Agenda of Albert-Eden Local Board

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

Date:

Time:

Meeting Room:

Venue:

Tuesday, 26 November 2013

3.00pm

Albert Eden Local Board Office
135 Dominion Road
Mt Eden

Albert-Eden Local Board

OPEN AGENDA

MEMBERSHIP

Chairperson	Peter Haynes
Deputy Chairperson	Glenda Fryer
Members	Helga Arlington
	Lee Corrick
	Graeme Easte
	Rachel Langton
	Margi Watson
	Tim Woolfield

(Quorum 4 members)

Michael Mendoza

Democracy Advisor

20 November 2013

Contact Telephone: (09) 623 6090

Email: Michael.Mendoza@aucklandcouncil.govt.nz

Website: www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz

Albert-Eden Local Board

26 November 2013

ITEM TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE

1 Welcome 5

2 Apologies 5

3 Declaration of Interest 5

4 Confirmation of Minutes 5

5 Leave of Absence 5

6 Acknowledgements 5

7 Petitions 5

8 Deputations 5

9 Public Forum 5

10 Extraordinary Business 5

11 Notices of Motion 6

11.1 Notice of Motion 6

12 Adoption of meeting schedule 9

13 Local board members portfolio allocation and urban design champion 13

14 Appointment of Board Members to Outside Organisations and Community Networks 17

15 Establishment of a Albert-Eden Local Board Grants Committee 27

16 Establishment of Swimming Pool Fencing Exemption Committee 41

17 Central Facility Partnerships Committee 45

18 Central Joint Funding Committee 55

19 Urgent Decision Process for the Albert-Eden Local Board 67

20 2013/2014 Albert Eden Local Board SLIPs Programme Update for September 2013 69

21 Sustainability Initiatives Budget Allocation 81

22 Infrastructure and Environmental Services Update Report 85

23 Chairperson's Report 89

24 Board Members' Reports 91

25 Governing Body Members' update 93

26 Consideration of Extraordinary Items

1 Welcome

2 Apologies

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

3 Declaration of Interest

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

4 Confirmation of Minutes

That the Albert-Eden Local Board:

a) confirm the ordinary minutes of its meeting, held on Wednesday, 4 September 2013 and the extraordinary minutes of its meeting, held on Wednesday, 6 November 2013, including the confidential section, as a true and correct record.

5 Leave of Absence

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

6 Acknowledgements

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

7 Petitions

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

8 Deputations

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

9 Public Forum

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

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

10 Extraordinary Business

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

11 Notices of Motion

11.1 Notice of Motion

In accordance with Standing Order 3.11.1, the following Notice of Motion has been received from Helga Arlington for inclusion on the agenda for the Albert-Eden Local Board meeting being held on day, Tuesday, 26 November 2013:

Recommendation/s

That the Albert-Eden Local Board urges that Auckland Council commission, at its earliest convenience, an investigation into and selection of a suitable platform and template for 'village websites', noting that the platform and template only would be provided by Council to enable development of sites for local areas to:

a) allow local business associations to create an ongoing business presence for their local areas

b) allow community groups to present themselves to their neighbourhood and to visitors

c) provide a vehicle for storage and display of 'sense of place' resources

d) make local areas visible and interesting online, so as to encourage 'micro-tourism' both within Auckland and more widely

e) permit local residents to communicate with one another about local issues

f) allow Auckland Council to communicate with local areas and seek feedback

Background

Business needs in local centres

Larger, well-organised Business Improvement Districts (BIDs) are able to offer websites that are fresh, relevant and continually updated, to their members and potential customers. Smaller areas whose business associations are not BIDs tend to have websites which were built by someone at some stage, and no one knows how to update them any longer, so they are woefully out of date and irrelevant. Both Sandringham and Greenwoods Corner are in this position, and both have urged the Albert-Eden Local Board to fund new websites. However, the Board has been reluctant to do so, for fear of creating new orphan websites in the future. Point Chevalier would also be in this position were it not for the email newsletter created for the area through a single person's volunteer efforts, and which showcases businesses. Such needs will be replicated across Auckland.

Community needs

The village noticeboards are not well-used - many long-standing residents have no idea that they exist. Residents ask - especially new residents in an area - "how might I have known that there was [a community playgroup] here? It would have been wonderful to have known that!" Even a well-established and well-organised group like Grow Sandringham Transition Community has needed to work continually at publicity to spread knowledge of the Sandringham Farmers' Market. Certainly the group has a Facebook page, but potential users must know that it is there.

There is no obvious way for residents to communicate with one another, to spread messages about local events, lost pets, local employment offers, informal courses and groups, and so on. The Point Chevalier community email also performs this function, but the BID websites do not.

NZTRI work in Albert-Eden

During the last Board term, the AELB commissioned the New Zealand Tourism Research Institute at AUT University to investigate 'sense of place' and 'micro-tourism' opportunities in Albert-Eden's villages. The proposition underlying the project is that places which are able to be able to be discovered readily online, in ways that convey them as interesting places to visit, will be attractive to visitors and that business will thus be enhanced. Reports were produced showing the web visibility or otherwise of Mount Albert, Mount Eden, Greenwoods Corner, Sandringham and Kingsland, and data was produced upon time and money spent in them. At the same time, residents in two of the areas were taught and encouraged to develop materials such as interviews with local residents, historical resources and so on, and to make them available online on sites such as YouTube. The Wikipedia sites for each village were updated by the AUT team, within the narrow constraints allowed. Residents involved in this process, known as 'web-raising', will, it is argued, become more interconnected and community-minded, creating a virtuous circle whereby the attractiveness of the area is further enhanced.

A gap in NZTRIs's work was a web platform which could be used to enable local businesses and residents to showcase the local area to itself, to Auckland and to the world, as intended by the process. The local materials so far created are not currently well-linked to the area so will be hard to find, and are likely to be lost. NZTRI refers to sites which can be used for this purpose as 'hyperlocal' sites, but did not offer a recommendation as to a suitable one for Albert-Eden's villages to use, or to the Board to provide for the purpose, despite urging to make such a recommendation.

Local democracy

Voting in the recent Auckland Council elections was at a new low. Now that this new Council is past its early setup phase, I argue that it must make a priority of seeking new ways to make contact with its citizens. Local websites could offer such an opportunity.

Harringay Online

I have been referred to this site, a hyperlocal site for London Haringey, by a former resident now living in Sandringham. Like the Point Chevalier email, it is created largely through one person's efforts. However, unlike the email it builds an archive of resources about the local area. It has been notably successful, and its founder Hugh Flouch has told me^{^[1]} that it and other similar sites are highly regarded by local councils in the UK as a means to make two-way contact with residents. The site enables residents and businesses to post material themselves.

Harringay Online was built on the Ning platform by Hugh Flouch himself. HO seems to offer solutions to many of the needs identified above. Its format is now dated, however - Ning is not multimedia friendly. It was formerly free but is not any longer.

An Auckland-wide solution

I propose that Auckland Council investigate the field to find a suitable up to date platform, and that the platform be offered to Auckland areas for the purposes described, by means of a corporate subscription. A template 'village website' could be designed and built for local areas to use as a basis for their own.

Such a shared platform would offer local boards or local villages the opportunity to fund development of 'local place' websites, knowing that they were based in a standard system which would be updated over time from the centre, and training in use of this single platform could be offered. Auckland Council would of course need to disclaim responsibility for resulting sites and demand compliance with appropriate standards.

Albert-Eden Local Board would be pleased to work with a commissioning process, and to collaborate in development of trial local sites.

Signatories

Author	Helga Arlington, Albert-Eden Local Board Member
Authoriser	Adam Milina - Acting Relationship Manager - Albert-Eden & Orakei Local Boards

Albert-Eden Local Board

26 November 2013

Adoption of meeting schedule

File No.: CP2013/26148

Purpose

1. To seek the adoption of the meeting schedule for the 2013/16 term.

Executive Summary

2. A draft local board meeting schedule has been developed for the 2013/2016 electoral term; it is attached to this report. It is recommended that the local board adopts this schedule.

3. The specific times and dates for the hearings process, part of the special consultative process outlined in the Local Government Act 2002, for local board agreements and local board plans are yet to be finalised. Local board meeting schedules may therefore be updated and provision made for these hearings, once the details are confirmed.

Recommendation/s

That the Albert-Eden Local Board:

a) Adopts its meeting schedule for the 2013/2016 electoral term as follows, all beginning at 3pm and held at the Albert-Eden Local Board office, 135 Dominion Road, Mt. Eden:

Wednesday, 11^th December 2013

Wednesday, 5^th February 2014

Wednesday, 5^th March 2014

Wednesday, 2^nd April 2014

Wednesday, 7^th May 2014

Wednesday, 4^th June 2014

Wednesday, 2^nd July 2014

Wednesday, 6^thAugust 2014

Wednesday, 3^rd September 2014

Wednesday, 1^st October 2014

Wednesday, 5^th November 2014

Wednesday, 3^rd December 2014

Wednesday, 4^th February 2015

Wednesday, 4^th March 2015

Wednesday, 1^st April 2015

Wednesday, 6^th May 2015

Wednesday, 3^rd June 2015

Wednesday, 1^st July 2015

Wednesday, 5^th August 2015

Wednesday, 2^nd September 2015

Wednesday, 7^th October 2015

Wednesday, 4^th November 2015

Wednesday, 2^nd December 2015

Wednesday, 3^rd February 2016

Wednesday, 2^nd March 2016

Wednesday, 6^th April 2016

Wednesday, 4^th May 2016

Wednesday, 1^st June 2016

Wednesday, 6^thJuly 2016

Wednesday, 3^rd August 2016

Wednesday, 7^th September 2016

b) Notes that dates and times for hearings and deliberations for local board agreements and local board plans are yet to be finalised.

Discussion

4. Clause (5)(d), Schedule 7 of the Local Government Act 2002 requires a local board to adopt a schedule of business meetings at its first meeting in the electoral term.

5. Adopting a meeting schedule allows for a planned approach to workloads and ensures local board members have clarity about their commitments. It also gives an indication to the public of when meetings are to be held and meets the requirement of clause 19, Schedule 7 of the Local Government Act 2002.

6. Each local board develops a Local Board Agreement annually and a Local Board Plan every three years. Both documents are subject to public consultation, with Local Board Plans being subject to a special consultative procedure process. The local board will hold hearings to give submitters the opportunity to express their views verbally.

7. The specific times and dates for the hearings process for the local board plan and agreements are yet to be finalised. Local board meeting schedules may therefore need to be updated and provision made for hearings, once details are confirmed.

8. In addition to local board meetings, local boards will hold workshops that are closed to the public. The proceedings of every workshop are recorded and considered at the next business meeting of the local board in accordance with current local board standing order provisions.

Consideration

Local Board Views

9. This decision falls under the local board’s delegated authority.

Māori Impact Statement

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

General

11. Clauses 19(4), 19(5) and 19(6), Schedule 7, of the Local Government Act 2002 states that:

“(4) A local authority must hold meetings at the times and places that it appoints.

(5) Unless clause 22 (extraordinary meeting) applies, the chief executive must give notice in writing to each member of the time and place of a meeting -

(a) not less than 14 days before the meeting; or

(b) if the local authority has adopted a schedule of meetings, not less than 14 days before the first meeting on the schedule.”

(6) If a local authority adopts a schedule of meetings, -

(a) the schedule –

(i) may cover any future period that the local authority considers appropriate; and

(ii) may be amended; and

(b) notification of the schedule or of any amendment to that schedule constitutes a notification of every meeting on the schedule or amendment.”

12. Similarly, the statutory requirement pursuant to clauses 46, 46(A) and 47 of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 mentions that:

· meetings of a local authority are publicly notified

· agendas and reports are available at least two working days before a meeting

· local board meetings are open to the public.

Implementation Issues

13. Meetings of the local boards are supported by Auckland Council’s Local Board Services Department.

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Signatories

Authors	Michael Mendoza - Democracy Advisor
Authorisers	Adam Milina - Acting Relationship Manager - Albert-Eden & Orakei Local Boards

Albert-Eden Local Board

26 November 2013

Local board members portfolio allocation and urban design champion

File No.: CP2013/26155

Purpose

1. To adopt a portfolio allocation for board members.

Executive Summary

2. Portfolios are established by local boards to oversee local board work programmes and consider issues relating to key council activities.

3. It is recommended that the local board allocates each portfolio area to two members, a lead and an alternate.

Recommendation/s

That the Albert-Eden Local Board:

a) Appoints the following portfolio holders for the 2013-2016 triennium:

Local Board Portfolio	Portfolio holders
Local Board Portfolio	Lead	Alternate
Planning, policy, governance
Arts and culture and events
Community services
Libraries
Recreation services
Parks
Built and natural environment
Economic development
Street environment and town centres
Transport and infrastructure
Civil defence and emergency management
Regulatory, bylaws and compliance

b) Appoints Member X, and Member XX as an alternate, to provide input into notification decisions for resource consent applications that trigger local board input

c) Approves the following projects as whole of board projects:

ii)

iii)

iv)

vi)

vii)

viii)

d) Appoints Member XXX as the board’s representative as an urban design champion and Member XXX as the alternate representative.

Discussion

Portfolio

4. In the previous electoral term, portfolio areas varied across the local boards. In that term, officers proposed that local boards consider portfolio areas which reflected the committee and forum structure adopted by the governing body and the key areas the board had a decision-making/input role. The interest and background of local board members also influenced the establishment of some portfolios.

5. Three years on, local boards have their local board plans with their own priorities; and the organisation has aligned itself to meet the needs of local boards. Rather than reflecting the governing body’s committee and forum structure as a framework for portfolios, it makes sense to align portfolios to the delegation protocols adopted last year, which guide the organisation in working with and supporting local boards.

6. A portfolio approach will assist board members in having a strategic overview of programmes and activities rather than feeling they are dealing with issues in an ad-hoc manner. It also provides for a consistent approach that is familiar to staff working to these delegations and will assist with the running of the portfolio (e.g. regular portfolio briefings/workshops with staff from one activity). The proposed areas for portfolios are:

· Local planning, policy and governance

· Arts, culture and events

· Community services

· Libraries

· Recreation services

· Parks

· Built and natural environment

· Economic development

· Street environment and town centres

7. Additional portfolios outside of the delegation protocols may be required such as transport, or regulatory, bylaws and compliance.

Notification decisions on resource consent applications

8. In the previous electoral term, the governing body considered the role of local boards in regulatory matters, and resolved, amongst other things, that local boards be given the opportunity, within statutory timeframes, to provide their views on whether or not certain applications should be notified.

9. The council’s Resource Consents department worked with local boards to establish a process for local board input: a portfolio holder or spokesperson provides comments within three working days on applications that the board requested and that trigger local board input. Those comments are then included in the planners' report on the application.

10. By enabling local boards to have input into notification decision, the local voice can be heard at an early stage in the resource consent process.

11. Local boards that wish to have input into notification decisions on applications that trigger local board input, should appoint a lead and alternate for this role. These appointees could be the regulatory, bylaws and compliance portfolio holder, if any.

Portfolio holder role

12. A useful starting point for board members is to consider their role as portfolio holder as that of a “sounding board” on behalf of the board. Staff from departments across the organisation will need to regularly talk to board members for a number of reasons. This may be to provide a progress up-date to the board on projects and work programmes that have been agreed with the board, to test the level of interest a board has on a particular issue so the department can consider how best to progress matters, or to advise on any issues that may be arising from a project/activity. Portfolio holders are the key board member contacts for departmental staff and in that way assist staff to progress the work programme. Board members are not required to give advice to staff on the operational details of projects or activities. The important consideration for members is that they are appointed to be the local board representative on a particular area – they represent the views of the board (not their own views) to give direction/steer to staff.

13. If there is no known board view on an issue, board members will need to canvass views of fellow board members and then form the view on what the board position is. If it is likely to be a contentious issue with competing views, it is best referred to a full workshop to allow board members to discuss the issue and formulate a position.

14. Portfolio holders should have a lead and an alternate to help share the workload.

Communication

15. Feedback from the previous term indicates that communication from portfolio holders back to other board members was an area that could be improved. Portfolio holders have a responsibility to provide a feedback loop to other board members – this includes updating on how issues are progressing (or not), putting issues on the radar for all members, bringing issues to the table if guidance is needed from other board members. Local board advisors can provide assistance and advice about how to progress these types of issues.

16. Communication needs to be regular (for example, monthly) and can be done in a range of ways – scheduled slots on workshop agendas can be an effective way to keep everyone informed about the key things that are happening in the portfolio.

17. The work on portfolio areas will often eventuate in formal reports to the whole board requesting a decision or providing an update – so it is important for portfolio holders to have provided regular and clear communication on the portfolio area so that all board members are briefed and there are no surprises.

Decision-making

18. Decision-making is carried out at formal board business meetings. However in some cases – generally quite limited – decision-making has been delegated to the portfolio holder – for example when it is a straight forward issue and a decision may be needed quickly such as landowner consents. Any delegation of decision-making to portfolio-holders would need to be made through a formal business meeting. If a portfolio-holder has delegated decision-making and is asked to consider a significant/complex decision it is advisable to refer to the wider group of board members.

Urban Design Champion

19. Auckland Council has set up local board champions to contribute to the drive toward creating the world’s most livable city. Each of the 21 local boards is asked to appoint a member as the board’s urban design champion or advocate. The governing body will also appoint an urban design champion.

Consideration

Local Board Views

20. This report asks for the local board view.

21. The Local Government (Auckland Council) Amendment Act 2013 provides for local boards to delegate to committees, sub-committees members of the local board or Auckland Council officers, any of its responsibilities, duties and power, with some specific exceptions.

Māori Impact Statement

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

Implementation Issues

23. The network of design champions is supported by the built environment unit of the Chief Planning Office department, led by Tim Watts, manager built environment. The network is expected to be active for the second term of council from February 2014.

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Signatories

Authors	Michael Mendoza - Democracy Advisor
Authorisers	Adam Milina - Acting Relationship Manager - Albert-Eden & Orakei Local Boards

Albert-Eden Local Board

26 November 2013

Appointment of Board Members to Outside Organisations and Community Networks

File No.: CP2013/26170

Purpose

1. To appoint board members to be representative to outside organisations and community networks within the local board area, including local Mainstreet or Business Improvement District (BID) executive committees, and Local Government New Zealand.

Executive Summary

1. Elected members participate on management, governance or networking groups in outside organisations for a number of reasons. This report provides details of the organisations and outlines and networks relevant to the local board. It included the appointment delegated to the local boards by the governing body (Resolution GB/2013/126).

2. The beginning of the new electoral term generates the need for new appointment. It is recommended that the board appoint one representative, and one alternate representative for each organisation and community network listed in the recommendations.

Recommendation/s

That the Albert-Eden Local Board:

a) Allocates board members to outside organisations and community networks, as listed below:

Organisation	Lead	Alternate
*Advisory Groups*
Heron Park Advisory Group
*Associations*
Auckland and Northland Local Community Board Associations
Local Government New Zealand Zones
*Business Associations*
Dominion Road Business Association
Greenwoods Corner Business Association
Kingsland Business Society Inc
Mt Eden Village Business Association
Sandringham Business Association Inc
*Business Precincts/Shopping Centres*
Balmoral Shopping Centre
Mt Albert Shopping Centre
Pt Chevalier Shopping Centre
*Liaison Groups*
Eden Park Community Liaison Group
SH20 Community Liaison Group
SH20 Working Liaison Group
*Stakeholder groups*
Maungawhau Stakeholders Group
*Trusts*
Mt Eden Methodist Church Trust
Kerr Taylor Trust

Discussion

1. A number of external organisations provide for the formal participation of elected members in their affairs. Elected member appointees will have a variety of duties and liabilities depending on the individual organisation. Board members may provide updates of their activities with their allocated organisations at local board meetings.

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

· a trust deed of an organisation providing for the council to appoint a trustee

· an organisation of interest to the council simply inviting representation at its meetings

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

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

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

· a resource consent requiring the formation of a representative committee

3. At the commencement of each triennium, committees and local boards recommend appointments to outside organisations as appropriate and the governing body reviews and either makes the appointments it sees fit and delegates the remaining appointments to local boards. At the end of each triennium, appointments to outside organisations must be reviewed by the appropriate officers as to current relevance, and a recommendation made to the appointing body as to whether or not representation should be continued.

4. It is recommended that the board appoint one representative, and one alternate representative for each organisation and community network listed in the recommendations.

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

· Historical relationships

· Relevance and interest

· Time commitment.

6. In addition, the governing body has delegated appointment to the local boards (Resolution GB/2013/126).

Local Government New Zealand

7. Membership of Local Government New Zealand Zone One (i.e. Auckland and Northland) Committee includes a representative from each of the 21 local boards.

8. Each local board needs to consider selecting their representative, as well as an alternate. Meetings take place four times a year and the venue for meetings is shared across the entire Zone One area.

9. Further information on LGNZ is available in Attachment B.

BID Partnership Programmes

10. There are 46 BID Partnership Programmes operating within the Auckland region; many other business areas have also expressed an interest in involvement with the BID Partnership Programme. The programme provides a focal point for local business clusters to assist and help themselves in creating local employment opportunities. It provides a means for local innovation and economic growth. Details of the programme and the role of the local boards are provided in Attachment A.

11. There are three local Mainstreet or Business Improvement District in the Albert-Eden Local Board area.

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

13. It is recommended that the local board appoints a local board member and an alternate on each business association to represent the local board regarding all matters relating to the business association.

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

Consideration

Local Board Views

15. This report seeks the local board’s decision on representatives to outside organisations and community networks.

16. The decisions in this report fall within the local board’s delegated authority.

Māori Impact Statement

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

General

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

19. Elected representatives may be part of any organisation in their private capacity and personal interests.

20. Elected representatives are encouraged to disclose memberships to external organisations in the conflict of interest register.

Implementation Issues

21. The venues for Local Government NZ Zone One meetings are shared across the entire Zone One area and some travel costs may be incurred by local boards as a result of the appointments.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a	Business Improvement District Partnership Programme	21
b	Local Government New Zealand	25

Signatories

Authors	Carole Canler - Advisor
Authorisers	Adam Milina - Acting Relationship Manager - Albert-Eden & Orakei Local Boards

Albert-Eden Local Board

26 November 2013

Establishment of a Albert-Eden Local Board Grants Committee

File No.: CP2013/26179

Purpose

1. The purpose of this report is for the Albert-Eden Local Board to formally establish an Albert-Eden Local Board Grants Committee.

Executive Summary

2. The Albert-Eden Local Board has two funds for allocation to community groups in 2013/14. The local discretionary grants fund has a budget of $45,307 for allocation to local community groups. The local event contestable fund has a budget of $20,000 for allocation to community groups specifically for events.

3. This report will formally establish a Grants Committee to consider and allocate the community discretionary grants and local event contestable fund grants and sets up a timetable for funding rounds and a cut off date for applications.

4. Further information on the grants process and application information is available on the Auckland Council website:

Local Community Discretionary Grants: http://www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/EN/newseventsculture/communityfundingsupport/grantsfunding/localboarddiscretionary

Local Event Contestable Fund Grants:

http://www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/EN/NEWSEVENTSCULTURE/COMMUNITYFUNDINGSUPPORT/GRANTSFUNDING/EVENTS

Recommendation/s

That the Albert-Eden Local Board:

a) Establishes an Albert-Eden Local Board Grants Committee of the whole for the 2013-2016 triennium

b) Delegates to the Albert-Eden Local Board Grants Committee all powers to:

i) Allocate and vary local discretionary community grants

ii) Allocate and vary local event contestable fund grants

c) Sets the following Albert-Eden Local Board Grants Committee meeting dates for 2013/14:

- Albert-Eden Grants Committee, Wednesday, 12 February 2014, 3pm, Albert- Eden Local Board office, 135 Dominion Road, Mt. Eden (Local Event Contestable Fund and Local discretionary community grants)

- Albert-Eden Grants Committee, Wednesday, 30 April 2014, Albert-Eden Local Board office, 135 Dominion Road, Mt. Eden (Local discretionary community grants)

Discussion

5. In the first term of Auckland Council, the Albert-Eden Local Board delegated authority to an Albert-Eden Local Board Grants committee of the whole, to allocate local discretionary funding and local events funding.

6. This delegation needs to be re-established for the second term of the Albert-Eden Local Board.

7. During the 2011/12 financial year, an interim community funding model has enabled Council to deliver a wide range of legacy contestable funding schemes to communities across the region. In the absence of an overarching Community Funding Policy, these inherited schemes and the new Local Board Discretionary Grants (LBDG) scheme have been administered by Council officers in accordance with legacy policies and processes. The interim model sought to recognise the new shared governance environment by passing decision-making responsibility for legacy council contestable funding to local boards. Where legacy funds sat sub-regionally, the majority of local boards have worked together to disburse grants via specially convened joint committees or subcommittees.

8. In May 2012 the Regional Development and Operations Committee (RDOC) resolved to defer the delivery of the new funding policy and programme until 2013/14 to allow time for further development of the proposed programme. In the interim, the following rounds will be administered for the allocation of Local Board Discretionary Community Grants and Local Event Funds across the region:

Local Board Discretionary Grants funding rounds across the region

- Round 1 to close in December 2013 (six weeks prior to the decision meeting in February 2014 and payments in April 2014),

- Round 2 to close in March/April 2014 (six weeks prior to the decision meeting in May 2014 for payments in June 2014)

Local Board event funding rounds across the region

- Round 1 closed in July 2013 with decisions in September/October 2013 and payments in November 2013

- Round 2 to close during December 2013 for decisions in February/March 2014 and payments in April 2014

9. In line with this, the Albert-Eden Local Board grants committees will be held on the following dates for the remainder of 2013/14:

- Wednesday, 12 February 2014, (Local discretionary community grants and Local Events contestable fund)

- Wednesday, 30 April 2014, (Local discretionary community grants)

10. Guidelines for both funding rounds are attached to this report.

Decision Making

11. The Albert-Eden Local Board Grants Committee will record its reasoning for declining an application, to provide valuable feedback to applicants and reduce repeat applications from low priority projects. Resolutions documenting grant allocations will follow a standard format to speed up administration and payment.

Accountability

12. The Albert-Eden Local Board Grants Committee will request grants recipients provide evidence of acknowledgement of the local board (or Auckland Council where the grant has been allocated by multiple boards). Groups who fail to meet their accountability obligations from previous Council grants will not be funded, except in exceptional circumstances, and/or by stipulating that completing accountability is a condition of grant payment.

Consideration

Local Board Views

13. The development of the Community Funding Policy and the community grants funding process has incorporated Local Board feedback.

Maori Impact Statement

14. Community funding is a general programme of interest, and accessible to a wide range of groups, including Maori. However, no particular implications for the Maori community or Maori stakeholders arising from this report have yet been identified.

Implementation Issues

15. No implementation issues have been highlighted.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a	Albert-Eden Local Board Local discretionary fund guidelines	31
b	Albert-Eden Local Board Albert-Eden Local Board Local events fund guidelines	33

Signatories

Authors	Blaire Lodge - Local Board Democracy Advisor
Authorisers	Adam Milina - Acting Relationship Manager - Albert-Eden & Orakei Local Boards

Albert-Eden Local Board

26 November 2013

Establishment of Swimming Pool Fencing Exemption Committee

File No.: CP2013/26163

Purpose

1. To establish the Albert-Eden Local Board Swimming Pool Fencing Exemptions Committee to assess and consider applications in relation to the Special Exemption under S6 of the Fencing of Swimming Pools Act 1987, and to appoint a maximum of four local board members to the committee.

Executive Summary

2. Under S6 of the Fencing of Swimming Pools Act 1987, territorial authorities may grant exemptions from the requirements in the Act for particular pools if satisfied that it “would not significantly increase danger to young children”.

3. The decision-making responsibility for swimming pool fences exemptions has been delegated to local boards. To administer this delegation in the 2010 – 2013 political term, local boards formed committees to assess and consider swimming pool fencing exemption applications.

4. In accordance with Clause 30(7) of the Local Government Act 2002, all committees have been automatically dissolved following the 2013 Local Government elections.

5. Officers recommend that the local board:

· Establishes a committee to assess and consider applications in relation to the Special Exemption under S6 of the Fencing of Swimming Pools Act 1987

· Appoints a maximum of four local board members to the Albert-Eden Local Board Swimming Pool Fencing Exemptions Committee.

Recommendation/s

That the Albert-Eden Local Board:

a) Establishes the Albert-Eden Local Board Swimming Pool Fencing Exemptions Committee to assess and consider swimming pool fencing exemption applications.

b) Appoints the following four members to the Albert-Eden Local Board Swimming Pool Fencing Exemptions Committee: Member W, Member X, Member Y and Member Z.

Discussion

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

7. Under S6 of the Act, territorial authorities may grant exemptions from the requirements in the Act for particular pools. Territorial authorities can also impose special conditions on a property and a pool. A territorial authority can only grant an exemption, or impose a special condition, if, after having regard to the characteristics of the pool and the property, it is satisfied that it “would not significantly increase danger to young children”. No exemption is required for a new pool fence, or an alteration to an existing fence, if the new or altered fence is at least as safe as one built in accordance with the standard in the schedule of the Act.

8. The governing body has delegated decision-making responsibility for swimming pool fences exemptions to local boards (resolution GB/2011/163). This decision is documented in the following report: “Auckland Council Long Term Plan 2012-20122. Volume three: Financial information, policies and fees. Chapter one: Allocation of decision-making responsibility for non-regulatory activities. Part one: Source of decision-making responsibilities”.

9. To administer this delegation, the previous local boards considered two options, as detailed in the table below.

Option one: Creation of swimming pool fencing exemption subcommittee
(recommended option)

Description

A subcommittee is created to assess and consider swimming pool fencing exemption applications

Benefits

· enables decision-making to be undertaken in a timely manner as and when applications are received

· the application and hearing can be the appropriate consideration away from a congested business meeting agenda

· provides flexibility to organise a meeting as some applications will require a site visit

Costs / risks

· additional workload for local board members

· not all local board members will sit on the subcommittee

· can be difficult to organise a meeting time with members on an ad-hoc basis

Option two: Application considered at local board business meeting

Description

Local board assess and consider swimming pool fencing exemption applications at their business meetings

Benefits

· consistent and streamlined approach that is considered at the next local board business meeting

· no additional workload for local board members

Costs / risks

· item may not be given due consideration amongst congested local board business meeting

· site visits

10. After consideration, the previous local boards opted for option one and established committees to assess and consider swimming pool fencing exemption applications. Under this option, the committee is called together when a suitable number of applications are to be heard. A particular time is set aside to hear the applications, giving each applicant sufficient time to present their case. Some applications for exemption require a site visit; the committee meeting may be adjourned for that purpose, and reconvened following the site visit.

11. In accordance with Clause 30(7) of the Local Government Act 2002, all committees have been automatically dissolved following the 2013 Local Government elections.

12. Officers recommend that in the 2013 – 2016 political, local boards re-establish committees to assess and consider applications in relation to the Special Exemption under S6 of the Fencing of Swimming Pools Act 1987.

13. It is also recommended that the boards each appoint a maximum of four local board members to their local board swimming pool fencing exemptions committees.

Consideration

Local Board Views

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

Māori Impact Statement

15. This report does not specifically impact on Māori population or iwi.

General

16. The local board’s decision on this matter does not trigger the Auckland Council Significance Policy.

Implementation Issues

17. Costs associated with the formation of the Local Board Swimming Pool Fencing Exemptions Committee will be met within internal operating budgets.

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

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Signatories

Authors	Michael Mendoza - Democracy Advisor
Authorisers	Adam Milina - Acting Relationship Manager - Albert-Eden & Orakei Local Boards

Albert-Eden Local Board

26 November 2013

Central Facility Partnerships Committee

File No.: CP2013/26160

Purpose

1. This report seeks:

· agreement to continue the Central Facilities Partnership Committee for the 2013/2014 year in the absence of a regional policy

· agreement on the terms of reference

· nomination of a board’s representative and alternate representative to the Committee.

Executive Summary

2. The Central Facilities Partnership Committee was a joint committee established by the seven central local boards. It had decision-making responsibility to allocate the legacy Facility Partnerships funding in support of capital development projects that will assist Auckland Council to meet its identified strategic outcomes.

3. In accordance with Clause 30(7) of the Local Government Act 2002, the committee has been automatically dissolved following the 2013 Local Government elections.

4. The Central Facility Partnerships Committee needs to be operational for the 2013/2014 to administer legacy Facility Partnerships funding. This report seeks the board’s approval to re-establish the Central Facility Partnerships Committee for the 2013/2014 as a joint committee of the local boards, approval of the Terms of Reference and appointment of a member and an alternate to the Committee.

5. The Committee will consider applications to the 2013/2014 Facility Partnerships fund at a workshop on 27 November 2013, and hold a meeting on 11 December 2013 to ratify the decisions.

Recommendation/s

That the Albert-Eden Local Board:

a) Agrees to re-establish the Central Facility Partnerships Committee with the Albert-Eden, Great Barrier, Orakei, Puketapapa, Waiheke, and Waitemata Local Boards, to collectively administer the Facility Partnerships fund.

b) Endorses the Terms of Reference and Guidelines for the Central Facility Partnerships Committee, which will be adopted by the Committee at its first meeting

i. The Central Facility Partnerships Committee has a member from each of the following Local Boards: Albert-Eden, Great Barrier, Maungakiekie-Tamaki, Orakei, Puketapapa, Waiheke, Waitemata.

ii. The Central Facility Partnerships Committee has the authority to make funding decisions in 2013/2014 in relation to the Facility Partnership Guidelines.

iii. The Central Facility Partnerships Committee will appoint and may remove its own chairperson and deputy chairperson.

iv. The Central Facility Partnerships Committee will meet as required. It is envisaged there will be two procedural meetings and no less than one funding decision meeting in each financial year.

c) Appoints Board Member XXX and Board Member XXX as alternate, to the Central Facility Partnerships Committee with appropriate delegated authority to bind the board on decisions relating to the Central Facility Partnership Fund made by the Committee.

d) Notes that the first meeting of the Central Facility Partnerships Committee will be held on 11 December 2013.

Discussion

6. The legacy Facility Partnerships fund invites organisations to submit partnership proposals for capital development projects that will assist Auckland Council to meet its identified strategic outcomes.

7. Where a proposal fits identified strategic priorities and other criteria, council may contribute to the capital cost of the project. The level of financial assistance is informed by the level of benefit to, and access, the public will have to the facility once the project is completed.

8. Organisations participating in Facility Partnerships benefit from funding, as it enables them to leverage grants from other donors, and through technical assistance and support. Funding from council allows organisations (many of which are not-for-profit voluntary groups) to meet their objectives sooner and in some cases, develop a better facility than may otherwise have been possible.

9. Facility Partnerships benefit the council by delivering quality, community accessible facilities, without council providing all the development funding. Facility partnerships are not limited to sport and recreation facilities, and can be provided for other general or specific community purposes (for example a community hub or arts facility).

10. The wider Auckland community benefit from Facility Partnerships by having access to a greater number of quality, community facilities.

11. Auckland Council inherited several different approaches for managing Facility Partnerships. A new, integrated policy is being developed and is expected to be completed for the 2014/2015 year.

12. In the absence of an integrated regional policy, and to enable facility partnership funding to be allocated, the Regional Development and Operations Committee (RDOC) resolved on 24 May 2012 and again on 14 March 2013 that an interim approach be implemented for 2013/14.

13. RDOC also resolved that the interim approach would be implemented by devolving the legacy Facility Partnerships funding to “local board sub-regional funding committees.”

14. The seven central local boards consequently established a joint committee of local boards that deals specifically with central Facility Partnerships. Each of the seven central local boards appointed a representative to the Central Facility Partnerships Committee to ensure that the Facility Partnerships fund can be implemented in a timely manner.

15. The Central Facility Partnerships Committee has a different focus to the Central Joint Funding Committee, with the latter having a focus on community and heritage funding. In contrast, facility partnership is a capital development fund that establishes partnerships between council and external organisations.

16. In accordance with Clause 30(7) of the Local Government Act 2002, the committee has been automatically dissolved following the 2013 Local Government elections.

17. It is recommended that the board agrees to re-instate the Central Facility Partnerships Committee to administer the Facility Partnerships funding. This report also asks the seven central local boards to appoint a representative and an alternate to the Committee, with the appropriate delegated authority to bind the local boards on decisions relating to the legacy Facility Partnerships policy made by the Committee, and to agree the attached terms of reference (unchanged from last term).

Consideration

Local Board Views

18. This decision falls under the local board’s delegated authority.

Māori Impact Statement

19. Facility partnerships is a general programme of interest that is accessible to a wide range of groups, including Māori. No particular implications for the Māori community or Māori stakeholders have been identified from this report.

Implementation Issues

20. The Committee will hold its first workshop on 27 November 2013. The purpose of the workshop is to discuss and seek additional information on the partnership applications.

21. A first meeting is scheduled on 11 December 2013 to consider procedural matters including but not limited to electing a Chair and Deputy Chair; adopting the Central Facility Partnerships Committee Terms of Reference (attached) and considering funding applications received (Stage 1).

22. After the Central Facility Partnerships Committee has decided which projects to support, the local board where the project is based will be actively engaged with the project. The local board’s role may include setting expectations for community access to the facility.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a	Central Facilities Partnership Guidelines	49
b	Terms of Reference for Central Facilities Partnership Committee	53

Signatories

Authors	Michael Mendoza - Democracy Advisor
Authorisers	Adam Milina - Acting Relationship Manager - Albert-Eden & Orakei Local Boards

Albert-Eden Local Board

26 November 2013

Central Joint Funding Committee

File No.: CP2013/26161

Purpose

1. To seek the local board’s agreement:

· to re-instate the Central Joint Funding Committee to oversee the relevant legacy community funding schemes

· on the Terms of Reference for the Central Joint Funding Committee

· to nominate a member and an alternate on the Central Joint Funding Committee.

Executive Summary

2. The Central Joint Funding Committee was a joint committee established by the seven central local boards with decision-making responsibility for the allocation of grants through the legacy community funding schemes.

3. In accordance with Clause 30(7) of the Local Government Act 2002, the committee was automatically dissolved following the 2013 Local Government elections.

4. The Central Joint Funding Committee needs to be operational for the 2013/2014 financial year to administer legacy community funding budgets. This report seeks the board’s approval to re-instate the Central Joint Funding Committee for the rest of the 2013/2014 financial year, approval of the Terms of Reference and appointment of a member to the Committee.

5. The establishment of the committee is an interim approach until a region-wide community funding policy is finalised. Financial analysis is currently underway to inform options and a supporting budget structure for the new funding policy. Formal consultation on the draft policy will be undertaken with local boards in 2014.

Recommendation/s

That the Albert-Eden Local Board:

a) Agrees to re-instate the Central Joint Funding Committee for 2013/2014 to administer the legacy funds as per the Terms of Reference

b) Endorses the draft Terms of Reference for the Central Joint Funding Committee

c) Appoints Board Member XXX and Member XXX as alternative to the Central Joint Funding Committee for 2013/2014 with appropriate delegated authority to bind the board on decisions relating to the legacy community funding schemes made by the Committee

d) Notes that a region-wide Community Funding Policy is being developed and will in time replace the current interim funding arrangements.

Discussion

6. The Central Joint Funding Committee was a joint committee established by the seven central local boards - Albert-Eden, Great Barrier, Maungakiekie-Tamaki, Orakei, Puketapapa, Waiheke and Waitemata Local Boards. It had decision-making responsibility to allocate grants from the legacy community funding schemes.

7. Local boards continue to have full decision-making authority over their individual Local Boards Discretionary Grants schemes. These schemes were established as part of the interim funding programme, using budgets inherited from legacy community board funding schemes.

8. At its March 2013 meeting, the Regional Development and Operations Committee resolved to continue the Community Assistance Programme for 2013/2014 within unchanged structural and budgetary parameters, while the region-wide Community Funding Policy is in development.

9. This means that, as per previous years, legacy community funding budgets are allocated to sub-regional joint funding committees of local boards, and that the Central Joint Funding Committee needs to be operational for the 2013/2014 financial year.

10. The previous local board agreed to the continuation of the Central Joint Funding Committee for 2013/2014, approved amended terms of reference and appointed a member and an alternate to the Committee. Attachment A presents the rationale behind this decision, as well as the details of the funds to be allocated.

11. In accordance with Clause 30(7) of the Local Government Act 2002, the committee was automatically dissolved following the 2013 Local Government elections.

12. Officers recommend that the board re-instates the Central Joint Funding Committee for the rest of the 2013/2014 financial year, approves the Terms of Reference and appoints a member to the Committee.

13. Each of the legacy councils had a different approach to investing in their communities, and community grant funding is only one of several mechanisms for making this investment. In April 2013, the Regional Development and Operations Committee requested comprehensive financial analysis of all community development-related spending, including but not limited to the legacy community funding budgets that local boards are administering through the interim programme (Resolution number RDO/2013/55). The Regional Development and Operations Committee required this work to be completed prior to development of the second iteration of a new Community Funding Policy.

14. The financial analysis is currently underway, and will be reported to the relevant committee early in 2014. It is anticipated that the findings will provide a clearer picture of current budget distribution and show the variation in inherited community investment models in place around the region. This will provide a valuable basis for developing new policy options and outlining the appropriate budget structures to underpin them. However, any changes to current budget distribution will be proposed as part of the Local Board Funding Policy (not the Community Funding Policy) for implementation as part of the Long Term Plan (from 2015).

15. Officers will be formally engaging with local boards around further development of the region-wide Community Funding Policy in the coming months.

Consideration

Local Board Views

16. The legacy funding schemes are a key way for local boards to support their communities.

Māori Impact Statement

17. The legacy community funding schemes are of general interest to communities and accessible to a wide range of groups, including Māori. No particular implications for the Māori community or Māori stakeholders have been identified as arising from this report.

General

18. The recommendations contained in this report fall within the local board’s delegated authority.

Implementation Issues

19. The Central Joint Funding Committee resolved in September 2013 to distribute the 2013/2014 legacy community funding schemes for the purposes of administering the funding, as follows:

Fund	Allocation
Auckland City Natural Heritage Fund $50,000	$40,000 for Great Barrier Island Local Board $10,000 for Waiheke Island Local Board For Hauraki Gulf Island projects only and noting that the funding split is based on historical allocation
Auckland City Cultural Heritage Fund $50,000	Five isthmus local boards to administer jointly
Community Group Accommodation Support Fund $676,900	$5000 to Great Barrier Island Local Board $20,000 to Waiheke Island Local Board Remainder ($651,900) administered jointly by the five isthmus local boards
Community Group Assistance Fund $435,150	$15,000 to Waiheke Island Local Board Remainder ($420,150) administered jointly by the five isthmus local boards

20. The Central Joint Funding Committee also resolved that there would be two rounds only for the legacy community funding schemes (Community Group Assistance Fund, Community Group Accommodation Support, Auckland City Cultural Heritage, and Auckland City Natural Heritage):

I. Round one opened in June 2013 and closed on 15 July 2013 with decisions in September 2013

II. Round two will open in November 2013 and close on 13 December 2013 (CGAF only) and 28 March 2014 (ACCHF) for decisions in May 2014.

21. The Central Joint Funding Committee will hold a workshop and a meeting (dates to be confirmed) to consider procedural matters including but not limited to:

i) electing a Chair and Deputy Chair

ii) adopting the Terms of Reference (attached)

iii) considering the applications received.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a	Agenda report to the local boards May / June 2013	59
b	Draft terms of reference	65

Signatories

Authors	Michael Mendoza - Democracy Advisor
Authorisers	Adam Milina - Acting Relationship Manager - Albert-Eden & Orakei Local Boards

Albert-Eden Local Board

26 November 2013

Urgent Decision Process for the Albert-Eden Local Board

File No.: CP2013/26167

Purpose

1. This report seeks the board’s agreement for a process for urgent decisions of the Albert-Eden Local Board on matters that require a decision where it is not practical to call the full board together and meet the requirement of a quorum.

Executive Summary

2. This report details a process for urgent decisions of the local board on matters that require a decision where it is not practical to call the full board together and meet the requirement of a quorum.

Recommendation/s

That the Albert-Eden Local Board:

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

b) Delegates authority to the Chair and Deputy Chair or any person acting in these roles to make an urgent decision on behalf of the local board.

c) Requests that all urgent decisions be reported to the next ordinary meeting of the local board.

Background

3. An extraordinary meeting is called when an urgent decision is required on matters that cannot wait until the next scheduled ordinary meeting of the local board. At times, such as during the Christmas and New Year period, it is not practical to call the full board together and meet the requirement of a quorum.

4. An alternative to calling for an extraordinary meeting is to delegate the authority to the Chair and Deputy Chair, or any person acting in these roles, to make the decision on behalf of the local board.

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

Decision Making

6. It is recommended that the local board delegate the power to the Chair and Deputy Chair, or any person acting in these roles, to make urgent decisions on behalf of the board.

7. Any request for an urgent decision of the local board must be processed through the Local Board Services department, and the Local Board Relationship Manager must endorse the request for an urgent decision before commencing the process.

8. All requests for an urgent decision will be supported by a report stating the nature of the issue, reason for urgency and what decisions or resolutions are required. These reports will comply with the standard approval process.

9. A number of factors are considered before approval to use the urgent decision process is given such as:

· The timing of the next scheduled meeting.

· Confirmation that the local board has the delegation to make the decision.

· Consideration of the rationale for urgency.

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

10. Any decision made by delegation will be reported as an information item to the next ordinary meeting of the local board.

11. The Local Government (Auckland Council) Amendment Act 2013 provides for local boards to delegate to committees, sub-committees members of the local board or Auckland Council officers, any of its responsibilities, duties and power, with some specific exceptions.

Consideration

Local Board Views

12. This decision falls under the local board’s delegated authority.

Māori Impact Statement

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

Implementation Issues

14. The Local Board Relationship Managers can provide advice as to what might constitute an urgent decision.

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Signatories

Authors	Michael Mendoza - Democracy Advisor
Authorisers	Adam Milina - Acting Relationship Manager - Albert-Eden & Orakei Local Boards

Albert-Eden Local Board

26 November 2013

2013/2014 Albert Eden Local Board SLIPs Programme Update for September 2013

File No.: CP2013/25728

Purpose

1. This report provides a project summary for the Albert Eden Local Board 2013/2014 Small Local Improvement Projects (SLIPs) programme, recommends projects for approval and the allocation of additional funding to existing projects.

Executive Summary

2. The Albert Eden Local Board had $449,000 SLIPs capital funding (Capex), of which 100% was allocated. $202,000 SLIPs operational funding (Opex) was available of which 100% allocated and spent in the 2012/2013 financial year.

3. The total Capex 2012/2013 budget amount deferred to the 2013/2014 financial year was approximately $445,425. This was due to ongoing planning, consultation and consenting with projects as per their agreed delivery programme, and deferrals in delivery with other Council teams. The majority of these projects are expected to be delivered before the end of the 2013 calendar year.

4. The Albert Eden Local Board has $426,016 SLIPs capital funding (Capex) to allocate in the 2013/2014 financial year and $162,576 SLIPs operational funding (Opex) to allocate in the 2013/2014 financial year.

5. To date the Albert Eden Local Board has allocated $90,800 capital funding or 21% of the available budget. $125,889 operational funding or 77% of the available budget.

6. Recommendations that are being sought in this report will allocate a total of $5,165 capital funding, which will result in a total of $95,965 capital funding being allocated or 23%.

7. Recommendations that are being sought in this report will allocate a total of $10,000 operational funding, which will result in a total of $135,889 operational funding being allocated or 84%.

Recommendations are being sought in this report are as detailed below:

1. Mount Albert Station Greenscreen top up 2013/2014	$5,165 Capex
2. Pt Chevalier pontoons top up	$5,000 Opex
3. Sandringham Reserve community consultation project	$5,000 Opex

Recommendation/s

That the Albert-Eden Local Board:

a) Receives the Albert Eden 2013/2014 SLIPs programme update.

b) Approves the following 2013/2014 SLIPs proposals for implementation:

i) Mount Albert Station Greenscreen project $5,165 Capital Expenditure

ii) Pt Chevalier pontoons project $5,000 Operational Expenditure

iii) Sandringham Reserve community consultation project $5,000 Operational Expenditure

c) Notes upon approval of the above recommendations there will be $330,051 SLIPs capital funding remaining to allocate and approximately $26,686 SLIPs operational funding remaining to allocate in the 2013/2014 financial year.

Discussion

8. The Albert Eden Local Board had $449,000 SLIPs capital funding (Capex), of which 100% was allocated. $202,000 SLIPs operational funding (Opex) was available of which 100% allocated and spent in the 2012/2013 financial year.

9. The total budget amount deferred to the 2013/2014 financial year is approximately $445,425. This due to ongoing planning, consultation and consenting with projects as per their agreed delivery programme, and deferrals in delivery with other Council teams. The majority of these projects are expected to be delivered before the end of the 2013 calendar year.

10. In May 2013 the Albert Eden local board resolved to allocate $65,000 of unspent Opex from various other Council team budget lines to SLIPs for delivery.

11. The Albert Eden Local Board has $426,016 SLIPs capital funding (Capex) to allocate in the 2013/2014 financial year and $162,576 SLIPs operational funding (Opex) to allocate in the 2013/2014 financial year.

12. Recommendations that are being sought in this report will allocate a total of $5,165 capital funding, which will result in a total of $95,965 capital funding being allocated or 23%.

13. Recommendations that are being sought in this report will allocate a total of $10,000 operational funding, which will result in a total of $135,889 operational funding being allocated or 84%.

Recommendations are being sought in this report to allocate budget to the scoped proposals as detailed below:

1. Mount Albert Station Greenscreen top up 2013/2014	$5,165 Capex
2. Pt Chevalier pontoons top up	$5,000 Opex
3. Sandringham Reserve community consultation project	$5,000 Opex

14. All 2013/2014 projects should have budget allocated to them within the first quarter of the 2013/2014 financial year; to enable commencement and completion between prior to 30th June 2014.

15. Most projects will need eight months or more to be successfully delivered within the 2013/2014 financial year. Projects that had budget allocated to them with less then eight months remaining within the current financial year, are at risk of not being completed by 2012/2013 financial year end. As a result the project completion, as per the agreed delivery programme, may be deferred across into the following 2014/2015 financial year for completion.

Consideration

Local Board Views

16. This report canvasses the views of the Albert Eden Local Board.

17. The recommendations contained within this report fall within the Local Boards allocated authority.

Maori Impact Statement

18. Parks and open spaces contribute significantly to Maori well-being, values, culture and traditions. Where any aspects of the proposed work programme are anticipated to have a significant impact on sites of importance to Tangata Whenua, appropriate consultation will follow.

General

19. Communities are impacted by SLIPs projects. They provide an opportunity for staff and elected representatives to engage with the communities on their specific needs. SLIPs staff will liaise directly with all residents and stakeholders impacted by any SLIPs funded projects to be delivered.

20. Funding for the proposed projects within this report will come from the Albert Eden Local Board’s SLIPs budget. After allocating budget to all the projects listed in this report and elsewhere, the Albert Eden Local Board will still have unallocated SLIPs capital and operational funding. Further reporting as part of the monthly work programme reporting will be used to determine what other projects the Board may wish to fund.

21. SLIPs need to comply with all relevant legislation, including the Resource Management Act 1991, the Local Government Act and all Auckland Council policies.

Implementation Issues

22. All 2013/2014 projects should have budget allocated to them within the first quarter of the 2013/2014 financial year; to enable commencement and completion between prior to 30th June 2014.

23. Most projects will need eight months or more to be successfully delivered within the 2013/2014 financial year. Projects that had budget allocated to them with less then eight months remaining within the current financial year, are at risk of not being completed by 2013/2014 financial year end. As a result the project completion, as per the agreed delivery programme, may be deferred across into the following 2014/2015 financial year for completion.

24. Projects with agreed longer term delivery programmes will result in their SLIPs capital funding being carried forward to the 2014/2015 financial year and these projects not delivered within the 2013/2014 financial year.

25. Budgets for projects funded from 2013/2014 SLIPs operational expenditure must be fully expended within the 2013/2014 financial year.

26. The ability to spend/deliver outcomes is dependent on the availability of experienced staff or consultant project management resource.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a	AE SLIPs programme report (Nov update) 2013_11_11	73

Signatories

Authors

Oliver Kunzendorf - Team Leaser SLIPs

Authorisers

Julie Pickering - Manager Asset Development & Business Support Central

Ian Maxwell - Manager Parks, Sports & Recreation

Adam Milina - Acting Relationship Manager - Albert-Eden & Orakei Local Boards

Albert-Eden Local Board

26 November 2013

Sustainability Initiatives Budget Allocation

File No.: CP2013/25291

Purpose

1. To partially agree the 2013/2014 Albert-Eden Local Board (Board) budget line for sustainability initiatives.

Executive Summary

2. In 2012/2013 the Board, through its sustainability initiatives budget line initiated a household sustainability work programme. This included a stocktake of local people and projects, an energy workshop and the launch of Sustainability Street. The budget also supported the development of a detailed scoping report to identify opportunities for the Board to support projects that support its priority of building strong communities through environment and sustainability projects. The scoping report identified a number of possible projects that could be funded from the 2013/2014 sustainability initiatives budget line (total of $42,113).

3. This report recommends that $21,133 of the 2013/2014 sustainability initiatives budget support the ongoing roll out of Sustainability Street as a way of supporting people to live more sustainably and to set up a sustainability showcase to profile local sustainability initiatives. The board also identified a further opportunity to promote sustainability through funding a business case for a Community Recycling Centre to be established in the joint board area of the three central local boards (Albert-Eden, Waitemata and Puketapapa). This report recommends the Board confirm that its contribution to that business case be funded from the remaining $20,000 of the sustainability initiatives budget.

4. The Albert-Eden Local Board also identified a further opportunity to promote sustainability through funding a business case for a Community Recycling Centre to be located in the joint board area of the three central local boards: Albert-Eden, Waitemata and Puketapapa.

Recommendation/s

That the Albert-Eden Local Board:

a) Receives the Sustainability Initiatives Budget Allocation report.

b) Agrees to fund the following projects from its 2013/2014 sustainability initiatives budget line;

Project	Cost
Sustainability Street	$16,000
The Sustainability Showcase	$5,133
Resource Recovery Business Case	$20,000

Discussion

5. The Local Board Plan signals the intention of the Board to lead Auckland in providing ways for communities and neighbourhoods to become more sustainable. The Board already supports this aspiration through funding for, and advocacy of, ecological restoration projects. However, a recent detailed scoping report identified additional means of meeting the Board’s desire to reduce local carbon emissions, promote waste minimisation, safe and warm homes and energy efficiency.

6. One of the projects identified through the scoping process was Sustainability Street. The central idea of Sustainability Street is that people get together as local communities, learn about ecological sustainability and then do what they can to encourage, assist or ‘teach’ other individuals or communities to join the groundswell. This project was initiated in the Board area earlier in 2013 and the recommendation is to build on this early start by recruiting more streets to participate.

7. A key part of the Albert-Eden Sustainability Street project is the recruitment and training of a network of local green ambassadors. These green ambassadors will be able to provide training and support to the streets in order to support households to reduce water, energy and waste. One of the strengths of the Albert-Eden community is the number of committed and knowledgeable locals who can support delivery of sustainability projects, so recruiting and training them to deliver sustainable living workshops is considered a particular innovation for this Board area.

8. The core components of the Sustainability Street project are recruiting and training and network of green ambassadors, recruiting streets to be involved and then delivering in-home sustainable living workshops for participants, with an initial focus on water, energy and waste.

9. The second project identified for the Board is to set up a Sustainability Showcase to acknowledge and profile local sustainability initiatives. The stocktake has identified a wide range of local projects and people that can be incorporated into the showcase, including sustainable homes, Sustainability Streets, food production, sustainable business and social enterprises. The structure and timing of the Sustainability Showcase have yet to be determined.

10. The third project identified by the Board was to fund a business case for a Community Recycling Centre. It is envisaged that this facility would provide a convenient place for local residents to drop off their used furniture, clothes, whiteware, hazardous waste and other materials. It will form part of a larger network of resource recovery facilities that will be spread across the region. These facilities will be run by businesses, community organisations, voluntary sector organisations and iwi. They will enable large quantities of reusable and recyclable materials to be diverted from landfill for reuse, repair or refurbishment and sale. They will also create valuable opportunities for local employment. This business case is scheduled to be completed in February 2014.

Consideration

Local Board Views

11. The Albert-Eden Local Board Plan notes that the Board wishes to be a leader in promoting and developing projects that support sustainable neighbourhoods. This report outlines how the Board plans to achieve this in 13/14 through funding various sustainability initiatives.

Maori Impact Statement

12. Projects that promote waste minimisation and energy efficiency have links with concepts of kaitiakitanga and the mauri of the environments. It is noted that The Māori Plan for Tāmaki Makaurau drafted by the Independent Maori Statutory Board supports sustainable energy use as part of its manaakitanga (or improve quality of life) strategic direction. The Māori Plan also notes the importance of energy efficiency to rangatahi (youth).

General

13. The design and delivery of the sustainability initiatives outlined in paragraphs four to nine above are supported by multiple council departments, including Infrastructure and Environmental Services and Community Development.

14. No external consultation was required for the purposes of this report.

Implementation Issues

15. Regular reporting on project delivery will be through the quarterly report from the Infrastructure and Environmental Services department, or as required.

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Signatories

Authors

Dr Viv Heslop – Environmental Programmes Advisor

Lucy Hawcroft – Relationship Advisor (Solid Waste)

Authorisers

Gael Ogilvie – Manager: Environmental Services Unit

Ian Stupple – Manager: Solid Waste

John Dragicevich – Infrastructure and Environmental Services Manager

Adam Milina - Acting Relationship Manager - Albert-Eden & Orakei Local Boards

Albert-Eden Local Board

26 November 2013

Infrastructure and Environmental Services Update Report

File No.: CP2013/25302

Purpose

1. This quarterly update from the Infrastructure and Environmental Services (I&ES) department covers the period from August to October 2013. It reports on both regional and place based activities undertaken by the three I&ES units – Environmental Services, Stormwater and Solid Waste.

2. This report also tracks the delivery and expenditure of environmental budget lines from the 2013/2014 Local Board Agreement (LBA), as assigned to the Infrastructure and Environmental Services Department.

Executive Summary

3. The I&ES Department delivers on the Auckland Plan and Local Board Plans through the delivery of environmental programmes, regional stormwater and waste services, as well as the maintenance and enhancement of Auckland's natural environment.

4. This report has been written to update the Board on the delivery of activities and work programmes by I&ES. A number of these regional activities have a distinct local involvement and impact and are detailed in the attachments to this report.

5. This report also includes some background information for newly elected board members, to familiarise them with the work programme and priorities of the department.

Recommendation

That the Albert-Eden Local Board:

a) Receives the Infrastructure and Environmental Services update report.

Discussion

6. This report and attachments specifically details the activities delivered by the three units of I&ES within the Board area which support and contribute to the following Local Board Plan priorities and initiatives:

Priorities

· Value and Protect Heritage

· Strong, Safe, Sustainable Communities

Initiatives

· Improve the quality of our streams and beaches

· Youth programmes

· Support volunteer organisations and create a link between services

· Initiate sustainability projects

7. In addition this report may detail activities which may not be specifically identified in the Local Board Plan but which will; impact on the local area.

8. The following provides some background information for board members, to familiarise them with the work programmes and priorities delivered by the three units within the I and ES department.

Environmental Services Unit

9. The Auckland Plan describes a transformational shift to ‘strongly commit to environmental action and green growth’. It is the responsibility of the Environmental Services Unit (ESU) within I and ES to support that shift through the development, promotion and implementation of projects that support environment and sustainability outcomes.

10. Improving freshwater quality is a key focus for ESU and is supported through the implementation of catchment-based restoration projects (such as the Sustainable Catchments Programme and Project Twin Streams), land management programmes, and community education initiatives such as Wai Care.

11. The vision of the Indigenous Biodiversity Strategy is to ensure that Auckland’s biodiversity is flourishing and treasured. In supporting this vision, as well as that of the Auckland Plan, the biodiversity team provide technical advice to ecological restoration projects being delivered by either Council or private landowners. Biodiversity staff also provides technical input into the evaluation of resource consent applications and other statutory processes, such as the development of the draft unitary plan.

12. Biosecurity works alongside biodiversity to contribute to environmental outcomes. Biosecurity is responsible for the implementation of the Regional Pest Management Strategy through a number of programmes, and is also responsible for the regional coordination of national biosecurity management programmes, such as the local response to kauri dieback and kiwifruit vine disease (PSA).

13. ESU also delivers a number of projects that support community development through engaging communities in environment and sustainability projects. These projects include Wai Care, Enviroschools and Trees for Survival. In addition, ESU is currently developing and trialling a number of household sustainability initiatives in various local board areas.

Solid Waste Unit

14. The Solid Waste Unit, within the Infrastructure and Environmental Services Department, is responsible for the management of the region’s kerbside domestic refuse, recycling, hazardous waste, inorganics, illegal dumping and litter collection. It also manages some transfer stations, and develops and delivers waste minimisation programmes. It is made up of four main operational delivery groups; Waste Planning, Waste Minimisation, Waste Operations and Waste Infrastructure and Assets.

15. The Waste Planning team is responsible for carrying out implementation planning for the delivery of the Waste Management and Minimisation Plan (WMMP) and ensuring our waste operations and plans are consistent with regional waste bylaws and national level waste legislation. They advocate council views to central government on waste issues.

16. The Waste Minimisation team is responsible for the development, management and delivery of waste minimisation behaviour change and education programmes to households, businesses, and schools. This includes programmes such as the Create Your Own Eden composting courses and WasteWise schools.

17. The Waste Operations team is responsible for the management of the region’s kerbside domestic refuse, recycling and inorganic waste collection services, servicing and maintaining public litter bins and loose litter cleaning.

18. The Waste Assets and Infrastructure team is responsible for providing infrastructure to ensure Auckland meets its obligations under the Waste Management Act for the safe and efficient recovery, recycling and disposal of waste across the region.

19. These infrastructure requirements are managed in many ways. For example, through direct service supply contracts for delivery of waste to landfill, Build Operate Own and Transfer contracts for facilities to process recycling, and through council-owned assets and operations such as those at the Waitakere Transfer Station in Henderson and the Claris Landfill on Great Barrier Island. In addition, the team also procures and manages the stock of refuse and recycling bins and public litter bins. Finally, they work with suppliers to make provision for hazardous waste drop off, recovery and disposal.

Stormwater Unit

20. Council’s Stormwater Unit is largely responsible for two of the activities outlined in the 2010 amendment of the Local Government Act 2002: Stormwater drainage, and flood protection and control, and is required to comply with the Resource Management Act and other legal requirements. The purpose of these activities is to minimise the nuisance of flooding, protect people and property from the adverse effects of extreme storm events and protect the environment and public health by reducing stormwater contaminant and sediment runoff that is discharged into natural waters.

21. Council’s stormwater functions are guided by the draft Stormwater Unit Strategic Direction and the Stormwater Asset Management Plan 2012-2032.

22. The Stormwater Asset Management Plan is updated every three years and its review is a key focus for the 2013/14 financial year. The Stormwater Asset Management Plan spans a 20-year period with focus on the ten year period covered in the council’s 10-year Long Term Plan (LTP). The Stormwater Asset Management Plan addresses all major asset based activities. A primary purpose of asset management planning is to ensure that present and future customer service requirements are met while managing assets in the most cost effective manner.

23. The draft Stormwater Unit Strategic Direction was completed in 2013. It is a non-statutory document aligned to the Auckland Plan that guides the operational matters of the council in relation to stormwater that informs and engenders support from internal and external parties involved in stormwater management. The document ultimately will be incorporated into the updated Stormwater Unit Asset Management Plan 2015-2035.

Consideration

Local Board Views

24. This is a report prepared specifically for the Local Board.

Maori Impact Statement

25. While this report is for information only and does not require any decision making, it is recognised that environmental management, water quality and land management has integral links with the mauri of the environments and concepts of kaitiakitanga.

Implementation Issues

26. The activities detailed in this report are within budget. Any decisions arising from discussions and planned changes to work programmes will have financial and resourcing implications which will need to be managed.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a	Environmental Services Unit update (Under Separate Cover)
b	Meola Creek - Sites supported by Sustainable Catchments Programme (Under Separate Cover)
c	Proposed Phyllis Reserve Sustainable Catchments Programme Project (Under Separate Cover)
d	Solid Waste Report (Under Separate Cover)
e	Auckland Household Waste Prevention Study (Under Separate Cover)
f	Stormwater Local Board Update Report (Under Separate Cover)

Signatories

Authors

Lucy Hawcroft - Relationship Advisor

Emma Joyce - Relationship Advisor

Varsha Belwalkar - Stormwater Liaison Advisor

Mara Bebich - Senior Relationship & Engagement Advisor

Authorisers

John Dragicevich - Manager Infrastructure and Environmental Services

Adam Milina - Acting Relationship Manager - Albert-Eden & Orakei Local Boards