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

 

Date:

Time:

Meeting Room:

Venue:

 

Tuesday, 21 September 2021

4.00pm

This meeting will proceed via Skype for Business. Either a recording or written summary will be uploaded on the Auckland Council website

 

Henderson-Massey Local Board

 

OPEN AGENDA

 

 

 

 

MEMBERSHIP

 

Chairperson

Vanessa Neeson, JP

 

Deputy Chairperson

Brenda Brady, JP

 

Members

Chris Carter

 

 

Peter Chan, JP

 

 

Dr Will Flavell

 

 

Matt Grey

 

 

Brooke Loader

 

 

Ingrid Papau

 

 

(Quorum 4 members)

 

 

 

Brenda Railey

Democracy Advisor

 

14 September 2021

 

Contact Telephone: 021 820 781

Email: brenda.railey@aucklandcouncil.govt.nz

Website: www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz

 

 


Henderson-Massey Local Board

21 September 2021

 

 

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

8.1     Deputations: David Riley - literacy programme                                                5

9          Public Forum                                                                                                                  6

10        Extraordinary Business                                                                                                6

11        Ward Councillors' Update                                                                                             7

12        Classification of a portion of land and the grant of a new community lease to Waitākere Outrigger Canoe Club Incorporated                                                          9

13        Reporting back decisions made under delegation                                                  25

14        Tāmaki Tauawhi Kaumātua - Age-friendly Auckland Action Plan                         31

15        Local board feedback on the kerbside refuse charging mechanism policy         87

16        Public feedback on proposal to make a new Public Trading Events and Filming Bylaw 2022                                                                                                                  105

17        Local board feedback on Auckland Transport's Parking Strategy Review        165

18        Public feedback on proposal to amend the Animal Management Bylaw 2015  225

19        Public feedback on proposal to amend the Water Supply and Wastewater Network Bylaw 2015                                                                                                                  285

20        Draft Business Improvement District Policy (2021) Kaupapa Here ā-Rohe Whakapiki Pakihi                                                                                                                           309

21        Addition to the 2019-2022 Henderson-Massey Local Board meeting schedule 359

22        Governance Forward Work Calendar                                                                      363

23        Confirmation of Workshop Records                                                                        367

24        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.

            The following are declared interests of elected members of the Henderson-Massey Local Board.

Member

Organisation

Position

Brenda Brady, JP

-        Safer West Community Trust

Trustee

Chris Carter

(Chair)

-        St Lazarus Trust

-        Waitemata District Health Board

-        Waitakere Badminton Club

Member

Member

Member

Peter Chan, JP

 

-        Cantonese Opera Society of NZ

-        Asian Leaders Forum

-        NZ-Hong Kong Business Association

-        NZ-China Business Association

-        Auckland Chinese Environment Protection Association (ACEPA)

-        Whau Coastal Walkway Trust

Member

Member

Member

Member

Advisor

 

Trustee

Matt Grey

-        West Auckland Youth Development Trust

-        Billy Graham Youth Foundation

Director

Board Member

Will Flavell

(Deputy Chairman)

-        Asia New Zealand Leadership Network

-        COMET

-        Te Atatū Tennis Club

-        Waitākere Literacy Board

Member

Employee

Board Member

Board Member

Brooke Loader

-         Waitakere Licensing Trust

-         Te Atatu Peninsula Business Association

-         Neighbourhood Support

-         Te Atatu Glendene Community Patrol

Member

Associate Member

Member

Volunteer

Vanessa Neeson

-        Village Green Quilters

-        Ranui Advisory Group

-        Waitakere Badmington Club

Member

Chairperson

Patron

Ingrid Papau

-        Liberty Impact Community Trust

-        #WeLoveTuvalu Community Trust

-        Neighbourhood Support

-        Liberty Church

-        Rutherford Primary Board of Trustees

Board Member

Member

Street Contact

Member

Member

           


 

Member appointments

            Board members are appointed to the following bodies. In these appointments the board members represent Auckland Council:

External organisation

 

Leads

Alternate

Central Park Henderson Business Association

Brenda Brady and Brooke Loader

 

Heart of Te Atatu South

Brenda Brady and Brooke Loader

 

Massey Matters

Will Flavell and Peter Chan

 

Ranui Advisory Group

Vanessa Neeson (Chair) and Ingrid Papau

 

Te Atatu Peninsula Business Association

Peter Chan and Ingrid Papau

 

Waitakere Ethnic Board

Ingrid Papau and Peter Chan

 

Waitakere Healthlink

Peter Chan

Chris Carter

Te Whau Pathway Trust

Matt Grey and Brenda Brady

 

 

 

4          Confirmation of Minutes

That the Henderson-Massey Local Board:

a)         confirm the ordinary minutes of its meeting, held on Tuesday, 17 August 2021, including the confidential section, as true and correct.

 

 

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 Henderson-Massey Local Board. This means that details relating to deputations can be included in the published agenda. Total speaking time per deputation is ten minutes or as resolved by the meeting.

 

8.1       Deputations: David Riley - literacy programme

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To receive a deputation from David Riley.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       David Riley, teacher and children’s author based in South Auckland will be in attendance to discuss his projects to improve literacy for children.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Henderson-Massey Local Board:

a)      receive the presentation on improving literacy for children and thank David Riley for his attendance.

 

 

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.”


Henderson-Massey Local Board

21 September 2021

 

 

Ward Councillors' Update

File No.: CP2021/13171

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To receive a verbal update from the Waitākere Ward Councillors.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       A period of 10 minutes has been set aside for the Waitākere Ward Councillors to have an opportunity to update the Henderson-Massey Local Board on regional matters.

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Henderson-Massey Local Board:

a)      thank Councillors Linda Cooper and Shane Henderson for their update.

 

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.      

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Brenda Railey - Democracy Advisor

Authorisers

Adam Milina - Local Area Manager

 


Henderson-Massey Local Board

21 September 2021

 

 

Classification of a portion of land and the grant of a new community lease to Waitākere Outrigger Canoe Club Incorporated

File No.: CP2021/12998

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To classify three parcels of land to recreation reserve at 28 Bridge Avenue and Bridge Avenue Reserve, 56A Covil Avenue, Te Atatū South, legally described as:

-     Section 3 SO 404674 unclassified local purpose (esplanade) reserve

-     Lot 89 DP 39914 unclassified recreation reserve

-     Section 2 SO 404674 unclassified local purpose (esplanade) reserve.

2.       To grant a new community lease to Waitākere Outrigger Canoe Club Incorporated located on part of 28 Bridge Avenue, Te Atatū South.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

3.       On 22 February 2021, landowner approval was granted to Waitākere Outrigger Canoe Club Incorporated to occupy an area located at 28 Bridge Avenue, Te Atatū South (Attachment A).

4.       The canoe club currently lease approximately 400m2 of space at the Te Atatu Boating Club Incorporated, 32 Bridge Avenue and wish to expand its services in to 28 Bridge Avenue, Te Atatū South (Attachment B) for use as an interim storage space (Attachment C) while a project for a permanent waka ama facility is investigated.

5.       To support the activities of the canoe club and before a community lease can be granted, three parcels of land that make up the area of 28 Bridge Avenue and Bridge Avenue Reserve,56A Covil Avenue, Te Atatū South require classifying to recreation reserve under Section 16(2A)(a) of the Reserves Act 1977. 

6.       The parcels are:

-     Section 3 SO 404674 unclassified local purpose (esplanade) reserve

-     Lot 89 DP 39914 unclassified recreation reserve

-     Section 2 SO 404674 unclassified local purpose (esplanade) reserve.

7.       Public notification is required under Section 119 of the Reserves Act 1977. The proposed lease was notified in the Western Leader on 17 June 2021. No submissions in respect to the proposal were received.  

8.       Prior to any lease being granted, engagement with mana whenua is required under Section 4 of the Conservation Act 1987. Staff wrote to mana whenua who have a key interest in the site on 26 May 2021. There were no concerns from mana whenua.   

9.       The proposed classification and the granting of a new community lease to the canoe club will not impact the Te Whau Pathway project or impact the way in which the area is currently maintained and used.


 

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Henderson-Massey Local Board:

a)      approve the classification of the following three parcels of land to recreation reserve at 28 Bridge Avenue and Bridge Avenue Reserve, 56A Covil Avenue, Te Atatū South, legally described as:

-     Section 3 SO 404674 unclassified local purpose (esplanade) reserve

-     Lot 89 DP 39914 unclassified recreation reserve

-     Section 2 SO 404674 unclassified local purpose (esplanade) reserve.

b)      approve a new community lease to Waitākere Outrigger Canoe Club Incorporated for the council-owned site being 200m2 (more or less) located at 28 Bridge Avenue, Te Atatu South on the following terms and conditions:

i)        term: five years commencing 21 September 2021 with one five year right of renewal

ii)       rent: $1.00 per annum

iii)      provision of a community outcomes plan as approved by local board members and attached to the lease document (Attachment D)

iv)      all other terms and conditions in accordance with the Auckland Council Community Occupancy Guidelines 2012 and the Reserves Act 1977.

 

Horopaki

Context

10.     This report considers the classification of three parcels of land and the leasing of part of the land at 28 Bridge Avenue and Bridge Avenue Reserve, 56A Covil Avenue, Te Atatū South. 

11.     The Henderson-Massey Local Board is the allocated authority relating to local, recreation, sport and community facilities, including community leasing matters.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

The Land

12.     The land to be classified as recreation reserve is legally described as Section 3 SO 404674, Lot 89 DP 39914 and Section 2 SO 404674 pursuant to Section 16(2A)(a) of the Reserves Act 1977.

13.     Section 3 SO 404674 is currently owned by Auckland Council in fee simple as an unclassified Local Purpose (Esplanade) Reserve subject to the Reserves Act 1977 and was dedicated as local purpose esplanade reserve and transferred to council from the Te Atatu Boating Club in 2012. The Te Atatu Boating Club support the classification of Section 3 SO 404674.

14.     Lot 89 DP 39914 is owned by Auckland Council in fee simple as unclassified Recreation Reserve subject to the Reserves Act 1977. By way of historical background, on deposit of DP 39914 in 1952, Lot 89 was acquired by the Crown as reserve pursuant to Section 13 Land Subdivision in Counties Act 1945 and became a recreation reserve. In 1961, by Gazette Notice 18345, Lot 89 was vested by the Crown in the Waitemata County Council, in trust, for recreation purposes. Subsequently, on the enactment of Counties Amendment Act 1961 coming into force, ownership in Lot 89 was transferred from the Crown to the Waitemata County Council as recreation reserve.

15.     Council is proposing to classify the three parcels under Section 16(2A)(a) of the Reserves Act 1977.  This section provides that where a reserve is vested in Auckland Council and did not derive its title to the land from the Crown, Auckland Council shall by resolution, classify the reserve according to its principal and primary purpose.

16.     An assessment of the principle and primary purpose of the reserve was undertaken, and staff consider that a classification of recreation reserve is more appropriate than local purpose (esplanade) reserve because the current and proposed use of the land aligns with the purpose of a recreation reserve.

Waitākere Outrigger Canoe Club Incorporated

17.     The canoe club was formed in 1991 and its purpose is to promote the sport of waka ama to the West Auckland community.  The canoe club has been registered as an incorporated society since 24 October 1997. Its objectives are to:

-      be affiliated to Waka Ama NZ as a member club within the Auckland Regional Outrigger Canoe Association Region

-      lead the development, practice and promotion of waka ama within the community and to do so in a manner that is consistent with the requirements of AROCA and Waka Ama NZ

-      educate those involved in waka ama (primarily) but also the general public about the values of waka ama; the importance of water safety; and the unique culture of waka ama.

18.     The canoe club provides coaches, resources and opportunities for communities to engage with waka ama, the moana, the whenua and the people. The foundation of the sport is whanaungatanga and manaakitanga.  Tikanga is shared and the canoe club has many whānau from the pacific islands who share their knowledge of the ocean and environment. Member’s respect and take care of each other and care for the environment from a spiritual, physical and environmental sense. 

19.     The canoe club competes on the national and international stage and has eight six-man waka, four-single waka and one two-man waka.  Many of the members are from Kura Kaupapa Maori, Kohānga Reo and the local marae (Hoani Waititi and Te Piringatahi o Te Maungaarongo).

20.     Membership is approximately 247 with 118 male members and 129 female members. 11 per centare NZ European, 37 per cent Pacific Island and 42 per cent Maori. The age ranges of club members is outlined below:

 Age

5-13

53

 

14-21

112

 

22-50

70

 

51+

12

 

Te Atatu Boating Club Incorporated

21.     The canoe club currently lease approximately 400m2 of land at the Te Atatu Boating Club, 32 Bridge Avenue, Te Atatū South and wish to expand its services into 28 Bridge Avenue, Te Atatū South, to utilise approximately 200m2 of council owned land to place either two 20 foot or one single 40-foot container and waka storage racks.

22.     The container/s will be placed on the land and will be visually mitigated by initially painting the container/s dark green and then painting a mural.

23.     In February 2021, the Te Atatu Boating Club confirmed its support for the canoe clubs proposal. 

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

24.     Council makes key decisions relating to the form and function of the region which can have significant implications for both the climate resilience and greenhouse gas emissions of the region’s infrastructure, businesses and communities.

25.     The proposed site may experience coastal inundation due to climate change, high winds and the possible threat from a medium to large scale tsunami.

26.     To mitigate the above, the canoe club may need to undertake the following:

-      prepare the site for high winds by securing large outdoor objects

-      subscribe to emergency alerts and plan and learn a tsunami evacuation route

-      adopt a recycling plan outlining provisions to reduce waste

-      look at ways to reduce its carbon footprint.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

27.     In compiling the recommendations contained herein staff have obtained input from colleagues in Connected Communities, Area Operations, Community Facilities and Parks Sports and Recreation. 

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

Local impacts and local board views

28.     The recommendations in this report were workshopped with the local board in May 2021. 

29.     The recommendation for a new lease to the canoe club support the Henderson-Massy Local Board Plan 2020 outcomes:

·     Henderson-Massey is a great place to live, work and play

·     a thriving, inclusive and engaged community

·     thriving Maori culture and identity.

30.     The recommended lease term for an established group on council land under the Auckland Council Community Occupancy Guidelines 2012 is five years with a five year right of renewal.

31.     The Henderson-Massey Local Board may, at its discretion, choose to vary from these recommendations on a case-by-case basis, as they deem appropriate. The guidelines suggest that where a term is varied, it aligns to one of the recommended terms contained in the guidelines.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

32.     Delivering on Auckland Council’s commitment to Māori at a local level is a priority for local boards.  Henderson-Massey Local Board are focused on building strong and meaningful relationships with local Māori to ensure Māori needs, and aspirations are understood.

33.     Staff wrote to mana whenua who have a key interest in the site on 26 May 2021. There were no concerns from mana whenua in classifying the land or granting a new community lease to the canoe club.  

34.     The canoe club provide activities that support Māori outcomes and Auckland Council’s commitment to meeting its responsibilities under Te Tiriti o Waitangi and its broader legal obligations to Māori.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

35.     The cost implications for Auckland Council is the cost of public notification of the lease estimated at approximately $750.00.  This cost is borne by the Community Facilities Department. 

36.     Rent will be $1.00 plus GST per annum and the Lead Financial Advisor for the Henderson-Massey Local Board has indicated there are no other financial implications.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

37.     If the classification and new community lease is not granted it will inhibit the canoe club’s ability to extend its services to the local community and to apply for funding.  

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

38.     Subject to the Henderson-Massey Local Board granting the classification and new community lease, council staff will work with key representatives of the canoe club to finalise the lease agreement.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Site plans for Waitakere Outrigger Canoe Club Incorporated

15

b

Proposed leased area to Waitakere Outrigger Canoe Club Incorporated

19

c

Proposed layout for Waitakere Outrigger Canoe Club Incorporated

21

d

Community Outcomes Plan

23

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Michelle Knudsen - Lease Advisor

Authorisers

Adam Milina - Local Area Manager

Taryn Crewe - Acting General Manager Community Facilities

 


Henderson-Massey Local Board

21 September 2021

 

 

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator


Henderson-Massey Local Board

21 September 2021

 

 

PDF Creator


Henderson-Massey Local Board

21 September 2021

 

 

PDF Creator


Henderson-Massey Local Board

21 September 2021

 

 

PDF Creator

PDF Creator


Henderson-Massey Local Board

21 September 2021

 

 

Reporting back decisions made under delegation

File No.: CP2021/12615

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To report back a decision of the Henderson-Massey Local Board made under delegation to provide feedback to inform Auckland Council submissions.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       On 21 April 2020 the Henderson-Massey Local Board delegated authority to the local board Chairperson to submit the local board’s formal views for inclusion in Auckland Council submissions to Central Government, select committees and other councils, where this feedback is due before a local board meeting (resolution number HM/2020/50) as follows:

            That the Henderson-Massey Local Board:

a)    delegate authority to the Chair to approve and submit the local board’s input into Auckland Council submissions on formal consultation from government departments, parliament, select committees and other councils.

b)    note that the local board can continue to use its urgent decision process to approve and submit the local board’s input into Auckland Council submissions on formal consultation from

c)    note that this delegation will only be exercised where the timeframes do not allow for local board input to be considered and approved at a local board meeting.

d)    note all local input approved and submitted for inclusion in an Auckland Council submission is to be included on the next local board meeting agenda for the public record.

3.       On 24 August 2021, the Chairperson signed off under delegation feedback from the Henderson-Massey Local Board for inclusion in Auckland Council's submission on the Department of Internal Affairs' consultation on changes to Māori ward and Māori constituency processes.

4.       This feedback and its supporting documentation is appended as Attachment A. Further information and summary documents on the consultation on changes to Māori ward and Māori constituency processes can be found on Te Tari Taiwhenua/Department of Internal Affairs website here: https://www.dia.govt.nz/maori-wards

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Henderson-Massey Local Board:

a)      receive the decision made under delegation on 24 August 2021 providing feedback from the Henderson-Massey Local Board for inclusion in Auckland Council's submission on the Department of Internal Affairs' consultation on changes to Māori ward and Māori constituency processes.


 

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Henderson-Massey Local Board feedback for inclusion in Auckland Council's submission on the Department of Internal Affairs' consultation on changes to Māori ward and Māori constituency processes

27

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Wendy Kjestrup - Senior Local Board Advisor

Authorisers

Adam Milina - Local Area Manager

 


Henderson-Massey Local Board

21 September 2021

 

 

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator


Henderson-Massey Local Board

21 September 2021

 

 

Tāmaki Tauawhi Kaumātua - Age-friendly Auckland Action Plan

File No.: CP2021/13248

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To seek support for the draft Tāmaki Tauawhi Kaumātua -Age-friendly Auckland Action Plan.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       The number and diversity of older Aucklanders is growing, and this creates challenges and opportunities for improving the age-friendliness of our environment, infrastructure, and services now and in the future.

3.       Older people experience barriers to participation across all areas of life.

4.       The draft Tāmaki Tauawhi Kaumātua Action Plan (Action Plan) is our commitment to supporting older Aucklanders to participate fully in their communities.

5.       It is a region-wide, cross-sector plan that commits the council, council-controlled organisations (CCOs) and sector partners to improve outcomes for older Aucklanders through the delivery of tangible and meaningful short, medium and long-term actions. 

6.       To develop the Action Plan, staff listened to over 3,000 Aucklanders who shared their thoughts on what is needed to improve the age-friendliness of Tāmaki Makaurau / Auckland.

7.       Engagement with kaumātua and whānau to hear what is important to Māori led to the development of our unique Age-Friendly Tāmaki Makaurau Framework. The Framework combines the WHO domains with Te Ao Māori concepts and reflects the bicultural identity of Aotearoa and the diversity of Tāmaki Makaurau.

8.       Many activities within the plan will benefit people of all ages and what we do now to improve older Aucklander’s accessibility and quality of life will also benefit future generations.

9.       The Action Plan is constrained by actions needing to be delivered within existing resources, or as and when new funding can be secured. Greater or quicker impact could be possible in the future if budget is not such a limitation.

10.     By working together council and cross-sector partners can, however, leverage resources to achieve greater collective impact and prioritise efforts to where it is needed most.

11.     Over time the plan will help create an age-friendly lens that becomes embedded in the way council and partners design and deliver services and infrastructure. This will result in ongoing and incremental change that makes a tangible impact on the lives of older people.

12.     Community engagement on the draft Action Plan is underway and will be completed in September 2021.  

13.     The final Action Plan will be reported to the Parks, Arts, Community and Events Committee for adoption in November 2021.

14.     The adopted Action Plan will enable Tāmaki Makaurau / Auckland to join the World Health Organisation’s (WHO) Global Network of Age-friendly Cities and Communities.


 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Henderson-Massey Local Board:

a)      support the draft Tāmaki Tauawhi Kaumātua – Age-friendly Auckland Action Plan.

Horopaki

Context

15.     Auckland Council has a strong interest in the wellbeing of older people, because:

·     Tāmaki Makaurau / Auckland is home to New Zealand’s largest population of older people[1] - this number will more than double between 2018 and 2043

·     of the current 65+ population, most are well-placed but some face hardship and this will increase[2] 

·     diversity in life stage, needs and abilities, culture, language, living situation and financial stability affect how older people contribute and participate in the community.

16.     In view of this, in July 2018 Auckland Council’s Environment and Community Committee resolved to become an Age-friendly City and seek membership to the World Health Organisation’s Global Network of Age-friendly Cities and Communities (ENV/2018/88).

17.     The network includes cities that are committed to supporting each other and creating inclusive and accessible environments for all people to enjoy. It identifies eight interconnected domains of urban life that contribute to improving the wellbeing and participation of older people.

18.     To obtain membership to the network, council has led a process to develop a region-wide cross-sector Action Plan that will deliver over 80 actions to improve the age-friendliness of Tāmaki Makaurau / Auckland. 

19.     To develop the Action Plan, staff listened to over 3,000 Aucklanders who shared their thoughts on what is needed to improve the age-friendliness of Tāmaki Makaurau / Auckland.

20.     The Action Plan has been created to ensure infrastructure, activities and services are developed or adapted to respond to the diverse needs of Auckland’s growing and increasingly more diverse ageing population.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

The problem/opportunity

21.     Tāmaki Makaurau / Auckland’s older population is growing faster than any other age-group and faces challenges and barriers to participation across all areas of life.

22.     Our older people are taonga, and deserve to live full, meaningful lives where they can participate and are valued for the contribution they make to our communities. 

Our services and infrastructure need to respond and adapt to older peoples’ diverse needs

23.     Tāmaki Makaurau / Auckland’s growing and increasingly diverse ageing population means we need short-term as well as longer-term, system-level solutions to ensure older people can actively participate in their communities now and in the future.

24.     The burden on the environment, infrastructure and on services such as healthcare will expand exponentially as the older population grows to a projected 432,800 Aucklanders by 2043. To enable older people to live active and full lives in Tāmaki Makaurau, we need to ensure infrastructure, activities and services are developed or adapted to respond to their diverse needs.

Older Aucklanders told us they face challenges related to accessibility across all areas including public space, buildings, transport, and housing options

25.     Older people told us they need:

Older Aucklanders can find it difficult to access information and to keep up to date with technology

26.     Older people told us they need:

Older people can feel invisible, disconnected, and discouraged from taking an active role in their community

27.     Older people told us they need:

Our response to the problem/opportunity

28.     The development of Tāmaki Tauawhi Kaumātua – Age-friendly Auckland Action Plan (Attachment A).

29.     This is a cross-sector action plan that responds to the diverse needs and aspirations of older Aucklanders to improve their wellbeing and quality of life; and to make Tāmaki Makaurau / Auckland a more age-friendly region.

Strengths

A cross-sector action plan will deliver collective impact in an innovative, sustainable, and equitable way

30.     Auckland Council has worked with a range of organisations and communities who are active in advancing the wellbeing of older Aucklanders including:

·     nineteen organisations with different specialities, such as health, recreation, and housing

·     regional and local organisations, ensuring a breadth of reach across communities.

31.     Together we identified and developed actions that will address the challenges and opportunities raised by older Aucklanders. This approach:

·     enables collaboration between the council, aged-sector organisations, and communities

·     creates opportunities to leverage resources and deliver greater collective impact over time.

·     develops an action platform for organisations to build upon

·     encourages interest and participation from other organisations to be part of delivery

·     recognises that improving the age-friendliness of Tāmaki Makaurau / Auckland relies on many different groups and agencies playing their part

·     ensures the delivery of actions that have impact for older Aucklanders of all ethnicities, abilities, and beliefs.

32.     It is anticipated that having a shared vision for an age-friendly Tāmaki Makaurau will continue to build momentum within the organisations who are responsible for delivering actions.

33.     The intent is that over time an age-friendly lens will become embedded in the way council and partners design and develop services and infrastructure across the region.

34.     The result of this will be ongoing action and incremental change that makes a tangible impact on the lives of older people.


 

The Action Plan includes a mixture of over 80 new and existing actions

35.     Impact will be delivered through a mix of short, medium, and long-term actions. They are spread across all ten domains, but not equally.

36.     Some domains have more actions than others, for example the Housing Domain has fewer actions than the Respect and Social Inclusion Domain. This is because some things, such as refurbishing Haumaru Housing units take time and money to implement whereas supporting community-led social activities can use existing resource or may build upon activities that are already happening.

37.     Council’s actions are primarily focused in the areas where most council services are provided. These are:

·     Te Taiao; council maintains outdoor spaces and facilities for the community,

·     Respect and Social Inclusion; council hosts region-wide and local community events and activities that foster belonging and inclusion for diverse Aucklanders, and

·     Communication and Information; council informs communities about what is happening and offers support through libraries and community centres.

It has a unique Age-Friendly Tāmaki Makaurau Framework to reflect our bicultural foundations 

38.     Staff developed the Age-friendly Tāmaki Makaurau Framework in response to feedback from kaumātua.

39.     The framework provides a holistic way to frame the plan that integrates the WHO domains with Te Whare Tapa Whā- a Māori wellbeing framework - and Te Ao Māori values.

40.     It includes two additional domains and expanded another:

·     Culture and Diversity and Kaumātua and Kuia domains were added to reflect Tāmaki Makaurau / Auckland’s diversity and bicultural foundations

·     The WHO Domain of Outdoor Spaces and Buildings was expanded to become Te Taiao, representing the natural and built environment.

41.     The framework is unique to Tāmaki Makaurau. It ensures the actions within the plan are meaningful, achievable, and impactful for older Aucklanders.

42.     The framework will continue to be used to guide how we collectively improve and evaluate the age-friendliness of Tāmaki Makaurau / Auckland.

The Action Plan will have a wider community and intergenerational impact

43.     The actions within the plan will benefit older people and others in the community now and, in the future. For example, ensuring all buses are accessible will benefit small tamariki (children) and disabled community members.

44.     Many activities within the plan benefit people of all ages and stages and what we do now to improve older Aucklander’s accessibility and quality of life will also benefit future generations.

Diagram

Description automatically generated

Constraints and limitations 

It will take time to see the full, long-term impacts of the Action Plan

45.     The Tāmaki Tauawhi Kaumātua – Age-friendly Auckland Action Plan will deliver impact but that will happen over time.

46.     Some actions are small and local and will not have significant or regional impact. However, there is opportunity for these local activities to be expanded as the age-friendly vision and plan gains traction.

47.     Some actions will be delivered immediately or are in progress, others will take time. For instance, making roads, buildings and parks more accessible will be achieved over time, subject to the roll-out of relevant capital works and renewal programmes.  

Council, CCOs and partner organisations are constrained by the financial impact of COVID-19 and operating within existing budget and resources

48.     The Action Plan has been developed on the basis that everyone is operating in a constrained financial environment and actions will be delivered within existing resources.

49.     The current assumption is that:

·     no additional budget will be available

·     where new funding is required, it will need to be reprioritised from elsewhere, secured through grants, or considered through budget-setting processes.

50.     Consequently, the first one to five years of the action plan focus on existing or new actions that are easier and more affordable to carry out within existing budgets.

51.     There is potential for this to change as the Action Plan evolves and if more funding becomes available in the medium to long term (5-10 years).

Success relies on cooperation, ongoing commitment, and resources to support collaboration

52.     The Action Plan relies on the dedication and commitment of council and partner organisations working together to improve the age-friendliness of Tāmaki Makaurau / Auckland:

·     many of the partner organisations are community-led with limited capacity and dependant on ongoing public funding

·     larger entities and agencies (including government and council departments) may have competing priorities

·     success is dependent on all parties continuing to prioritise age-friendly outcomes and delivering the actions they have developed.

53.     Resources will also be needed to support sector collaboration. It will take time and effort to facilitate organisations working together and supporting each other to build an age-friendly Tāmaki Makaurau. 

54.     As part of council’s commitment to the plan, council staff will play a key backbone role in keeping the Action Plan alive, bringing partners together, and monitoring implementation and impact.    

Community views

55.     Staff undertook extensive community engagement in 2019-2020 to ensure the voices of diverse older Aucklanders were at heart of the plan. We developed surveys, held workshops across the region, hui with kaumātua and had one-on-one interviews with rainbow community members.

56.     Targeted engagement was facilitated by Age Concern, Toa Pacific, New Zealand Indian Senior Citizens Association, Hindu Elders Foundation Inc and The Selwyn Foundation to ensure we heard the diverse voices of older Aucklanders.

57.     Over 3,000 people shared their vision for an Age-friendly Auckland and told council what actions they think will support older people to live full, active and healthy lives.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

58.     During our engagement we heard, particularly from kaumātua, that environmental wellbeing was missing from the WHO framework. The wellbeing of the natural environment is important to our own wellbeing, and we have a role in looking after our environment in all its forms.

59.     In response, we have expanded the existing WHO Domain Outdoor Spaces and Buildings to include Te Taiao (the natural environment), to recognise that the environment’s wellbeing and our own are connected.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

60.     This Action Plan includes actions developed with CCOs including Auckland Transport.

61.     The Seniors Advisory Panel acted as kaitiaki throughout the process, providing advice, guidance and feedback and contributing to workshops and action planning sessions.

62.     The Seniors Advisory Panel will continue to provide support and guidance on the Action Plan as it is delivered.

63.     Auckland Council, Seniors Advisory Panel and CCOs are aware of the impacts of the Action Plan and their role in implementation.

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

Local impacts and local board views

64.     Local boards have a strong interest in the wellbeing of older people. All local boards have outcomes that foster social inclusion and participation among their residents, and many have age-friendly specific goals and actions.

65.     Community engagement was held at locations across the region in 2019-2020, from Warkworth to Pukekohe.

66.     Two reports were produced on the findings, the Community Engagement Findings Report and the Age-friendly Tāmaki Makaurau Report.[3] These were shared with elected members, stakeholders, and the community. These reports were also published on the council Age-friendly website.

67.     Staff attended local board workshops in August and September 2021 to share the draft Action Plan.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

68.     The Action Plan is relevant to Māori as tangata whenua and kaitiaki of the sky, land and sea and supports the Māori Identity and Wellbeing outcome within the Auckland Plan 2050

69.     In the 2018 Census older Māori made up over four per cent of the Tāmaki Makaurau / Auckland over-65 population.

70.     Older Māori have lower levels of equity, income and rely heavily on superannuation. Actions that are focused on kaumātua delivered by Māori organisations and others will make a positive impact on wellbeing.

71.     The involvement of kaumātua, whānau and organisations has been influential on the design of the Framework, work on implementation; and ensuring this is a living document.

Engagement to better understand the needs of kaumātua and Te Ao Māori

72.     To ensure the Action Plan is relevant and effective for kaumātua, mana whenua and mataawaka were invited to a dedicated hui in February 2020. The hui was organised in partnership with Te Kōtahi a Tāmaki and hosted at Manurewa Marae.

Recognition of tangata whenua, hauora Māori concepts and Te Tiriti o Waitangi are important to kaumātua

73.     Kaumātua also told us:

·     Importance of building and marae accessibility – safety of our kaumātua

·     Utilising marae more e.g., events, programmes, line dancing, tai chi, learning Te Reo

·     Age-appropriate housing design

·     More disability parking

·     More Te Reo visible everywhere

·     Environmental recognition – care for Papatūānuku and te taiao incorporated into plan

·     Sport and recreation options available for older people and open areas for activities

·     Affordable digital communication.

74.     Te ao Māori values from the Independent Māori Statutory Board’s (IMSB) Māori Plan for Tāmaki Makaurau are also imbedded in the Framework:

·     Whanaungatanga (Develop Vibrant Communities), in relation to the different opportunities to engage and participate in their own and other cultures.

·     Rangatiratanga (Enhance Leadership and Participation), in relation to the activities under Respect and Social Inclusion.

·     Manaakitanga (Improve Quality of Life), in relation to the Action Plan’s outcome of improving the hauora of older Aucklanders.

·     Wairuatanga (promoting distinctive identity), in relation to valuing and protecting Māori heritage and Taonga Māori.

·     Kaitiakitanga (ensuring sustainable futures), in relation to protecting Te Taiao now and in the future.

75.     These values underpin the way people and organisations will work together to deliver this plan with, and for, our communities.

76.     The Action Plan supports the IMSB’s Schedule of Issues of Significance 2021 by addressing social, cultural, environmental and wellbeing for Māori in Tāmaki Makaurau.

77.     The Age-friendly Tāmaki Makaurau Framework incorporates the WHO framework, Te Whare Tapa Whā and te ao Māori. The unique Framework contributes to the awareness, education and understanding of Māori perspectives. 

78.     Mana whenua and mataawaka will have an opportunity to provide further feedback during public engagement on the Action Plan.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

79.     The Action Plan has been designed to be delivered within the existing budgets and resources of council, CCOs and sector partners.

80.     Where additional investment is desired by Auckland Council to implement new or joint actions this will need be considered through Long-term Plan or Annual Plan processes.

81.     There are no financial implications to the local board for any decisions to support the Action Plan.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

Risk

Mitigation

Adoption of a new plan may create expectations that there will be additional budget to support age-friendly outputs.

All public-facing communications and guidance about the new plan will reference that actions will be funded from existing budgets. Where new funding is required, this will be sought through grants and processes such as the long-term plan.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

82.     Public engagement for the Action Plan is expected to be completed by the end of September 2021.

83.     A summary of all feedback, including from local boards, and a final Action Plan will be reported for adoption by the Parks, Arts, Community and Events Committee in November 2021.

84.     Following adoption of the Action Plan, staff will seek membership to the WHO network.

85.     An annual progress report will provide details on the impact and success of our actions. This will include an update on the delivery of actions against the identified measures of success, high-level wellbeing indicators and examples of good and promising practice. This will be presented to the Governing Body, the WHO and shared with all organisations supporting delivery. 

86.     The Tāmaki Tauawhi Kaumātua – Age-friendly Auckland Action Plan will be reviewed every five years.

87.     Baseline research was carried out in 2017 - The Older Aucklanders: A Quality of Life Status Report. The research is across the domains that contribute to quality of life and wellbeing. This research is being conducted this year and will be carried out every five years to help monitor progress and guide the development of future actions.

 


 

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Tāmaki Tauawhi Kaumātua - Age-Friendly Tāmaki Makaurau (draft)

41

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Cleo Matthews - Policy Analyst

Authorisers

Kataraina Maki, General Manager Community & Social Policy

Louise Mason, General Manager Local Board Services

Adam Milina - Local Area Manager

 


Henderson-Massey Local Board

21 September 2021

 

 

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


Henderson-Massey Local Board

21 September 2021

 

 

Local board feedback on the kerbside refuse charging mechanism policy

File No.: CP2021/13406

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To seek formal feedback from local boards on the kerbside refuse charging model policy review.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       Auckland Council is currently committed to expanding the pay-as-you-throw (PAYT) funding model for kerbside refuse collection across the Auckland region. This reflects the policy within our Waste Management and Minimisation Plan 2018 to provide consistent waste services across the region.

3.       This would involve moving the legacy Auckland City Council and Manukau City Council areas away from a rates-funded service to a PAYT funding model.

4.       Before we make this shift, Waste Solutions is reviewing the evidence to support the decision to move these areas to a PAYT model to assess whether PAYT is still the best solution for achieving the objectives of the Waste Management and Minimisation Plan.

5.       Evidence gathered so far is being assessed against three options:

·   all areas pay-as-you-throw (PAYT)

·   keeping a hybrid model (currently, 55 per cent of the region’s refuse collection is rates-funded, 45 per cent PAYT)

·   all areas rates-funded.

6.       The options will have a different impact on each local board area, depending on the current service charging mechanism relative to the proposed service change (Attachment A).

7.       A memo was circulated to all local boards on 23 July 2021 (Attachment B) outlining initial conclusions reached through the analysis of evidence gathered to date. This was used as a basis for discussion with local boards at workshops throughout August 2021 to understand their views on the risks and impacts of the potential options within their respective areas.

8.       This report seeks formal feedback from local boards, using the template in Attachment C as a guide, to inform the recommendation that staff will present to the Environment and Climate Change Committee on 14 October 2021.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Henderson-Massey Local Board:

a)      provide feedback on the kerbside refuse charging model policy review.

Horopaki

Context

9.       The 2012 Waste Management and Minimisation Plan (WMMP) made provision to move all Auckland households towards a user-pays charging system for refuse collection, known in Auckland as pay-as-you-throw (PAYT). This transition to a consistent regional PAYT refuse service (weekly, changing to fortnightly over time) was confirmed in WMMP 2018.

 

10.     The decision was based on:

·   best evidence at the time that this was the most effective way to incentivise diversion from landfill and enable householders to reduce their waste costs

·   the understanding that technology would be available to enable pay-per-lift charging through radio-frequency identification (RFID) chipped bins.

11.     In legacy rates-funded areas, it was decided that the move to PAYT would take effect after the introduction of a food scraps collection service, to reduce the financial impact on households.

12.     Since then, more information has become available about the effectiveness of PAYT, particularly in the context of the other complementary services that the council has rolled out, for example regionwide recycling and the pilot food scraps service, due to be rolled out regionwide from early 2023. Prior to making the change to PAYT, Waste Solutions is reviewing the evidence base for this shift.

13.     In this review we are assessing several factors, including:

·   the potential effects of each funding model on communities

·   the potential waste minimisation impacts of each funding model

·   the expected cost to implement each funding model taking into account the changing financial circumstances of both ratepayers and council.

14.     To assist with this review, Waste Solutions commissioned independent consultants, Morrison Low, to examine the evidence currently available against the following aspects of the refuse collection service and its impact on the council, customers and the environment:

·   waste minimisation

·   cost effectiveness

·   reputation

·   technology

·   household responsibility / accountability

·  access / equity

·  downstream impacts on the collections industry

·  climate change

·  amenity

·  health and safety.

 

15.     Evidence gathered so far is being assessed against three options:

·   all areas PAYT

·   keeping a hybrid model (currently 55 per cent rates-funded, 45 per cent PAYT)

·   all areas rates-funded.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

16.     Currently, 55 per cent of Auckland households (legacy Auckland City and Manukau City) are provided with a rates-funded refuse service, with the remaining 45 per cent (legacy Franklin, Waitākere, Papakura and North Shore City Council) on a PAYT service provided by either the council or a private operator. There is no council refuse collection service in legacy Rodney, but under current policy there is a commitment to provide a PAYT service in the future. See Attachment A for a breakdown of council refuse collection services by local board area.

17.     Detailed analysis and advice were provided to local boards in a memo dated 23 July 2021 (Attachment B).

Conclusions on key issues

18.     Aotearoa/New Zealand is unique in having side-by-side competition between private and council services in the residential refuse collection market. This impacts the way PAYT operates and introduces a number of challenges not experienced overseas.

19.     Financial modelling currently indicates that PAYT is less cost-effective for the council than rates-funded solutions because of more complex systems, duplication of workloads by multiple suppliers and the council’s need to offer the service to properties across the entire region.

20.     Evidence from overseas found only a very weak link between marginal pricing changes and change in refuse quantities. This is consistent with a 2021 examination of refuse tonnages, which found no clear evidence that PAYT areas of Auckland produce less refuse per capita than rates-funded areas.

21.     The current price in Auckland does not appear to be a sufficient economic driver to motivate behaviour change in households.

22.     International evidence indicates the greatest waste minimisation is achieved through providing easy access to services that divert waste away from landfill (such as the recycling and food scraps collection services), good community education programmes, and reduced access to refuse volume to encourage use of the diversion services.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

23.     Enhancing access to diversion and resource recovery, along with optimising efficiencies around collecting refuse at the kerbside, presents opportunities to mitigate greenhouse gas emissions directly, for example through the reduction of vehicle movements and diversion of organic material from landfill, and indirectly by encouraging better resource use.

24.     Therefore, considerations to take into account when assessing options include the opportunities to minimise both direct and immediate impacts on greenhouse gas emissions, for example: 

·     emissions can be mitigated where the council retains greater control over household behaviour and container size (larger customer base), to drive higher participation rates from households in the weekly food scraps service which is critical to reducing methane emissions from landfill

·     emissions can be mitigated by choosing the option that will bring efficiencies to vehicle servicing routes. This includes reducing duplication of refuse collectors operating side-by-side in the same areas of Auckland.

25.     The rates-funded option provides the opportunity to reduce total truck kilometres travelled from a sole supplier, the ability to specify the truck requirement through the procurement process and efficiencies in route design.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

26.     This review is about the way in which council charges for domestic kerbside rubbish collections and so views have not been sought from the wider council family.

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

Local impacts and local board views

27.     Local boards provided feedback through the Waste Management and Minimisation Plan 2018 development process. All local boards supported the proposed WMMP. Only Devonport-Takapuna, Manurewa, Ōrākei and Papakura Local Boards expressed views on refuse charging mechanisms within their responses.

28.     Staff provided a detailed memo to all local boards on 23 July 2021, outlining the early findings of the review, acknowledging that detailed works on costs and equity were still being completed.

29.     Staff attended workshops with local boards between 29 July and 24 August 2021 to present on the key points of the review and seek views on the current refuse collection services. Informal feedback was noted during these workshops.

30.     This report seeks formal feedback from the local board using the template provided in Attachment C to inform the recommendation to the Environment and Climate Change Committee on 14 October 2021.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

31.     Mana whenua and mataawaka were engaged in the development of the 2018 Waste Management and Minimisation Plan and identified priority actions for Māori.

32.     The council partners with Para Kore ki Tāmaki – a Māori-developed and implemented programme that integrates mātauranga Māori and zero waste principles and practices to support marae, Māori organisations, Kura Kaupapa Māori and Kōhanga Reo to divert significant quantities of recycling and organic waste from landfill.

33.     Staff outlined the purpose of the review and early findings to the Infrastructure and Environmental Services Mana Whenua Kaitiaki Regional Hui on 9 July 2021 and then at a Regional Projects Workshop on 20 July 2021. Members of the forum receiving the presentation raised concerns that poorer communities had fewer choices in relation to controlling their waste production. Staff acknowledged that this was recognised by Waste Solutions and that multiple approaches are needed, including advocacy to central government on phasing out hard-to-recycle plastics and the introduction of product stewardship schemes.

34.     Staff are also working with specialist community facilitators Rākau Tautoko and Waste Solutions community partners to hold targeted focus groups with Māori and Pacific communities during August and September 2021 to seek their views on different refuse collection payment mechanisms. These views will inform the recommendation to Environment and Climate Change Committee on 14 October 2021.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

35.     In terms of cost-effectiveness, when comparing rates funded with PAYT models, the Morrison Low study concluded that the rates-funded option provides greater cost-effectiveness for the council than both the current hybrid model and the PAYT option due to economies of scale.

36.     This was based on:

·     cost: results of financial modelling commissioned by the council, using existing parameters and the weekly PAYT service, show that the cost of delivering a rates-funded service is similar, but costs the community significantly less overall when all service costs, including private collection costs, are included.

·   cost sustainability: an estimated variation in cost per pickup based on the number of customers serviced by Auckland Council which shows that the cost of operating the council service increases sharply when the council is servicing less than 30 per cent of the community. At 30 per cent, it is approximately double the cost per pickup compared to 80 per cent.

37.     Further analysis of costs is being carried out by council staff as part of this discovery phase.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

38.     High level risks are outlined in Table 1. More detailed risks and mitigations will be examined as part of the development of options for Environment and Climate Change Committee throughout September.

          Table 1: Kerbside refuse charging policy review high level risks and mitigations

Risk

Mitigation

The perception of unfairness in offering the same service/charge to all households: households that produce large amounts of waste are favoured under the rates-funded model, whereas households that produce less waste are favoured under the PAYT model.

Staff are investigating the cost of offering three different bin sizes (80l/120l/240l) under the rates-funded model to accommodate different households’ needs.

There is no agreement on which charging model works best for the whole of Auckland

Consideration of a hybrid model will be presented as part of the options analysis to Environment and Climate Change Committee on 14 October 2021. 

The preferred option costs council more to deliver than the current hybrid option.

Detailed costs will be provided for all three options. These will be presented at workshops with elected members and local board chairs as part of the Annual Budget 2022/23 process. This will include analysis of the cost to the community and an estimate of the cost of failing to meet Auckland’s climate change goals.

 

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

39.     Staff are currently engaging with elected members, local boards, industry and community groups, prior to developing options and recommendations to take to the Environment and Climate Change Committee for a decision on 14 October 2021.

40.     Local board feedback received by 28 September will help inform the recommendation, and will be included within the report.

41.     In addition to the above, the following studies are currently underway, or have recently concluded: 

·   radio-frequency identification (RFID) trial to show whether this service will be able to be operated at scale, with a sufficiently low error rate to be considered feasible in Auckland

·   detailed analysis of costs of all options

·   investigation of the social impacts of the three options.

42.     The results of these studies will conclude the desk-based discovery phase and will inform the final evaluation of options by Morrison Low. This final report will help to inform the recommendation that will be presented to the Environment and Climate Change Committee on 14 October 2021.

43.     If the Environment and Climate Change Committee decide to deviate from current Waste Management and Minimisation Plan policy by approving either the rates-funded or hybrid model option, the current proposal is to engage more widely on options through a special consultative procedure as part of the Annual Plan 2022/2023 process.

44.     Local boards will be consulted on the preferred option, which will include a more detailed analysis of the timings of any changes to service, during that process.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Current refuse services and impact of options by local board area

93

b

Memo Kerbside Refuse Charging Review

95

c

Template for local board feedback – refuse charging

103

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Sarah Le Claire - Waste Planning Manager

Authorisers

Parul Sood – General Manager Waste Solutions

Barry Potter – Director Infrastructure and Environmental Services

Louise Mason – General Manager Local Board Services

Adam Milina - Local Area Manager

 


Henderson-Massey Local Board

21 September 2021

 

 

PDF Creator



Henderson-Massey Local Board

21 September 2021

 

 

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator


Henderson-Massey Local Board

21 September 2021

 

 

PDF Creator


Henderson-Massey Local Board

21 September 2021

 

 

Public feedback on proposal to make a new Public Trading Events and Filming Bylaw 2022

File No.: CP2021/13013

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To seek local board views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback to the proposed new Te Kaunihera o Tāmaki Makaurau Te Ture ā-Rohe Tauhokohoko, Whakahaerenga me te Tango Kiriata Tūmatanui / Auckland Council Public Trading, Events and Filming Bylaw 2022, before a final decision is made.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       To enable the local board to provide its views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback to the proposal, staff have summarised the feedback and provided a structure for deliberations.

3.       The proposal helps to minimise safety risks, nuisance and the misuse of council-controlled public places (for example footpaths, local parks and civic spaces) by continuing to regulate trading, events and filming activities.

4.       Council received responses from 75 people and organisations at the close of feedback on 16 July 2021. All feedback is summarised into the following topics:

Topic

Description

Proposal 1

Continue to regulate trading, events and filming in a similar way to the current Bylaw.

Proposal 2

Clarify the need for rental micromobility devices to be approved under their own licence instead of a mobile shop licence as they currently are.

Proposal 3

Clarify which activities require an approval, don’t require an approval as long as certain conditions are met, and are not addressed in the Bylaw.

Proposal 4

Update the title, structure, format, definitions, and wording to ensure that a new bylaw is easier to read, understand and comply with.

Other

Other bylaw-related matters raised in public feedback and other additional matters.

5.       Staff recommend that the local board provide its views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback to the proposal, and if it wishes, present those views to the Bylaw Panel. Taking this approach will assist the Panel and Governing Body to decide whether to adopt the proposal.

6.       There is a reputational risk that feedback from the local board area is from a limited group of people and organisations, and does not reflect the views of the whole community. This report mitigates this risk by providing local boards with a summary of all public feedback.

7.       The Bylaw Panel will consider all local board views and public feedback on the proposal, deliberate and make recommendations to the Governing Body on 20 October 2021. The Governing Body will make a final decision in November 2021.


 

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Henderson-Massey Local Board:

a)      receive public feedback on the proposal to make a new Te Kaunihera o Tāmaki Makaurau Te Ture ā-Rohe Tauhokohoko, Whakahaerenga me te Tango Kiriata Tūmatanui 2022 / Auckland Council Public Trading, Events and Filming Bylaw 2022 in this agenda report.

b)      provide its views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback to the proposal in recommendation (a) to assist the Bylaw Panel in its deliberations.

c)      appoint one or more local board members to present the views in (b) to the Bylaw Panel on 19 October 2021.

d)      delegate authority to the local board chair to appoint replacement(s) to the persons in (c) should an appointed member be unable to present to the Bylaw Panel on 19 October 2021.

Horopaki

Context

Bylaw regulates trading, events and filming in council-controlled public places

8.       The current Auckland Council Trading and Events in Public Places Bylaw 2015 / Te Kaunihera o Tāmaki Makaurau Ture ā-Rohe Hokohoko, Whakahaerenga i ngā Wāhi Tūmatanui 2015 seeks to protect public safety, minimise nuisance and misuse of council-controlled public places caused by trading activities, events and filming.

9.       The rules are enforced by the Licensing and Regulatory Compliance Unit using a graduated compliance model (information, education and enforcement).

10.     The current Bylaw is one part of a wider regulatory framework that includes the:

·     Reserves Act 1997, Resource Management Act 1991, Food Act 2014, Road User Rule 2004, Trespass Act 1980, Fair Trading Act 1986, Customer Guarantees Act 1993, Electricity (Safety) Regulations 2010 and Auckland Unitary Plan

·     Auckland Council Public Safety and Nuisance Bylaw 2013, Signage Bylaw 2015, Alcohol Control Bylaw 2014 and Waste Management and Minimisitaion Bylaw 2019

·     Auckland Transport Trading and Events in Public Places Bylaw 2015.

11.     The current Bylaw will expire on 26 February 2022 and council must adopt a new bylaw before that date to avoid a regulatory gap.

Council proposed a new bylaw for public feedback

12.     On 27 May 2021, the Governing Body adopted a proposal to make a new Te Kaunihera o Tāmaki Makaurau Te Ture ā-Rohe Tauhokohoko, Whakahaerenga me te Tango Kiriata Tūmatanui / Auckland Council Public Trading, Events and Filming Bylaw 2022 (Bylaw) for public consultation (GB/2021/51).

13.     The proposal arose from a statutory review of the Auckland Council Trading and Events in Public Places Bylaw 2015 (see figure below).

14.     The proposal helps to minimise safety risks, nuisance and the misuse of council-controlled public places (for example, in local parks, reserves and civic spaces) by:

·     continuing to regulate trading, events and filming in a similar way to the current Bylaw

·     clarifying the need for rental micromobility devices to be approved under their own licence instead of a mobile shop licence as they currently are

·     clarifying which activities require an approval, don’t require an approval as long as certain conditions are met, and are not addressed in the Bylaw

·     updating the title, structure, format, definitions, and wording to ensure that a new bylaw is easier to read, understand and comply with.

15.     The proposal was publicly notified for feedback from 8 June until 16 July 2021. During that period, council received feedback from 59 people and 16 organisations. In addition, the ‘AK Have Your Say’ webpage received 525 hits.[4]

The local board has an opportunity to provide views on public feedback

16.     The local board now has an opportunity to provide its views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback to the proposal before a final decision is made.

17.     Local board views must be provided by resolution to the Bylaw Panel. The local board can also choose to present those views to the Bylaw Panel on 19 October 2021.

18.     The nature of the local board views are at the discretion of the local board but must remain within the scope of the proposal and public feedback. For example, the local board could:

·     indicate support for matters raised in public feedback by people from the local board area

·     recommend how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Feedback from people in the local board area supports the proposal

19.     A total of two people and two organisations from the local board area provided feedback to the proposal. There was split support for Proposals One and Two and majority support for Proposals Three and Four. All proposals had similar support to the totals from all people who provided feedback.

Support of proposal in the local board area

Proposal

Total support from local board area

Total support from people across Auckland

1:        Continue to regulate trading, events and filming in a similar way to the current Bylaw.

50 per cent support

50 per cent ‘other’

66 per cent

(40/61 submitters)

2:        Clarify the need for rental micromobility devices to be approved under their own licence instead of a mobile shop licence as they currently are.

50 per cent support

50 per cent opposed

74 per cent

(46/62 submitters)

3:        Clarify which activities require an approval, don’t require an approval as long as certain conditions are met, and are not addressed in the Bylaw.

100 per cent support

75 per cent

(44/59 submitters)

4:        Update the title, structure, format, definitions, and wording to ensure that a new bylaw is easier to read, understand and comply with.

100 per cent support

83 per cent

(48/58 submitters)

20.     Key themes from feedback from people in the local board area are consistent with key themes from all public feedback. For example, that the proposal:

·     has a more balanced approach towards regulating events

·     addresses the health and safety risks of rental micromobility devices

·     supports the use of lay rules and wording.

21.     The full proposal can be viewed in the link. Attachment A of this report contains a draft Bylaw Panel deliberations report which includes a summary of all public feedback. Attachment B contains a copy of all public feedback related to the local board area.

Staff recommend the local board provide its views on public feedback

22.     Staff recommend that the local board provide its views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback by resolution, and if it wishes, present those views to the Bylaw Panel on 19 October 2021.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

23.     There are no implications for climate change arising from decisions sought in this report.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

24.     The proposal impacts the operation of several council departments and council-controlled organisations. This includes Auckland Council’s Licensing and Regulatory Compliance Unit, Events in Regional Service Planning, Investment and Partnerships Unit, Alcohol Licensing and Environmental Health Unit, Auckland Unlimited (previously known as Auckland Tourism, Events and Economic Development), and Screen Auckland. These teams are aware of the impacts of the proposal and their implementation role.

25.     The proposal may also impact the Auckland Transport Trading and Events in Public Places Bylaw 2015. Auckland Transport is aware of the proposal. Auckland Transport has also made council aware of Auckland Transport’s review of its bylaw.

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

Local impacts and local board views

26.     The proposed new bylaw impacts on local governance as it regulates trading, event and filming activities in council-controlled public places, for example local parks.

27.     Local boards views were sought on a draft proposal in April 2021. The draft was supported in full by 13 local boards and with suggested changes by eight local boards.

28.     A summary of local board views and changes made to the proposal can be viewed in the link to the 11 May 2021 Regulatory Committee agenda, page 191 (Attachment B to Item 12).

29.     This report provides an opportunity to give local board views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback to the proposal, before a final decision is made.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

30.     Māori have strong bonds to the land as kaitiaki. The proposal supports the Independent Māori Statutory Board Plan for Tāmaki Makaurau by minimising the misuse of council-controlled public places and facilitating opportunities for Māori business owners.

31.     The proposed rules for trading, events and filming in council-controlled public places apply to activities undertaken by Māori, particularly major or international events.

32.     Mana whenua and mataawaka were notified of the proposal and given the opportunity to provide feedback through face-to-face meetings, in writing, online and in-person.

33.     Those submitters who identified as Māori supported Proposals One, Three and Four which is consistent with the overall percentage of the Auckland-wide feedback. Comments included that the proposed regulation seems sensible and provides appropriate balance between mitigating risks and enabling businesses to operate. While the support for Proposal Two was split, submitters agreed that rental micromobility should remain regulated.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

34.     There are no financial implications arising from decisions sought in this report. Costs associated with the special consultative procedure will be met within existing budgets.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

35.    The following risks have been identified:

If...

Then...

Mitigation

The feedback from the local board area is from a limited group of people and organisations.

The feedback may not reflect the views of the whole community.

This risk is mitigated by providing local boards with a summary of all public feedback.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

36.     On 20 October 2021, the Bylaw Panel will consider all formal local board views and public feedback on the proposal, deliberate and make recommendations to the Governing Body. The Governing Body will make a final decision in November 2021 (refer to the ‘Process to make the new Public Trading, Events and Filming Bylaw 2022’ diagram in Context).

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Draft Bylaw Panel Deliberations Report

111

b

Public feedback from people in the Henderson-Massey Local Board area

157

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Magda Findlik - Principal Policy Analyst

Sam Bunge - Policy Advisor

Authorisers

Paul Wilson - Senior Policy Manager

Adam Milina - Local Area Manager

 


Henderson-Massey Local Board

21 September 2021

 

 

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


Henderson-Massey Local Board

21 September 2021

 

 

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator


Henderson-Massey Local Board

21 September 2021

 

 

Local board feedback on Auckland Transport's Parking Strategy Review

File No.: CP2021/13577

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To seek feedback from local boards on Auckland Transport’s Parking Strategy Review.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       Auckland Transport (AT) is currently reviewing its Parking Strategy (2015). The AT Parking Strategy sets out the objectives, principles and policies relating to AT’s management and supply of parking across Auckland.

3.       Since 2015, there have been numerous changes in the local government setting. These require realignment of policy.

4.       This report gives an overview of the approach being taken to the Parking Strategy review, including how staff are engaging with local boards.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Henderson-Massey Local Board:

a)      provide feedback on the review of Auckland Transport’s Parking Strategy by 30 September 2021, ahead of public consultation on the review.

Horopaki

Context

5.       The AT Parking Strategy was developed subsequent to local government amalgamation, bringing together one regional strategy and set of policies for all AT managed parking.[5]

6.       The current strategy was released in 2015 and is provided as Attachment A. The policies cover:

·     management of on-street and off-street parking

·     regulation methods (including pricing)

·     parking permits and coupons

·     comprehensive Parking Management Plans

·     parking for different types of transport

·     event management

·     technology for parking management

·     Park and Ride provision and pricing

·     compliance and enforcement

7.       The Parking Strategy has worked well over the last seven years. It has led to various changes and successes:

·     business/centre parking areas implemented

·     residential parking schemes rolled out and expanded due to their success and popularity

·     demand-responsive, priced parking implemented successfully, helping to manage parking demand and keep parking spaces turning over and available for customers

·     a consistent approach applied across the region to parking issues, and a transparent approach.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

The AT Parking Strategy needs to be reviewed

8.       Since the AT Parking Strategy was developed in 2015, there have been a number of changes to policy and planning, as well as changes in the Auckland setting. Examples include:

·     adoption of the Auckland Unitary Plan. Development signalled in the Unitary Plan will enable growth that may be difficult to service with public transport, meaning that some new suburbs will rely on car use for access

·     market demand is pushing for more housing provision and density. Development is already showing evidence of less car-parking provision and more issues with car-parking compliance

·     changes to travel behaviour, such as emergence of micro mobility (scooters etc) and the growth of the delivery economy

·     Auckland’s public transport network has matured over time, providing opportunities for further passenger uptake and efficiency related to park and ride management

·     Auckland’s Climate Plan (and coming government strategy) will require changes to the land transport system, including parking

·     of particular relevance is the National Policy Statement on Urban Development (NPS-UD). This guides direction on urban development through district planning. The NPS-UD requires council to remove parking minimum requirements from the Unitary Plan. This means that developments will not be required to provide onsite parking. This will contribute to society and transport becoming less car-centric over time, however, it will lead to increasing pressure on public parking resources, particularly kerbside parking.

Developing a next-generation parking strategy

9.       The overall approach that AT is taking to the review is to:

·     realign the Parking Strategy objectives and outcomes with the central and local government policy and planning context

·     discover and understand key issues for parking through focussed discussions with elected representatives, subject matter experts, industry representatives, partners and stakeholders

·     fill any gaps with new policies (including those focus areas below)

·     re-engage with Aucklanders on parking

·     develop a strategy that is practical to implement.

10.     The review will also focus on three key areas where there is a known need for improvements and updates to policies and guidelines. These include:

·     Park and Ride - planning for growth and provision and managing demand

·     Kerbzone optimisation – developing a framework to manage the space between the kerbside lane and adjacent land uses

·     Comprehensive Parking Management Plans - these are parking management plans for more localised areas - we are reviewing the framework and guidelines to develop these.

What we are asking of local boards

11.     Parking roles and responsibilities provide an important context for understanding how parking is managed and how to have best effect in appealing or advocating for change.

12.     Under the Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009, AT is responsible for all parking within the road reserve. AT manages a number of off-street carparking sites on behalf of Council, by delegation. In addition, AT manages Park and Ride sites. Auckland Council owns all underlying land assets.

13.     We have reviewed local board plans, giving us some insight into how parking issues impact each local board area. Common themes are the desire for more Park and Ride and bike parking, as well as managing parking as part of new developments.

14.     The recent Regional Land Transport Plan (RLTP) consultation also received feedback from local boards on the topic of enhancing Park and Ride facilities.

15.     Auckland Transport welcomes further local board discussion and input to the Parking Strategy review. We are keen to hear from local boards, what outcomes we should be aiming for and also what specific issues the strategy should address.

16.     Local board feedback will enable us to shape the draft refresh of the Parking Strategy prior to public consultation.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

17.     Te Tāruke-ā-Tāwhiri:Auckland’s Climate Action will require changes to the land transport system, including parking.

18.     Government strategy and direction will also require changes, particularly the National Policy Statement on Urban Development (NPS-UD) which requires planning decisions to contribute to the development of urban environments that support reductions in greenhouse gas emissions and are resilient to the likely current and future effects of climate change.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

19.     Auckland Transport have engaged with key stakeholders and across the Auckland Council family, including with council’s Advisory Panels.

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

Local impacts and local board views

·     June 2021- introductory memo to local boards to introduce the Parking Strategy review and approach

·     June 2021- presentation to the Local Board Chairs’ Forum to introduce the Parking Strategy review and discuss plans for local board engagement

·     August 2021- workshops with those local boards who elected to have a workshop before public consultation questions, raise ‘pain-points’ and gauge any initial feedback (PowerPoint provided as Attachment B)

·     September 2021 – opportunity to provide formal feedback ahead of public consultation.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

22.     We are engaging with the Mana Whenua Kaitiaki Forum to establish how best to incorporate views from Mana Whenua and mataawaka into the review.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

23.     There are no financial implications associated with the local board providing feedback on the review of Auckland Transport’s Parking Strategy.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

24.     The direction taken by the updated Parking Strategy will include what levers should be pulled, how far they should be pulled, and how fast.

25.     Lower levels of intervention, undertaken more slowly, will allow more incremental change, and plenty of time for Aucklanders to adapt, but will take longer to achieve the shifts that Auckland needs.

26.     More intervention, implemented more quickly will require significant changes in behaviour but will be a quicker route to the eventual outcome of a city that is less dependent on cars.

27.     Each of these approaches will have their own risks and necessary mitigations.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

28.     Feedback from local boards ahead of public consultation is required by 30 September 2021.

29.     Public consultation will take place in October/November 2021. 

30.     Following consultation, all local boards will receive a summary of data and comments received during public consultation.

31.     Those local boards who elected to have their workshop after public consultation have these booked in for February 2022.

32.     Following these workshops, all local boards will have a further opportunity to provide formal feedback.

33.     The final updated Parking Strategy is expected to go to the Planning Committee for adoption in May 2022, after which local boards will be provided with a final copy of the strategy.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Auckland Transport Parking Strategy (2015)

169

b

Parking Strategy – PowerPoint presentation to local board workshops

209

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Kat Ashmead - Senior Advisor Operations and Policy

Authorisers

Louise Mason - GM Local Board Services

Adam Milina - Local Area Manager

 


Henderson-Massey Local Board

21 September 2021

 

 

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


Henderson-Massey Local Board

21 September 2021

 

 

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


Henderson-Massey Local Board

21 September 2021

 

 

Public feedback on proposal to amend the Animal Management Bylaw 2015

File No.: CP2021/13224

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To seek local board views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback to a proposal to amend Auckland Council’s bylaw and associated controls about animals before a final decision is made.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       To enable the local board to provide its views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback to a proposal to amend the Te Kaunihera o Tāmaki Makaurau Te Ture-ā-rohe Tiaki Kararehe / Auckland Council Animal Management Bylaw 2015 and associated controls, staff have prepared feedback summary and deliberation reports.

3.       The proposal seeks to improve the current Bylaw and controls to better minimise animal-related risks to public health and safety, nuisance, offensive behaviour and misuse of council-controlled public places.

4.       Council received responses from 189 people and organisations at the close of feedback on 16 July 2021. All feedback is summarised by proposal and other matters as following:

Topic

Description

Proposal 1

Require an approval to keep more than two standard beehives on urban premises with a land area of less than 2000 square metres (no approval currently required).

Proposal 2

Incorporate rules from another bylaw about the feeding of animals on private property.

Proposal 3

Update the definitions, structure, format and wording of the Bylaw and controls.

Other

Other bylaw-related matters raised in public feedback and other additional matters.

5.       Staff recommend that the local board provide its views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback to the proposal, and if it wishes, present those views to the Panel. Taking this approach will assist the Panel and Governing Body to decide whether to adopt the proposal.

6.       There is a reputational risk that the feedback from the local board area is from a limited group of people and does not reflect the views of the whole community. This report mitigates this risk by providing local boards with a summary of all public feedback.

7.       The Bylaw Panel will consider all local board views and public feedback on the proposal, deliberate and make recommendations to the Governing Body on 29 October 2021. The Governing Body will make a final decision in November 2021.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Henderson-Massey Local Board:

a)      receive the public feedback on the proposal to amend Te Kaunihera o Tāmaki Makaurau Te Ture-ā-rohe Tiaki Kararehe 2015 / Auckland Council Animal Management Bylaw 2015 and associated controls in this agenda report.

b)      provide its views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback to the proposal in recommendation (a) to assist the Bylaw Panel in its deliberations.

c)      appoint one or more local board members to present the views in b) to the Bylaw Panel on 29 October 2021.

d)      delegate authority to the local board chair to appoint replacement(s) to the persons in c) should an appointed member be unable to present to the Bylaw Panel on 29 October 2021.

Horopaki

Context

The Animal Management Bylaw enables council to regulate the keeping of animals

8.       Te Kaunihera o Tāmaki Makaurau Te Ture-ā-rohe Tiaki Kararehe 2015 / the Auckland Council Animal Management Bylaw 2015 (Bylaw) and associated controls (controls) seek to minimise animal-related risks to public health and safety, nuisance, offensive behaviour and misuse of council-controlled public places.

9.       The rules are enforced by the Licensing and Regulatory Compliance unit using a graduated compliance model (information, education and enforcement).

10.     The Bylaw and controls are one part of a wider regulatory framework, including the:

·     Animal Products Act 1999 and Animal Welfare Act 1999 for animal welfare

·     Resource Management Act 1991 and Biosecurity Act 1993 to protect the environment

·     Dog Control Act 1996 and Auckland Council Dog Management Bylaw 2019 for the care and control of dogs.

Council proposed amendments to improve the Bylaw for public feedback

11.     On 27 May 2021, the Governing Body adopted a proposal to improve the Bylaw and controls for public consultation (Item 11, GB/2021/50).

12.     The proposal arose from a statutory review of the Bylaw (see figure below).

13.     The proposal seeks to better regulate the keeping of animals by:

·     requiring an approval to keep more than two standard beehives on urban premises with a land area of less than 2000 square metres (no approval currently required)

·     incorporating rules from another bylaw about the feeding of animals on private property

·     updating the definitions, structure, format and wording of the Bylaw and controls to make them easier to read and understand.

14.     The proposal was publicly notified for feedback from 8 June until 16 July 2021. During that period, council received feedback from 177 people and 12 organisations.

The local board has an opportunity to provide views on public feedback

15.     The local board now has an opportunity to provide its views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback to the proposal before a final decision is made.

16.     Local board views must be provided by resolution to the Bylaw Panel. The local board can also choose to present those views to the Bylaw Panel on 29 October 2021.

17.     The nature of the local board views are at the discretion of the local board but must remain within the scope of the proposal and public feedback. For example, the local board could:

·     indicate support for matters raised in public feedback by people from the local board area

·     recommend how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Feedback from people in the local board area partly supports the proposal

18.     A total of 11 people from the local board area provided feedback to the proposal via online and email feedback.

·     for Proposal One, there was majority opposition from the local board area, greater than the total opposition from all people who provided feedback

·     for Proposal Two, there was split support from the local board area, with less support than the total support from all people who provided feedback

·     for Proposal Three, there was majority support from the local board area, similar to the total support from all people who provided feedback.

 

Support of proposal in the local board area

Topic

Local board area feedback

Auckland-wide feedback

1:        Require an approval to keep more than two standard beehives on urban premises with a land area of less than 2000 square metres (no approval currently required).

18 per cent support

0 per cent opposed (want more rules)

82 per cent opposed (want less rules)

0 per cent ‘other’

0 per cent no response

34 per cent support

6 per cent oppose (want more rules)

48 per cent oppose (want less rules)

10 per cent ‘other’

2 per cent no response

2:        Incorporate rules from another bylaw about the feeding of animals on private property.

36 per cent support

27 per cent opposed

27 per cent ‘other’

9 per cent no response

62 per cent support

15 per cent oppose

12 per cent ‘other’

11 per cent no response

3:        Update the definitions, structure, format and wording of the Bylaw and controls.

64 per cent support

0 per cent opposed

27 per cent ‘other’

9 per cent no response

64 per cent support

10 per cent opposed

15 per cent ‘other’

11 per cent no response

 

19.     Key themes from feedback from people in the local board area are consistent with key themes from all public feedback. For example, that the proposal should:

·     maintain current rules

·     have a more graduated approach rather than one limit

·     consider the environmental impact of bees.

20.     The full proposal can be viewed in the link. Attachment A of this report contains a draft Bylaw Panel deliberations report which includes a summary of all public feedback. Attachment B contains a copy of all public feedback related to the local board area.

Staff recommend the local board provide its views on public feedback

21.     Staff recommend that the local board provide its views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback by resolution, and if it wishes, present those views to the Bylaw Panel on 29 October 2021.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

22.     There are no implications for climate change arising from decisions sought in this report.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

23.     The proposal impacts council’s Licensing and Regulatory Compliance team who implement the Bylaw. The unit is aware of the impacts of the proposal and their implementation role.

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

Local impacts and local board views

24.     The Bylaw is important to local boards as a topic of high community interest.

25.     Local board views were sought on a draft proposal in March and April 2021. The draft was supported in full by 13 local boards and with suggested changes by seven local boards. One local board opposed the proposal for public consultation.

26.     A summary of local board views and changes made to the proposal can be viewed in the link to the 11 May 2021 Regulatory Committee agenda (Attachment B to Item 11, page 101).

27.     This report provides an opportunity for local boards to provide views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback to the proposal, before a final decision is made.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

28.     The Bylaw has significance to Māori as kaitiaki of Papatūānuku.The proposal supports the key direction of kaitiakitanga in the Independent Māori Statutory Board Māori Plan for Tāmaki Makaurau by minimising the misuse of council-controlled public places.

29.     The proposed amended bylaw also supports the Independent Māori Statutory Board’s Schedule of Issues of Significance by clarifying how the Bylaw applies to Māori and papakāinga. For example, the proposal clarifies that limits on the ownership of animals in urban areas do not apply to papakāinga within the Māori Purpose Zone of the Auckland Council Unitary Plan.

30.     Mana whenua and mataawaka were notified of the proposal and given the opportunity to provide feedback through face-to-face meetings, in writing, online and in-person.

31.     The majority of people identifying as Māori who provided feedback support Proposals Two and Three (consistent with the overall public feedback). The majority of people identifying as Māori who provided feedback opposed Proposal One (consistent with the overall public feedback).

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

32.     There are no financial implications arising from decisions sought in this report.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

33.     The following risk has been identified:

If...

Then...

Mitigation

The feedback from the local board area is from a limited group of people.

The feedback may not reflect the views of the whole community.

This risk is mitigated by providing local boards with a summary of all public feedback.

 

 

 

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

34.     On 29 October 2021, the Bylaw Panel will consider all formal local board views and public feedback on the proposal, deliberate and make recommendations to the Governing Body. The Governing Body will make a final decision in November 2021 (refer to the ‘Process to amend the Animal Management Bylaw 2015’ diagram in Context).


 

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Draft Bylaw Panel deliberations report

231

b

Public feedback from people in the Henderson-Massey Local Board area

259

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Saralee Gore - Policy Advisor

Breanna Hawthorne - Policy Analyst

Authorisers

Paul Wilson - Senior Policy Manager

Louise Mason – General Manager Local Board Services

Adam Milina - Local Area Manager

 


Henderson-Massey Local Board

21 September 2021

 

 

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


Henderson-Massey Local Board

21 September 2021

 

 

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


Henderson-Massey Local Board

21 September 2021

 

 

Public feedback on proposal to amend the Water Supply and Wastewater Network Bylaw 2015

File No.: CP2021/13293

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To seek local board views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback to the proposed amendments to the Te Kaunihera o Tāmaki Makaurau Ture ā Rohe Whakarato Wai me te Pae Kōtuitui Wai Para / Auckland Council Water Supply and Wastewater Network Bylaw 2015, before a final decision is made.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       To enable the local board to provide its views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback to the proposal, staff have summarised the feedback and provided a structure for deliberations.

3.       The proposal helps to protect the water and water networks from damage misuse and interference and assist in the provision of reliable, safe, and efficient water and wastewater services in Auckland.

4.       Council received responses from 46 people and organisations at the close of feedback on 16 July 2021. All feedback is summarised into the following topics:

Topic

Description

Proposal 1

To further define the rules regarding unauthorised taking of water from the Water Supply Network

Proposal 2

To further define the rules regarding unauthorised discharges to the Wastewater Network

Proposal 3

Clarification of linkages to other legislation, bylaws, and other documentation

Other

Other bylaw-related matters raised in public feedback and other additional matters.

5.       Staff recommend that the local board provide its views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback to the proposal, and if it wishes, present those views to the Bylaw Panel. Taking this approach will assist the Panel and Governing Body to decide whether to adopt the proposal.

6.       There is a reputational risk that feedback from the local board area is from a limited group of people and organisations, and does not reflect the views of the whole community. This report mitigates this risk by providing local boards with a summary of all public feedback.

7.       The Bylaw Panel will consider all local board views and public feedback on the proposal, deliberate and make recommendations to the Governing Body on 5 November 2021. The Governing Body will make a final decision in November 2021.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Henderson-Massey Local Board:

a)      receive public feedback on the proposal to amend the Te Kaunihera o Tāmaki Makaurau Ture ā Rohe Whakarato Wai me te Pae Kōtuitui Wai Para / Auckland Council Water Supply and Wastewater Network Bylaw 2015 in this agenda report.

b)      provide its views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback to the proposal in recommendation (a) to assist the Bylaw Panel in its deliberations.

c)      appoint one or more local board members to present the views in (b) to the Bylaw Panel on 5 November 2021.

d)      delegate authority to the local board chair to appoint replacement(s) to the persons in (c) should an appointed member be unable to present to the Bylaw Panel on 5 November 2021.

 

Horopaki

Context

Bylaw protects the water supply and wastewater networks

8.       The Governing Body adopted the Ture ā Rohe Whakarato Wai me te Pae Kōtuitui Wai Para 2015 / Water Supply and Wastewater Network Bylaw 2015 (Bylaw) on 25 June 2015 (GB/2015/62). This Auckland Council Bylaw is administered by Watercare Services Limited.

9.       This Bylaw seeks to protect the water supply and wastewater networks by:

·    requiring authorisation from Watercare to connect to or disconnect from the water supply or wastewater network and enabling Watercare to refuse connections where there is insufficient network capacity

·    ensuring appropriate standards for any new infrastructure under Watercare's control

·    protecting the quality of the water supply and prohibiting illegal use from hydrants

·    managing work near the water supply and wastewater network to protect it from damage

·    allowing for restricting the water supply to maintain enough drinking water, in the event of drought or other emergency

·    managing inflows and illegal dumping of material into the wastewater network to avoid wastewater overflows.

10.     The Bylaw is one part of a wider regulatory framework. Issues related to access to private property are addressed under the Local Government Act 2002 while those related to the compliance with water quality are addressed under the Health Act 1956.

11.     In addition, uniquely to Auckland, Watercare has a contractual relationship with its customers. This enables the Bylaw to focus on matters relating to the impact of household and businesses’ behaviours on the public assets, while the customer contract addresses the rights and obligations for each customer’s water and wastewater connection.

Council proposed amendments to the Bylaw for public feedback

12.     On 25 February 2021, the Governing Body adopted a proposal make amendments to the Water Supply and Wastewater Network Bylaw for public consultation (GB/2021/11).  The proposal arose from a statutory review of the Water Supply and Wastewater Network Bylaw 2015 (see figure below).

13.     The proposal arose from a statutory review of the Water Supply and Wastewater Network Bylaw 2015 (see figure below).

14.     The proposal helps to clarify and further define the rules in the Bylaw by clarifying:

·    the rules around the unauthorised taking of water from the water supply network

·    the definitions around unauthorised discharges to the wastewater network

·    linkages with other bylaws and documentation.

15.     The proposal was publicly notified for feedback from 8 June until 16 July 2021. During that period, council received feedback from 43 people and 3 organisations. In addition, the ‘AK Have Your Say’ webpage received 396 hits.[6]

Process to amend Water Supply and Wastewater Network Bylaw 2015

 

The local board has an opportunity to provide views on public feedback

16.     The local board now has an opportunity to provide its views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback to the proposal before a final decision is made.

17.     Local board views must be provided by resolution to the Bylaw Panel. The local board can also choose to present those views to the Bylaw Panel on 5 November 2021.

18.     The nature of the local board views are at the discretion of the local board but must remain within the scope of the proposal and public feedback. For example, the local board could:

·   indicate support for matters raised in public feedback by people from the local board area

recommend how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Feedback from people in the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu local board area supports the proposal

19.       A total of five people from the Henderson Massey local board area provided feedback to the proposal. There was majority support for Proposals One, Two and Three, this is similar to the total support from all people across Auckland who provided feedback.

 

 

 

 

 

20.       Support of proposal in the local board area

Topic

Total support from the Henderson Massey local board area

Total support from people across Auckland

1:        To further define the rules regarding unauthorised taking of water from the network

60%

70 %

2:        To further define the rules regarding unauthourised discharges to the Wastewater network

100%

79 %

3:        Clarification of linkages to other legislation, bylaws and documentation

60%

76 %

 

21.     Key themes from feedback from people in the local board area are consistent with key themes from all public feedback.

·     Generally supportive of all amendments

·     On respondent had doubts about where to dispose of prohibited items if they could not be discharged to the wastewater system.

22.     The full proposal be viewed in the link. Attachment A of this report contains a draft Bylaw Panel deliberations report which includes a summary of all public feedback. Attachment B contains a copy of all public feedback related to the local board area.8

Staff recommend the local board provide its views on public feedback

23.     Staff recommend that the local board provide its views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback by resolution, and if it wishes, present those views to the Bylaw Panel on 5 November 2021.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

24.     There are no implications for climate change arising from decisions sought in this report.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

25.     The Bylaw impacts the operations of many Watercare teams in charge of the operations and the planning of water sources and water and wastewater networks. It also impacts some Auckland Council teams involved in compliance and stormwater management. Relevant staff are aware of the impacts of the proposal and their implementation role.

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

Local impacts and local board views

26.     Local Board members were invited to give feedback on the Bylaw in December 2019. This included an offer by staff to present workshops to interested local boards at their meetings.

27.     Communication was received from one local board in relation to wastewater overflows, a matter unrelated to Bylaw, and already covered by the Resource Management Act 1991.

28.     This low interest in the Bylaw review is consistent with the Auckland Council’s classification of the Bylaw as low impact and low interest to local boards under the agreed principles and processes for Local Board Involvement in Regional Policy, Plans and Bylaws 2019.

29.     An update on the findings and options stages were included in Watercare’s Local Board communications in June 2020.

30.     This report provides an opportunity to give local board views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback to the proposal, before a final decision is made.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

31.     The Bylaw contributes to the Māori Plan’s key directions and aspirations of Manaakitanga (Improve Quality of Life "Satisfaction with our environments and standard of living") and Kaitiakitanga (Ensure Sustainable Futures "lntergenerational Reciprocity") by ensuring the public water supply and wastewater network is future proofed and not contaminated or damaged, which would be detrimental to the people and the natural environment.

32.     Input by mana whenua was sought at a special hui of the Mana Whenua Kaitiaki Forum in January 2020. The main concerns related to environmental issues beyond the bylaw scope such as archaeological sites and clarifications of asset ownership and responsibilities.

33.     Staff sought input by mana whenua on the proposed options in June 2020. A meeting with the Chair of the Mana Whenua Kaitiaki Forum confirmed his support of the direction taken and recommended a written update at the June forum to carry on the engagement.

34.     Watercare staff presented an update of the Bylaw review process to the Mana Whenua Kaitiaki Forum in mid-October 2020.

35.     Those respondents who identified as Maori during the public consultation were all generally supportive of the three proposals.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

36.     There are no financial implications arising from decisions sought in this report. Costs associated with the special consultative procedure will be met within existing budgets.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

37.     The following risks have been identified:

If...

Then...

Mitigation

The feedback from the local board area is from a limited group of people and organisations.

The feedback may not reflect the views of the whole community.

This risk is mitigated by providing local boards with a summary of all public feedback.

 

 

 

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

38.     On 5 November 2021, the Bylaw Panel will consider all formal local board views and public feedback on the proposal, deliberate and make recommendations to the Governing Body. The Governing Body will make a final decision in November 2021 (refer to the ‘Process to make the amend the Water Supply and Wastewater Network Bylaw 2015’ diagram in Context).


 

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Draft Bylaw Panel Deliberations Report

291

b

Henderson-Massey Local Board Submissions

297

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Sharon Danks – Operations Delivery Manager – Watercare

Authorisers

Mark Bourne – Chief Operations Officer – Watercare

Louise Mason – GM Local Board Services

Adam Milina - Local Area Manager

 


Henderson-Massey Local Board

21 September 2021

 

 

Deliberations on proposal to amend the Water Supply and Wastewater Network Bylaw 2015

File No.:  <<leave blank – Infocouncil will insert this when the report is saved in HPRM>>

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To assist Bylaw Panel deliberations on public feedback to the proposed amendments to the Te Kaunihera o Tāmaki Makaurau Ture ā Rohe Whakarato Wai me te Pae Kōtuitui Wai Para / Auckland Council Water Supply and Wastewater Network Bylaw 2015.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       To assist Bylaw Panel deliberations on public feedback to the proposal, staff have summarised the feedback and provided a structure for the deliberations (Attachment A).

3.       The proposal helps to protect the water supply and wastewater networks from damage misuse and interference and assist in the provision of reliable, safe, and efficient water and wastewater services in Auckland.

4.       Council received responses from 46 people and organisations at the close of feedback on 16 July 2021. All feedback is summarised into the following topics:

Topic

Description

Proposal One

To further define the rules regarding unauthorised taking of water from the Water Supply Network.

Proposal Two

To further define the rules regarding unauthorised discharges to the Wastewater Network.

Proposal Three

Clarification of linkages to other legislation, bylaws, and other documentation.

Other

Other bylaw-related matters raised in public feedback and other additional matters.

5.       Staff recommend that the Panel consider all feedback received on the proposal and make the necessary recommendations to the Governing Body.

6.       This approach will help complete the statutory process the council must follow. This includes considering with an open mind the views of people interested in the proposal before making a final decision.

7.       There is a reputational risk that some people or organisations who provided feedback may not feel that their views are addressed. This risk can be mitigated by the Panel considering all public feedback contained in this report and in its decision report to the Governing Body.

8.       The final step in the statutory process is for the Governing Body to approve the Bylaw Panel recommendations. If approved, staff will publicly notify the decision and publish the Bylaw.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Bylaw Panel:

a)      thank those persons and organisations who gave public feedback on the proposed amendments to the Te Kaunihera o Tāmaki Makaurau Ture ā Rohe Whakarato Wai me te Pae Kōtuitui Wai Para / Auckland Council Water Supply and Wastewater Network Bylaw 2015

b)      request that staff as delegated by the Chief Executive prepare a decision report to the Governing Body for approval of the Panel.

Horopaki

Context

9.       The Governing Body adopted the Ture ā Rohe Whakarato Wai me te Pae Kōtuitui Wai Para 2015 / Water Supply and Wastewater Network Bylaw 2015 (Bylaw) on 25 June 2015 (GB/2015/62). This Auckland Council Bylaw is administered by Watercare Services Limited.

10.     This Bylaw seeks to protect the water supply and wastewater networks by:

·    requiring authorisation from Watercare to connect to or disconnect from the water supply or wastewater network and enabling Watercare to refuse connections where there is insufficient network capacity

·    ensuring appropriate standards for any new infrastructure under Watercare's control

·    protecting the quality of the water supply and prohibiting illegal use from hydrants

·    managing work near the water supply and wastewater network to protect it from damage

·    allowing for restricting the water supply to maintain enough drinking water, in the event of drought or other emergency

·    managing inflows and illegal dumping of material into the wastewater network to avoid wastewater overflows.

11.     The Bylaw is one part of a wider regulatory framework. Issues related to access to private property are addressed under the Local Government Act 2002 while those related to the compliance with water quality are addressed under the Health Act 1956.

12.     In addition, uniquely to Auckland, Watercare has a contractual relationship with its customers. This enables the Bylaw to focus on matters relating to the impact of household and businesses’ behaviours on the public assets, while the customer contract addresses the rights and obligations for each customer’s water and wastewater connection.

Bylaw Panel appointed to deliberate on public feedback to the proposal

13.     On 25 February 2021, the Regulatory Committee appointed the Bylaw Panel to attend public consultation events, deliberate and make recommendations to the Governing Body on public feedback to the proposal (REG/2021/03).

14.     When deliberating, the Panel:[7]

·    must receive public feedback with an open mind and give it due consideration

·    must provide the decisions and reasons to people who gave feedback

·    must ensure all meetings are open to the public

·    may consider or request comment or advice from staff or any other person to assist their decision-making.

                                                                    

 

Feedback on the proposal was received from 46 people and organisations

15.     The proposal was publicly notified for feedback from 8 June to 16 July 2021. Council received feedback from 46 people and organisations from across Auckland during that period (see table below).

Summary of public notification and feedback

Public consultation initiatives

·    public notice in all local suburban papers in June 2021

·    article on ‘Our Auckland’ website in June 2021

·    promotion through social media pages (Twitter and Facebook) in June 2021

·    promotion through the People’s Panel consultation webpages in June 2021

·    email notification to all local board members, advisors, senior advisors and local area managers, and the Chair of the Independent Māori Statutory Board in June 2021.

Public feedback opportunities

·    in writing online, by email or by post from Tuesday, 8 June to Friday, 16 July 2021

·    in person at a ‘Have Your Say’ event[8] at the Central Library on Friday, 2 July 2021

·    verbally by phone.

Consultation reach (number of responses)

·    feedback received from 46 people and organisations as follows:

online and written feedback provided by 43 people and organisations. This included 3 responses via email, 43 via the online ‘Have Your Say’ feedback form and feedback from three organisations and one individual who also attended the stakeholder day (Attachments C, D and E).

16.     Attachments A to G in this report contain a deliberations table, proposal, summary and full copy of public feedback and summary of operational and non-bylaw-related feedback.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

17.     To assist the Bylaw Panel in its deliberations, staff have summarised bylaw-related public feedback into topics in Attachment A as shown in the table below. This enables the Panel to deliberate and record its recommendations on each topic to meet statutory requirements.

Topic

Description

Proposal One

To further define the rules regarding unauthorised taking of water from the Water Supply Network.

Proposal Two

To further define the rules regarding unauthorised discharges to the Wastewater Network.

Proposal Three

Clarification of linkages to other legislation, bylaws, and other documentation.

Other

Other bylaw-related matters raised in public feedback and other additional matters.

 

18.     The majority of public feedback and views supported all proposals. This included 70 per cent of support for Proposal One, 79 per cent for Proposal Two and 76 per cent for Proposal Three.

19.     Key matters for deliberations include:

·    water should be available for rural unconnected customers as required

·    council should consider education rather that enforcement for unauthorised wastewater discharges

·    enforcement would be difficult with respect to wastewater discharges especially for residential properties.

20.     Staff have forwarded feedback on operational and non-bylaw matters (summarised in Attachment F) to relevant council units.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

21.     There are no implications for climate change arising from decisions sought in this report.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

22.     The Bylaw impacts the operations of many Watercare teams in charge of the operations and the planning of water sources and water and wastewater networks. It also impacts some Auckland Council teams involved in compliance and stormwater management. Relevant staff are aware of the impacts of the proposal and their implementation role

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

Local impacts and local board views

impacts and local board views

23.     Local Board members were invited to give feedback on the Bylaw in December 2019. This included an offer by staff to present workshops to interested local boards at their meetings.

24.     Communication was received from one local board in relation to wastewater overflows, a matter unrelated to Bylaw, and already covered by the Resource Management Act 1991.

25.     This low interest in the Bylaw review is consistent with the Auckland Council’s classification of the Bylaw as low impact and low interest to local boards under the agreed principles and processes for Local Board Involvement in Regional Policy, Plans and Bylaws 2019.

26.     An update on the findings and options stages were included in Watercare’s Local Board communications in June 2020.

27.     # local boards provided their views by resolution (Attachment G). Key views include [To be completed after September local board meetings].

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

28.     The Bylaw contributes to the Māori Plan’s key directions and aspirations of Manaakitanga (Improve Quality of Life "Satisfaction with our environments and standard of living") and Kaitiakitanga (Ensure Sustainable Futures "lntergenerational Reciprocity") by ensuring the public water supply and wastewater network is future proofed and not contaminated or damaged, which would be detrimental to the people and the natural environment.

29.     Input by mana whenua was sought at a special hui of the Mana Whenua Kaitiaki Forum in January 2020. The main concerns related to environmental issues beyond the bylaw scope such as archaeological sites and clarifications of asset ownership and responsibilities.

30.     Staff sought input by mana whenua on the proposed options in June 2020. A meeting with the Chair of the Mana Whenua Kaitiaki Forum confirmed his support of the direction taken and recommended a written update at the June forum to carry on the engagement.

31.     Watercare staff presented an update of the Bylaw review process to the Mana Whenua Kaitiaki Forum in mid-October 2020. Feedback was also asked for.

32.     Those respondents who identified as Maori during the public consultation were all generally supportive of the three proposals.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

33.     There are no financial implications arising from decisions sought in this report. The cost of the Bylaw Panel recommendations will be met within existing budgets.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

34.     The following risks have been identified:

If...

Then...

Mitigation

Some people or organisations feel the feedback they provided was not addressed.

There may be a negative perception about the legitimacy of the deliberations.

The Bylaw Panel considers all public feedback contained in this report and in its decision report to the Governing Body.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

35.     Staff will prepare a report from the Bylaw Panel to the Governing Body to implement the Panel directions on public feedback from its deliberations meeting. The report will be circulated to the Panel for approval and if necessary, the Panel can reconvene.

36.     The final step in the statutory process is for the Governing Body to approve recommendations from the Panel. If approved, council staff will publicly notify the decision and publish the amended Bylaw.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Deliberations table

 

b

Statement of Proposal

 

C

Summary of public feedback

 

D

Online and written feedback

 

E

‘Have Your Say’ event feedback

 

F

Operational and non-bylaw-related public feedback

 

G

Local Board views on public feedback

 

 

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Sharon Danks- Operations Delivery Manager, Watercare Services Limited

Authorisers

Mark Bourne – Chief Operations Officer, Watercare Services Limited

 


Henderson-Massey Local Board

21 September 2021

 

 

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator


Henderson-Massey Local Board

21 September 2021

 

 

Draft Business Improvement District Policy (2021) Kaupapa Here ā-Rohe Whakapiki Pakihi

File No.: CP2021/13389

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To seek local board feedback on the draft Business Improvement District (BID) Policy (2021) and supporting documents.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       The BID Team has implemented a review of the Business Improvement District (BID) Policy (2016) Kaupapa Here ā-Rohe Whakapiki Pakihi and supporting documents, as advised in the memo to local board members dated 23 April 2021. The memo can be found on the Auckland Council website, InfoCouncil.

3.       The review sought informal and formal feedback from local boards, BID-operating business associations, non-BID business associations, council-controlled organisations (CCOs), council departments and other external stakeholders.

4.       The review has focused on strengthening those parts of the policy relating to issue resolution and, following local board feedback, the financial sustainability of BID programmes.

5.       The review also focused on elected member needs and identifying any political risks and mitigations.

6.       The draft BID Policy (2021) has been before the Finance and Performance committee at a workshop on 18 August 2021. Feedback received has been incorporated into this version of the BID Policy (2021) and supporting documents.

7.       Staff are now seeking formal feedback from local boards on the draft BID Policy (2021) provided as Attachment A.

8.       Following formal feedback received from local boards, BID-operating business associations, non-BID business associations, CCOs, council departments and other external stakeholders, the final version of the BID Policy (2021) and support documents will be presented to the Finance and Performance Committee for adoption on 9 December 2021.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Henderson-Massey Local Board:

a)      provide formal feedback on the draft Business Improvement District Policy (2021) and supporting documents by 1 October 2021.

Horopaki

Context

Overview of the Auckland BID programme

9.       BID-operating business associations are membership-based organisations independent of Auckland Council. The draft BID Policy (2021) supports the independent nature of the BID-operating business associations. They are responsible for the BID programme delivery, its success, and are accountable to BID members/BID affiliates.

10.     Local boards have the primary relationship with BID-operating business associations in their area:

·     Local boards and business associations have a vested interest in a particular place and share similar goals. Working collaboratively achieves greater outcomes.

·     Local boards have significant allocated decision-making responsibility for BID programme establishments, amending existing BID programmes, BID boundary changes, continuation/discontinuation and issue resolution.

11.     Auckland Council requires BID-operating business associations to fully comply with the Business Improvement District (BID) Policy (Kaupapa Hereā-Rohe Whakapiki Pakihi) (refer Attachment A).

12.     The BID policy sets out the process for:

·     establishing, continuing/discontinuing BID programmes

·     changes to the BID programme boundary area/map

·     changes to the BID targeted rating mechanism

·     issue resolution

·     key stakeholder roles and responsibilities.

13.     The BID policy includes the engagement and reporting requirements for BID-operating business associations to ensure all BID members/BID affiliates have access to the relevant BID programme information. BID-operating business associations must use their Annual General Meeting (AGM) process to obtain formal member approval for the BID programme delivery, budget, and to confirm their BID targeted rate grant amount for the following financial year.

14.     The BID policy describes the balance between the independence of the BID-operating business association and the accountability role council has for monies collected as a public sector organisation. This balance is necessary to sustain public trust and confidence with the Auckland Council BID programme. 

The review

15.     Commencing April 2021, the review of the current policy began with communicating with local boards and all stakeholders involved in the management and operation of BID programmes across Tāmaki Makaurau, both BID-operating and non-BID business associations, council departments and interested parties. The process to date has included informal feedback and comments on the current policy.

16.     The review process focused on strengthening parts of the policy (and updating supporting documents) relating to issue resolution and, following local board feedback, financial sustainability of BID programmes.

17.     The review has also provided the opportunity to clarify the documentation between Auckland Council (collecting the BID targeted rate and the funder) and the BID-operating business association relating to the BID Programme Agreement (2016) document.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Rationale for the review

18.     The primary objective for reviewing the current 2016 policy is a focus on the issue resolution sections. Experience in this space over the last five years has illustrated gaps in the usefulness of the current policy to address and resolve issues in a timely manner.

19.     The review provided an opportunity to update parts of the policy relating to Auckland Council changes in operation, current business practices and where the advancement of technology has contributed to how business is done, for example zoom meetings.

20.     There was also an early opportunity to capture informal feedback from local boards and BID-operating business associations.

21.     The information and informal feedback collected in May, June and July of this year has been incorporated into the draft BID Policy 2021 (Attachment A) and supporting documents (Attachments B and C). A summary of the BID Policy (2021) requirements is provided with this report (Attachment D).

22.     BID programmes are operated by independent business associations, and their programmes and services are provided according to their members’ stated priorities. In recognition of their independent status, the BID policy does not prescribe standards for programme effectiveness. That is a matter for business association members to determine. Staff, therefore, cannot base recommendations on these factors, but only on the policy’s express requirements.

Participants in the review

23.     In addition to local boards, there are a range of stakeholders involved in BID programmes, both internal and external to Auckland Council. The BID team set a programme of informal engagement, outlined in Table 1 below:

            Table 1 – Key engagement activity

Stakeholder

Engagement

Dates

BID-operating business associations

Business associations without BID programmes

BID communication including newsletters and emails:

Sent to 50+ BID-operating business associations and other interested parties

March, April, May, June and July 2021

Three network meetings

May, June and July 2021

An average attendance exceeded 20+ BID-operating business associations

Four special workshops - topics included: issue resolution, conflict of interest and developing a board charter

June and July 2021

An average of 23+ BID programmes were represented at each workshop.

Local boards

18 local board workshop presentations

June and July 2021

Introduction memo and BID policy review information

Three special topic workshops - topics included: issue resolution, conflict of interest and developing a board charter

June and July 2021

An average of 16 local board elected members attended each workshop

Local Board Services Division Lead team

Presentation and information feedback received

Presentation on 18 June 2021

Finance and Performance Committee

Memo on BID policy review project

April 2021

Council departments including:

·    Legal Services

·    Connected Communities

·    Ngā Mātārae

·    Risk and Assurance

·    Finance and Policy

·    Local Board Services

Regular meetings, engagement and feedback

May, June, and July 2021

Independent polling agent

 

Engagement and feedback regarding the ballot/polling process

June 2021

Finance and Performance Committee workshop

The draft BID Policy (2021) V1 and support documents were presented and feedback received

18 August 2021

24.     The process to undertake the review of the current policy (2016) takes place from February 2021 to June 2022. Progress to date is set out in Table 2 below:

          Table 2 - Progress to date

Date

Progress

2021

Feb/March

·    Project planning, stakeholder communications

April to July

·    Directed consultation with local boards and stakeholders on the current BID policy and identified themes

  issue resolution

  conflicts of interest

  board charter development

May/June

·    Cross council, external engagement and feedback

June/July

·    Draft BID Policy (2021) and supporting documents created

August 18

·    Finance and Performance Committee workshop

August/September

·    Distribution of draft BID Policy (2021) for formal feedback

Informal local board feedback

25.     Discussions with local boards during workshops centred around:

·     issue resolution – how to do this fairly and in a timely manner

·     operational issues – relating to management and governance of BID-operating business associations

·     opportunities for collaboration and cost savings between BIDs

·     elected members involvement with BID-operating business associations

·     growth opportunities for BID-operating business associations

·     continued dependence on local board funding.

Seeking local board formal feedback on the draft BID Policy (2021) and support documents

26.     Local boards are now being asked to provide formal feedback on a revised draft policy (2021) and support documents (Attachments A, B and C). Local boards are encouraged to engage with BID-operating business associations in their local board area (where relevant/possible) to help to inform this feedback process. 

27.     Any feedback from local boards will help the further development of BID Policy (2021). It would be, however, particularly useful to get local board views on proposed changes set out in Tables 3 and 4 below.

28.     Feedback from local boards, external stakeholders and any further feedback from BID-operating business associations will be reviewed by staff and this will help inform the final version of the policy. Formal feedback can be sent to bids@aucklandcouncil.govt.nz

Draft BID Policy (2021) and support documents

29.     Once the BID Policy 2021 is approved, other support material will be made available on the BID Auckland Council website www.bid.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz and include:

·     BID-operating business association constitution (template 2021)

·     BID-operating executive committee board charter (template 2021)

·     individual BID programme area maps

·     BID affiliate/BID business association membership qualification diagram

·     local board BID representative position description

·     template documents, including:

AGM agenda

AGM minutes

BID programme income and expenditure budget (for BID grant $120,000).

Summary of changes made to the draft BID Policy (2021) and support documents

30.     The key proposed changes incorporated into the draft BID Policy (2021) are set out in Table 3:

          Table 3 - Key changes made to the draft BID Policy (2021) and support documents

Key change from current policy

Description

Note

2021 section, page

Issue resolution

 

Improving the ability to resolve issues with a clear process in a timely manner

An issue is identified as non- compliance with the BID policy

3.5, Requirement 24

BID Programme Funding Agreement (2021) Attachment B

Replaced BID Programme Agreement (2016)

Clarifies the relationship between the parties

3.1, Requirement 18

Size and scale of BID programmes

Minimum BID targeted rate grant $120,000

No change from 2016

Minimum BID targeted rate grant $120,000 remains

A new requirement for legacy BID programmes (11 in total) that currently receive less than $120,000pa to increase their targeted rate up to that amount over the next five years

A variety of options are suggested to achieve this

This requirement is a result of local board feedback on concerns to continually fund non-financially sustainable BID programmes

 

1.4, Requirement 3 and 4

Exceptional or unexpected circumstances

Council may, at its discretion, depart from the requirement set out in section 2.4 (25% of total voting forms must be returned for the ballot to be valid

Council will consider evidence of support to date, what is fair and any impact from amending the voting threshold mandate

 

3.4.2

BID operating business association constitution (template 2016)

This supporting document was included as part of the current policy and now removed from the BID Policy (2021)

This allows the business association to amend their constitution to suit their local needs, on the basis it’s not inconsistent with the BID policy

A template document is provided on the www.bid.auckland.govt.nz website

1.1, 2.3.2 Requirement 12

BID operating executive committee board charter (template 2016)

This supporting document was included as part of the current policy and now removed from the BID Policy (2021)

This allows the business association to amend their board charter to suit their local needs, on the basis it’s not inconsistent with the BID policy

A template document is provided on the www.bid.auckland.govt.nz website

1.1, 2.3.2 Requirement 12

31.     Minor changes made to the draft BID Policy (2021) are set out in Table 4 below:

            Table 4 - Minor changes made to the draft BID Policy (2021) and support documents

Minor changes to current policy

Description

Note

2021 section, page

Other council funding

 

Organisational view on risk regarding BID-operating business association receiving other council funding

The draft BID policy acknowledges other council funding grants allocated to BID-operating business associations

2.3.4, Requirement 16

Local boards – other roles

 

Updated

Refer to elected member conflicts of interest policy

A link to these documents can be found here

2.5.3

BID Annual Accountability Report (2021) Attachment C

Name change from BID Annual Accountability Agreement (2016)

To include BID targeted rate grant amount and copy of AGM resolution

3.2, Requirement 22, Table 2, item 9

Audit – provision for a review audit or full audit

Recognition of increased risk and increased reporting requirement based on the amount of targeted rate received

Set as a sliding scale

BID targeted rate grants less than $200,000pa must commission a review audit

BID targeted rate grants more than $200,000pa must commission a full audit

3.2, Requirement 23, Table 2, item 4

Rating mechanism - flat rate

Lifted the maximum flat rate amount from $500 to $900 per rateable property

To provide more flexibility for BID-operating business associations when considering BID programme budgets and the impact of BID targeted rates on ratepayers

3.1.2

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

32.     The BID Policy (2021) focuses on the governance and accountability for BID-operating business associations. Individually the BID programme, through targeted rate-funding, can focus on advocacy and activities.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

33.     Formal feedback will be sought from other council teams including CCOs and those who work and have an interested in the BID programme and business community space.

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

Local impacts and local board views

34.     Local boards have engaged with the review of the BID Policy (2016) and their informal feedback has been incorporated into the draft BID Policy (2021) and support documents. Table 1 outlines local board engagement to date.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

35.     Officers are working with Auckland Council’s Ngā Mātārae Unit to ensure that the BID Policy (2021) aligns with the Auckland Council Māori Responsiveness Framework. 

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

36.     There are no financial implications for local boards under the draft BID Policy (2021).

37.     Targeted rates for BID-operating business associations are raised directly from commercial ratepayers in the district and used by the business association for improvements within that rohe. The council’s financial role is to collect the BID targeted rates and pass them directly to the association every quarter.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

38.     There are no direct financial risks to the local board or the council that could result from the draft BID Policy (2021) and supporting documents.

39.     The policy describes the balance between the independence of the BID-operating business association and the accountability for monies collected by a public sector organisation.

40.     The draft BID Policy (2021) and support documents set out the requirements and obligations for BID-operating business associations and are intended to help minimise the potential for business associations to misuse BID targeted rate funds by requiring each BID to plan for their intended use, report on its activities to its members, and to undertake and meet all requirements set out in the policy.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

41.     Following formal feedback received from local boards, CCOs, BID-operating business associations, non-BID business associations, council departments, other external stakeholders and those with an interest in BID programmes, a final BID Policy (2021) and support documents will be updated and the steps outlined in Table 5 below will be completed by the BID team:

          Table 5 - Progress to completion

Date

Progress

2021

August

·    Draft BID Policy (2021) and support documents updated to post Finance and Performance Committee workshop feedback

Mid-August to 1 October

·    Draft BID Policy (2021) and support documents distributed to local boards, BID-operating business associations, council departments, CCOs and other stakeholders for formal feedback

·    Update www.bid.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz website with feedback link

·    Feedback open 24 August to 1 October

October

·    Update draft BID Policy (2021) and supporting documents incorporating formal feedback

9 December

·    Presentation of final version of BID Policy (2021) and support documents to Finance and Performance Committee meeting

2022

January/February

·    Post Finance and Performance approval actions, communications with local boards, BID-operating business associations, all stakeholders, and update www.bid.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz website

March to June

·    BID Policy (2021) communication, support and advice

·    The BID team will provide assistance to the 50 BID-operating business associations to comply with the BID Policy (2021), including guidance with aligning their individual constitutions and governance documents to meet the timing of their 2022 AGM timeframes

42.     The BID Policy (2021), if approved by the Finance and Performance Committee in December 2021, would become operational on 1 July 2022. 

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Draft BID Policy (2021)

319

b

BID Funding Agreement

341

c

BID Annual Accountability Report

353

d

Draft BID Policy requirements

355

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Claire Siddens - Principal Advisor

Authorisers

Alastair Cameron - Manager - CCO Governance & External Partnerships

Louise Mason - GM Local Board Services

Adam Milina - Local Area Manager

 


Henderson-Massey Local Board

21 September 2021

 

 

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


Henderson-Massey Local Board

21 September 2021

 

 

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator


Henderson-Massey Local Board

21 September 2021

 

 

PDF Creator

PDF Creator


Henderson-Massey Local Board

21 September 2021

 

 

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator


Henderson-Massey Local Board

21 September 2021

 

 

Addition to the 2019-2022 Henderson-Massey Local Board meeting schedule

File No.: CP2021/13139

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To approve two meeting dates to be added to the 2019-2022 Henderson-Massey Local Board meeting schedule in order to accommodate the Annual Budget 2022/2023 timeframes.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       The Henderson-Massey Local Board adopted the 2019-2022 meeting schedule on 3 December 2019.

3.       At that time, the specific times and dates for meetings for local board decision-making in relation to the local board agreement as part of the Annual Budget 2022/2023 were unknown. 

4.       The local board is being asked to approve two meeting dates as an addition to the Henderson-Massey Local Board meeting schedule so that the modified Annual Budget 2022/2023 timeframes can be met.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Henderson-Massey Local Board:

a)      approve the addition of two extraordinary meeting dates to the 2019-2022 Henderson-Massey Local Board meeting schedule to accommodate the Annual Budget 2022/2023 timeframes as follows:

·    Tuesday, 30 November 2021, 10.00am

·    Tuesday, 10 May 2022, 10.00am.

Horopaki

Context

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

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

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

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

7.       The Henderson-Massey Local Board adopted its 2019-2022 business meeting scheduled at its 3 December 2021 business meeting.

8.       The timeframes for local board decision-making in relation to the local board agreement, which is part of the Annual Budget 2022/2023, were unavailable when the meeting schedule was originally adopted.

9.       The board is being asked to make decisions in early December 2021, and early May and mid-June 2022 to feed into the Annual Budget 2022/2023 process. These timeframes are outside the board’s normal meeting cycle. 

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

10.     The local board has two choices:

·        option 1: add the meetings as additions to the meeting schedule

·        option 2: add the meetings as extraordinary meetings.

11.     For option 1, statutory requirements allow enough time for these meetings to be scheduled as additions to the meeting schedule and other topics may be considered as per any other ordinary meeting. However, there is a risk that if the Annual Budget 2022/2023 timeframes change again or the information is not ready for the meeting, there would need to be an additional extraordinary meeting scheduled.

12.     For option 2, only the specific Annual Budget 2022/2023 topic may be considered for which the meeting is being held. There is a risk that no other policies or plans with similar timeframes or running in relation to the Annual Budget 2022/2023 process could be considered at this meeting.

13.     Staff recommend option 2 – approving these meetings as extraordinary meetings, as there are ample meetings to manage usual business in the schedule. This requires a decision of the local board.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

14.     This decision is procedural in nature and any climate impacts will be negligible. The decision is unlikely to result in any identifiable changes to greenhouse gas emissions. The effects of climate change will not impact the decision’s implementation.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

15.     There is no specific impact for the council group from this report.

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

Local impacts and local board views

16.     This report requests the local board’s decision to schedule additional meetings and consider whether to approve them as extraordinary meetings or additions to the meeting schedule.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

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

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

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

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

19.     If the local board decides not to add this business meeting to their schedule, this will cause a delay to the Annual Budget 2022/2023 process which would result in the input of this local board not being able to be presented to the Governing Body for their consideration and inclusion in the budget.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

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

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Renee Burgers - Lead Advisor Plans and Programmes

Authorisers

Louise Mason - GM Local Board Services

Adam Milina - Local Area Manager

 


Henderson-Massey Local Board

21 September 2021

 

 

Governance Forward Work Calendar

 

File No.: CP2021/13172

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1.       To present the Henderson-Massey Local Board with a governance forward work calendar.

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

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

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

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

·    clarifying what advice is expected and when

·    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 Henderson-Massey Local Board:

a)      receive the governance forward work calendar for September 2021.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Governance forward work programme for September 2021

365

     

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Authors

Brenda Railey - Democracy Advisor

Authorisers

Adam Milina - Local Area Manager

 


Henderson-Massey Local Board

21 September 2021

 

 

PDF Creator


Henderson-Massey Local Board

21 September 2021

 

 

Confirmation of Workshop Records

 

File No.: CP2021/13174

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1.       To present records of workshops held by the Henderson-Massey Local Board.

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2.       Briefings/presentations provided at the workshops held are as follows:

          3 August 2021

1.   Local Board Transport Capital Fund

2.   12-month report back on achievements for the Community Empowerment Units work programme in 2020-2021

3.   HMLB's forward work programme update

4.   Te Atatu Pony Club Incorporated, Harbourview-Orangihina Park

5.   Henderson Croquet Club Inc. Cranwell Park, Henderson

6.   Report a problem training – refresh

7.   Road naming - board concerns

8.   Kerbside Refuse Charging Policy Review

Member update and informal board member discussion

10 August 2021

1.   Engagement Strategy and Action Plan

2.   Henderson-Massey Quick Response Grants Round One 2021/2022

3.   HMLB's forward work programme update

4.   CPTED and Safety in the Henderson Town Centre - Review and Recommendations of 2014 Report

5.   Henderson Croquet Club Inc. Cranwell Park, Henderson

6.   12-month report back on achievements for the Community Empowerment Units work programme in 2020-2021

7.   Kāinga Ora – Homes and Communities

Member update and informal board member discussion

24  August 2021

1.   Engagement Strategy and Action Plan

2.   Community Facilities monthly update

3.   Auckland Transport update / Candia Road Footpath

4.   HMLB's forward work programme update

5.   12-month report back on achievements for the Community Empowerment Units work programme in 2020-2021

Member update and informal board member discussion


 

 

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Henderson-Massey Local Board:

a)      note the workshop record for 3,10 and 24 August 2021.

 

 

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Workshop record for 3, 10 and 24 August 2021

369

     

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Authors

Brenda Railey - Democracy Advisor

Authorisers

Adam Milina - Local Area Manager

 


Henderson-Massey Local Board

21 September 2021

 

 

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator



[1] Statistics New Zealand, 22.9% (163,161) estimated in 2017

[2] Ministry of Social Development. Briefing to the Incoming Ministers, October 2014, p.31. 

[3] A systems analysis conducted by Auckland Council’s Innovation Unit.

[4]     ‘AK Have Your Say’ webpage ’hits’ comprised of 54 ‘engaged’ participants (people who completed the online survey), 134 ‘informed’ participants (people who downloaded a document, visited a FAQ page or multiple project pages, or completed the survey) and 337 ‘aware’ participants (people who visited at least one page).

[5] Management of Council parking is not covered by the 2015 Parking Strategy, unless Council has specifically delegated management to AT.

[6] ‘AK Have Your Say’ webpage ’hits’ comprised of 43 ‘engaged’ participants (people who completed the online survey), 88 ‘informed’ participants (people who downloaded a document, visited a FAQ page or multiple project pages, or completed the survey) and 265 ‘aware’ participants (people who visited at least one page).

[7] Sections 82(1)(e), 82(1)(f), 83(3) of the Local Government Act 2002 and sections 46 and 47 of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987.

[8] The ‘Have Your Say’ event was a drop-in opportunity for the public to learn more about the proposal, ask questions and provide feedback to council officers and panel members.