, Ngai Tai ki Tamaki and Ngati Whanaunga helped to provide advice to guide development of a pictogram depicting the swirling waters of the awa and the dual arms of mana whenua which symbolise love and protection.  This represents the cultural significance of the  te Auaunga Awa/Oakley Creek and the importance of mana whenua as kaitiaki (guardians) of the catchment.

26.       Event Partnership Fund – Whau  has set aside funding to support Waitangi Day celebrations on 6 February 2019.  Other events covered by this fund will also be delivering activations that encourage cross culture participation in Whau.

27.       E Tu -  responding to the key aspirations and priorities for Maori in the Whau. The Kelston Kaumatua Roopu met and identified key objectives and priorities for the year which included:

·        Strengthening relationships with board and Te Kawerau a Maki

·        Being available to tautoki civic and local events

·        Connecting with Kaumatua across the Whau.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea / Financial implications

28.       Whau Local Board capital investment for the period was $0.8m and net operational cost of service was $4.1m. Operating expenditure is 28% above budget the main driver relates to higher full facility contract maintenance due to prior years costs accrued regionally, while actual costs charged to local board and partly to responsive maintenance budgets held centrally and these will be allocated to local board in time for the next report. Operating revenue is in line with budget. Capital expenditure was (21%) below budget due to weather delays in installation of walkway at Holly St to Heron Park and development delays of sports fields at Sister Renee Shadbolt Park which is at procurement phase.

Ngā raru tūpono / Risks

29.       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.

30.       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

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

 

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Work Programme 2018/2019 Q1 Report

201

b

Local Board Financial Performance - Whau as at September 2018

219

c

Capital expenditure carry forwards 2018/2019 (from 2017/2018)

227

     

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Author

Antonina Georgetti - Local Board Advisor

Authoriser

Glenn Boyd - Relationship Manager Henderson-Massey, Waitakere Ranges, Whau

 


Whau Local Board

28 November 2018

 

 


Whau Local Board

28 November 2018

 

 


Whau Local Board

28 November 2018

 

 


Whau Local Board

28 November 2018

 

 


Whau Local Board

28 November 2018

 

 


Whau Local Board

28 November 2018

 

 


Whau Local Board

28 November 2018

 

 


Whau Local Board

28 November 2018

 

 


Whau Local Board

28 November 2018

 

 


Whau Local Board

28 November 2018

 

 


Whau Local Board

28 November 2018

 

 


Whau Local Board

28 November 2018

 

 


Whau Local Board

28 November 2018

 

 


Whau Local Board

28 November 2018

 

 


Whau Local Board

28 November 2018

 

 


Whau Local Board

28 November 2018

 

 


Whau Local Board

28 November 2018

 

 


Whau Local Board

28 November 2018

 

 


Whau Local Board

28 November 2018

 

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Whau Local Board

28 November 2018

 

 


 


Whau Local Board

28 November 2018

 

 

Auckland Regional Pest Management Plan consultation feedback and recommended changes

 

File No.: CP2018/21018

 

  

 

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 12 September 2018 to discuss the consultation feedback and proposed staff responses.

5.       Whau Local Board residents provided 41 submissions on the plan, representing three per cent 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 Whau Local Board:

a)      receive a summary of consultation feedback from Whau 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%

Great Barrier

24

4%

Devonport-Takapuna

53

4%

Franklin

50

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%

Local board

Number of submitters

Percentage of submitters

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 (see Attachment B for details around each of the proposed approaches). The responses received for each question from residents of the Whau 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 Whau 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

16%

26%

Partial support

5%

17%

Partial do not support

11%

3%

Full do not support

0%

2%

Other comments

68%

53%

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

Full support

16%

27%

Partial support

40%

29%

Partial do not support

4%

5%

Full do not support

0%

2%

Other comments

40%

37%

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

Full support

44%

46%

Partial support

25%

19%

Partial do not support

19%

12%

Full do not support

0%

2%

Other comments

13%

21%

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

Full support

20%

44%

Partial support

28%

20%

Partial do not support

8%

4%

Full do not support

4%

2%

Other comments

40%

30%

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

Full support

41%

43%

Partial support

24%

23%

Partial do not support

14%

7%

Full do not support

0%

4%

Other comments

21%

23%


 

Question

Response

Percentage of submissions local board

Percentage of submissions regional

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

Full support

44%

44%

Partial support

30%

21%

Partial do not support

11%

5%

Full do not support

0%

3%

Other comments

15%

28%

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

Full support

33%

38%

Partial support

27%

28%

Partial do not support

10%

7%

Full do not support

10%

4%

Other comments

20%

23%

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

Full support

35%

46%

Partial support

30%

23%

Partial do not support

4%

4%

Full do not support

0%

3%

Other comments

30%

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 Whau 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.     Proposed approaches to be taken in relation to these issues were workshopped with the board in July 2017. 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 12 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. 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.

·        Mana Whenua Kaitiaki Forum

·        Te Kawerau ā Maki

·        Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Whātua

·        Te Uri o Hau

·        Te Tira Whakamātaki - Māori Biosecurity Network

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

237

b

Proposed Regional Pest Management Plan 2018 - Summary Document

247

c

Whau Local Board feedback on the Proposed Regional Pest Management Plan

259

     

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

Glenn Boyd - Relationship Manager Henderson-Massey, Waitakere Ranges, Whau

 


Whau Local Board

28 November 2018

 

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Whau Local Board

28 November 2018

 

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Whau Local Board

28 November 2018

 

 


 


 


Whau Local Board

28 November 2018

 

 

Feedback on proposed topics for inclusion in the Auckland Water Strategy

 

File No.: CP2018/21102

 

  

 

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 (see 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, ahead of public consultation from February to April 2019.

 

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Whau Local Board:

a)      provide feedback on the proposed topics for inclusion in the Auckland Water Strategy (Attachment A of the agenda report)

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.

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

36.     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 Generals 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

37.     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

 

38.     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

269

b

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

277

     

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Author

Andrew Chin – Auckland Waters Portfolio Manager

Authorisers

Barry Potter - Director Infrastructure and Environmental Services

Louise Mason - GM Local Board Services

Glenn Boyd - Relationship Manager Henderson-Massey, Waitakere Ranges, Whau

 


Whau Local Board

28 November 2018

 

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Whau Local Board

28 November 2018

 

 


 


 


Whau Local Board

28 November 2018

 

 

Draft Contributions Policy

 

File No.: CP2018/20730

 

  

 

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 (see 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 November meetings will consider the draft Contribution Policy 2019 and resolve their feedback to inform the Governing Body’s decision making in December.

10.     Consultation is supported by a Consultation Document and Supporting Information, Attachments B and C respectively, which 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

11.     Details the key changes in our draft Contributions Policy and why we have proposed them.

 

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Whau Local Board:

a)      resolve feedback on the Contributions Policy 2019.

 

 

Horopaki / Context

12.     The current policy is known as the Contributions Policy 2015 (Variation A) and 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.

13.     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.

14.     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.

15.     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.

16.     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. Our 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 capital expenditure.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu / Analysis and advice

Capital expenditure and funding for Auckland’s growth

Capital investment and development contribution revenue

17.     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

18.     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.

19.     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.

20.     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

21.     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.

22.     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.

23.     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

24.     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.

25.     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.

26.     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 not general ratepayers.

Possible legislative changes to funding of Community Infrastructure

27.     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

28.     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.

29.     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

30.     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.

31.     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.

32.     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

33.     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.

34.     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.

35.     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.

36.     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.

37.     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.

38.     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.

39.     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

40.     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.

41.     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.

42.     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

43.     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.

44.     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.

45.     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.

46.     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.  Officers 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.

47.     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.

48.     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.

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

Payment timing

50.     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.

51.     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.

52.     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.

53.     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.

54.     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.

55.     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.

56.     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.

57.     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

58.     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.

59.     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.

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

Development Types

61.     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

62.     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

63.     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

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

Accommodation units for short term rental

65.     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

66.     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.

67.     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.

68.     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.

69.     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. We continue to work on new ways to partner with others to build and finance infrastructure. If we can do this successfully this will enable more development areas to be supported earlier.

Public Consultation

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

71.     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).

72.     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.

73.     It is planned to ask those providing written feedback 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

74.     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.

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

76.     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.

77.     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

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

79.     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.

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

81.     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.

82.     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.

83.     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

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

Ngā raru tūpono / Risks

85.     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

86.     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 would report on adoption of the final policy to the 13 December meeting of the Governing Body.

 

 

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Draft Contributions Policy 2019

293

b

Consultation Document

379

c

Supporting information

401

d

Remissions of development contributions for Maori development and social housing

421

     

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

Glenn Boyd - Relationship Manager Henderson-Massey, Waitakere Ranges, Whau

 


Whau Local Board

28 November 2018

 

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Whau Local Board

28 November 2018

 

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Whau Local Board

28 November 2018

 

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Whau Local Board

28 November 2018

 

 


 


 


 


 


Whau Local Board

28 November 2018

 

 

Governance forward work calendar - November 2018

 

File No.: CP2018/21984

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1.       To present the updated governance forward work calendar.

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2.       The governance forward work calendar for the Whau Local Board is in Attachment A. The calendar is updated monthly, reported to business meetings and distributed to council staff.

3.       The governance forward work calendars are part of Auckland Council’s quality advice programme and aim to support local boards’ governance role by:

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

·      clarifying what advice is expected and when

·      clarifying the rationale for reports.

4.       The calendar also aims to provide guidance for staff supporting local boards and greater transparency for the public.

 

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Whau Local Board:

a)      receive the governance forward work calendar for November 2018, as set out in Attachment A to this agenda report.

 

 

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Governance Forward Work Calendar - November 2018

429

     

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Author

Riya Seth - Democracy Advisor - Whau

Authoriser

Glenn Boyd - Relationship Manager Henderson-Massey, Waitakere Ranges, Whau

 


Whau Local Board

28 November 2018

 

 


Whau Local Board

28 November 2018

 

 

Confirmation of workshop records - 17 Oct 2018 to 7 Nov 2018

 

File No.: CP2018/21990

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1.       This report presents records of workshops held by the Whau Local Board on:

a)      17 October 2018

b)      7 November 2018

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2.       At the workshop held on Wednesday, 17 October 2018, the Whau Local Board had briefings on:

a)         Quick Response:    Round One, 2018/2019

b)         Regional Public Transport Plan Multi board workshop

c)         Code of conduct

d)         Whau Ethnic People’s Plan

e)         New Lynn Community Centre -  refurbishment update

3.       At the workshop held on Wednesday, 7 November 2018, the Whau Local Board had briefings on:

a)         Parks Services Work Programme

b)         2019/2020 Local board agreement and integrated work programme development

4.       The workshop records are attached to this report.

 

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Whau Local Board:

a)      confirm the records of the workshops in Attachments A to B held on the following dates: 

i)        17 October 2018

ii)       7 November 2018

 

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Records of workshop - 17 October 2018

433

b

Records of workshop - 7 November 2018

437

     

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Authors

Riya Seth - Democracy Advisor - Whau

Antonina Georgetti - Local Board Advisor

Authoriser

Glenn Boyd - Relationship Manager Henderson-Massey, Waitakere Ranges, Whau

 


Whau Local Board

28 November 2018

 

 


 


 


Whau Local Board

28 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.