Agenda of Regional Strategy and Policy Committee

1 Apologies

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

2 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.

3 Confirmation of Minutes

That the Regional Strategy and Policy Committee:

a) confirm the ordinary minutes of its meeting, held on Tuesday, 4 February 2014, including the confidential section, as a true and correct record.

4 Petitions

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

5 Public Input

Standing Order 3.21 provides for Public Input. Applications to speak must be made to the Committee Secretary, in writing, no later than two (2) working days prior to the meeting and must include the subject matter. The meeting Chairperson has the discretion to decline any application that does not meet the requirements of Standing Orders. A maximum of thirty (30) minutes is allocated to the period for public input with five (5) minutes speaking time for each speaker.

5.1 Mr Taylor - Hunters Corner Town Centre Society Inc

Purpose

1. Mr Pat Taylor, Chairman of the Hunters Corner Town Centre Society Inc., wishes to address the committee in relation to the recent opening of a legal high shop in Hunters Corner, Papatoetoe and provide suggestions on how to deal with it. This relates to item 9. on the agenda entitled “Work programme for the development of a local approved products policy”.

Recommendation/s

That the Regional Strategy and Policy Committee:

a) thank Mr Taylor of the Hunters Corner Town Centre Society Inc for his presentation.

6 Local Board Input

Standing Order 3.22 provides for Local Board Input. The Chairperson (or nominee of that Chairperson) is entitled to speak for up to five (5) minutes during this time. The Chairperson of the Local Board (or nominee of that Chairperson) shall wherever practical, give two (2) days notice of their wish to speak. The meeting Chairperson has the discretion to decline any application that does not meet the requirements of Standing Orders.

This right is in addition to the right under Standing Order 3.9.14 to speak to matters on the agenda.

6.1 Manurewa Local Board - Auckland Council LAPP on Psychoactive Substances

Purpose

1. The Manurewa Local Board Chair and Deputy Chair wish to address the committee on the development of an Auckland Council local approved products policy (LAPP) on Psychoactive Substances. This relates to item 9 on the agenda entitled “Work programme for the development of a local approved products policy”.

Recommendation/s

That the Regional Strategy and Policy Committee:

a) thank Angela Dalton (Chair) and Simeon Brown (Deputy Chair) of the Manurewa Local Board for their presentation.

7 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.”

8 Notices of Motion

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

Regional Strategy and Policy Committee

06 March 2014

Work programme for the development of a local approved products policy

File No.: CP2014/01906

Purpose

1. To provide the Regional Strategy and Policy Committee with the work programme for the development of a local approved products policy. This policy relates to the regulation of locations of psychoactive substances retail outlets.

Executive Summary

2. Officers have prepared a work plan to inform the development of a local approved products policy (LAPP). The Psychoactive Substances Act 2013 (the Act) enables councils to develop a policy (it is not mandatory) relating to the sale of psychoactive substances in their district (section 66).

3. On 19 September 2013 Regional Development and Operations Committee approved officers to undertake initial scoping and work plan development for a local approved products policy.

4. The policy will set rules regarding where retail outlets of psychoactive substances (the active ingredients in party pills, energy pills and herbal highs) may operate. The Act provides that a policy may regulate the location of retail outlets by reference to broad areas within a district, proximity to other premises selling approved products and/or distance from certain types of premises such as schools, places of worship and other community facilities.

5. This project falls under the delegated authority of Regional Strategy and Policy Committee. Update reports will be provided to Community Development and Safety Committee at key milestones of the project.

6. The recommended process for developing the policy estimates the date for the special consultative procedure (submissions and hearings) to fall between September and November 2014. This would mean the most likely date for adoption of the final policy would be the committee’s first meeting of 2015.

7. Local boards will be involved as the project progresses. Their feedback will be sought at key milestones during the development of the project.

8. Maori have not been consulted on the work plan but will be during the course of the project.

9. There is $95,000 in the budget to cover the costs of the policy development.

10. Regulations to support the legislation will be implemented in early to mid 2015 to give councils time to develop and implement their LAPPs prior to them coming into effect.

Recommendation

That the Regional Strategy and Policy Committee:

a) approve the work programme to develop a local approved products policy to regulate the retail of psychoactive substances in Auckland.

Discussion

Background

11. The Psychoactive Substances Act 2013 (the Act) sets a regulatory framework for the manufacture and sale of psychoactive substances. These are the active ingredients in party pills, energy pills and herbal highs. The Act’s purpose is to regulate the availability of psychoactive products to protect the health of, and minimise the harm to, individuals who use them.

12. Psychoactive substances are banned from being sold in dairies, service stations, supermarkets, convenience stores and places where alcohol is sold. The Ministry of Health estimates that following implementation of the Act, the number of retailers selling psychoactive substances has decreased from between 3,000 and 4,000 to fewer than 170.

13. The Act enables territorial authorities to develop a local approved products policy (LAPP) to specify locations where approved products may be sold. Location controls may relate to broad areas within a territorial authority’s district, proximity to other premises that sell approved products and/or proximity to premises of a particular kind such as schools, places of worship and other community facilities.

14. On 19 September 2013 the Regional Development and Operations Committee approved officers to undertake initial scoping and work plan development for a local approved products policy (RDO/2013/160).

15. Officers have undertaken this initial scoping and developed a work plan to set out roles and timeframes.

Project overview

16. The purpose of the LAPP is to regulate where psychoactive substances can be sold. This will create certainty for potential sellers and the community as a whole. The Psychoactive Substances Regulatory Authority will give the highest regard to a LAPP when deciding whether to grant a retail licence.

17. The Act provides that a LAPP may provide differently for different part of its district (section 66). It may not be so restrictive as to effectively ban the sale of these substances within the region.

Scope

18. Council is limited in what it can include in its policy. Section 68 of the Psychoactive Substances Act 2013 sets out what policies a LAPP may include. It states:

A local approved products policy may include policies on one or more of the following matters:

(a) the location of premises from which approved products may be sold by reference to broad areas within the district:

(b) the location from which approved products may be sold by reference to proximity to other premises from which approved products are sold within the district:

(c) the location of premises from which approved products may be sold by reference to proximity to premises or facilities of a particular kind or kinds within the district (for example, kindergartens, early childhood centres, schools, places of worship, or other community facilities).

Delegations

19. The approval of the policy falls within the delegated authority of the Regional Strategy and Policy (RSPC) committee.

20. Officers will report to Community Develop and Safety (CDS) and RSPC at key stages of the recommended process below. Local boards will also be involved to gain an understanding of their communities’ views on psychoactive substances.

Recommended process

21. The following table outlines the recommended process for developing the policy.

Step	Estimated timeframe
1. Complete research and analysis, and develop issues and options paper Officers will: - review other territorial authorities draft LAPPs - review alcohol research on density - collect anecdotal evidence on the effect of psychoactive substances - gather any statistics available. Officers will then develop an issues and options paper to inform stakeholder engagement.	February 2014
2. Stakeholder engagement on issues and options Officers will seek feedback from internal, external and political stakeholders on their preferred approach.	March – April 2014
3. Draft policy and gain stakeholder input The policy will be drafted based on feedback received from stakeholders on the issues and options paper. The draft will be presented to CDS, local boards and advisory panels for their input.	May – June 2014
4. Develop final draft for special consultative procedure Officers will then use feedback to develop a final draft policy for presentation to RSPC for approval for consultation.	July – August 2014
5. Special consultative procedure Officers will follow the special consultative procedure set out in section 83 of Local Government Act 2002. This will include public submissions and hearings.	September –November 2014
6. Adopt final policy Following the hearings the draft will be finalised and presented to RSPC for adoption.	February 2015
7. Implementation and review A copy will be sent to Ministry of Health after it has been completed. The LAPP will then be reviewed every five years in accordance with section 69 of the Act.	Ongoing

Regulations

22. The Ministry of Health is developing retail regulations to assist with the application of the Act. Councils have been advised that a discussion document on the content of the retail regulations will be released in mid to late February. Consultation is expected to last about a month. Regulations are expected to include that an application for a licence must comply with the relevant LAPP.

Consideration

Local Board Views

23. Many local boards have expressed an interest in the development of a local approved products policy. Manurewa Local Board in particular has been advocating for council to use its section 66 powers to develop a policy.

24. Three southern local boards (Papakura, Manurewa and Mangere-Otahuhu) have written draft position papers which will be used to help inform policy development.

25. Local boards will be consulted and included in the policy development process as outlined in the recommended process.

Maori Impact Statement

26. Maori have not been consulted directly on this work plan; however they will be included in the key stakeholder engagement phases on the policy development.

27. Maori have not specifically made reference to the use of psychoactive substances in their iwi management plans. However, a number of plans do make reference to ensuring the general health and well-being of their people.

General

Financial and resourcing implications

28. There is $5,000 in this year’s budget for pre engagement activities. There is currently $90,000 budgeted for the 2014/2015 financial year to undertake the special consultative procedure and for publications and promotion.

Legal implications

29. Section 66 of the Act gives councils the ability to develop a LAPP. Section 68 sets out the policies it may contain. Development will follow a special consultative procedure as set out in section 83 of Local Government Act 2002.

Implementation Issues

30. The latest correspondence from Ministry of Health is that the implementation of regulations will occur in early – mid 2015. This will give councils a chance to develop and implement their LAPPs prior to the regulations coming into effect. The decision to delay the implementation of the regulations means that no new licences will be approved until that time.

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Signatories

Authors

Louise Prew - Policy Analyst

Michael Sinclair - Team Leader, Regionwide Social Policy

Authorisers

Penny Pirrit - Regional & Local Planning Manager

Dean Kimpton - Chief Operating Officer

Regional Strategy and Policy Committee

06 March 2014

Community Grants Policy

File No.: CP2014/02311

Purpose

1. To update the committee on the development of the Community Grants Policy (previously known as the Community Funding Policy) and seek endorsement for its purpose, scope and timeline for implementation.

Executive Summary

2. The Community Grants Policy (CGP) is one of a suite of policies being developed to guide the provision of financial assistance to community groups and organisations. The specific purpose and scope of the CGP is to guide the allocation of discretionary, contestable grants at both the local and regional level.

3. A draft Community Funding Policy was developed and approved for public consultation in 2012 but was subsequently put on hold in April 2013 pending completion of a financial review of council’s total investment in community activities.

4. At the time of writing, the financial review has been completed. However the value of the findings as a decision-making tool is limited by the need to take account of a number of caveats, reflecting the complexity, variances and inconsistency of the budget information considered.

5. The review was primarily driven by concern over inequity of funding for ‘community services’ at the local level, with some boards inheriting less community funding from their former council than others, and/or perceiving that these legacy approaches to community funding or community service delivery would affect their funding allocations in future.

6. Since the financial review was commissioned, the policy landscape has changed, most notably due to a review of the Local Board Funding Policy (LBFP) led by council’s Finance department. The LBFP determines how services delivered by local boards will be funded, and who will pay. If a revised LBFP is adopted, this is likely to establish a different funding model for local services not linked to assets. This would include the majority of services and activities in scope of the review.

7. As a result, the findings of the review are more appropriate to consider in the context of the LBFP and service planning by the responsible business units through the Long Term Plan (LTP) process. Staff propose to provide the review data and findings to the operational departments, the LBFP team, and to local board financial advisors to use in discussions with their local boards as appropriate.

8. Once boards have determined their budgets for local community grants, the purpose of the Community Grants Policy will be to provide guidance to local boards on how to allocate those funds, by providing a suite of best practice tools and guidelines.

9. To address the primary issue raised by local boards concerning differing service delivery models, it is proposed that recurring grants to third parties to deliver core services (i.e. services that Council delivers in-house elsewhere) will be ring-fenced and treated alongside other operational budgets held by departments responsible for that activity area. These types of grants, referred to as ‘Term grants’, are proposed to be out of scope for the CGP.

10. At the regional level, the CGP will provide guidance to the governing body on the allocation of grants to regional groups and activities that are aligned to council’s strategic priorities in the areas of community development, arts and culture, events, recreation and sport, environment and heritage.

11. A discussion paper is being developed to present the key elements, issues and options for the CGP which will be work shopped with local boards, councillors and other key stakeholders in March and April. A key policy issue is how to deal with grants for sub-regional or ‘multi-board’ activities.

12. The proposed timeline is to complete a draft policy by June for public consultation in July/August with a final policy approved by November 2014. The intention is to align its implementation with the new LTP (i.e. from 1 July 2015) as this will enable any new funding or new budget structures to be implemented alongside the policy. This will mean existing funding arrangements and grants schemes will roll over for the 2014/2015 financial year.

Recommendation/s

That the Regional Strategy and Policy Committee:

a) endorse the purpose, scope and timeline for the development and implementation of the Community Grants Policy, noting that a draft policy is due to be completed in June 2014, a final policy by November 2014 and implementation from 1 July 2015

b) endorse existing funding arrangements and grants schemes being rolled over for the 2014 /2015 financial year

c) note that the data and findings of the financial review of community investment will be provided in full to the relevant business units and the Finance department for discussion with local boards as appropriate

d) agree that the report be forwarded to all local boards for their information.

Discussion

Background

13. A policy to guide council’s provision of grants to community groups and organisations is on Council’s approved Strategy and Policy Forward Work Programme. This reflects the need to implement a consolidated policy that reflects the current governance arrangements and priorities of Auckland Council.

14. The policy has recently been renamed from the ‘Community Funding Policy’ to the ‘Community Grants Policy’ (CGP) to avoid confusion with the Local Board Funding Policy, given there is some cross-over between these two policies and engagement is happening on both at the same time.

15. With the amalgamation of legacy councils in 2010, Auckland Council inherited eight different approaches to grant funding and more than 75 different funding schemes. Since then, in the absence of a consolidated policy, the majority of the existing funding arrangements and legacy grants schemes have continued to be rolled over each year, albeit with a range of operational enhancements to ensure delivery of the programme is effective as possible.

16. Through the interim community funding programme:

· Local boards have worked collaboratively in joint funding committees or ‘clusters’ to distribute grant funds (held in regional budgets) that were previously allocated at the ‘citywide’ level by the legacy councils

· Local boards have allocated funds through their individual discretionary grants schemes to a wide range of groups and organisations to support local activities, projects and events that benefit their communities

· The governing body has provided funding to regional community groups through:

o legacy regional schemes (such as Arts Alive and the Environmental Initiatives Fund)

o a new regional events fund aligned with the Events Policy (established 2012)

o a new interim regional community and arts fund (established 2013).

Financial review of Council’s current investment in community services

17. In mid-2012 a draft community funding policy was released for public consultation. In April 2013, following community and local board feedback, the policy was put on hold pending a review of Council’s financial investment into a range of community services and activities. This review had a far broader remit than community grants. It included investment via community leases, council-operated projects and programmes, community-facing staff and some facility costs.

18. The review was commissioned to respond to concerns raised by some councillors and local board members that the ‘full picture’ of council’s community investment was required before a community funding policy could be agreed. The primary issue was around inequity of funding for community services at the local level, with some boards inheriting less community funding from their legacy councils than others, and/or perceiving that legacy approaches to community funding or community service delivery would affect their funding allocations in future.

19. Some boards (particularly in the former North Shore City area) have historically funded community services via an ‘outsourced’ or partnership delivery model, by providing recurring grants to independent community organisations. These boards raised concerns that their communities would be disadvantaged if no differentiation was made between these and grants for purely discretionary activities. The issue is that grant funds which are effectively supporting core services could potentially be allocated for other purposes, while elsewhere in the region the same or similar services were being budgeted for and run by council staff ‘in-house’ (with the added advantage of annual inflationary adjustments).

20. At the time of preparing this report the financial review has been completed, and it is anticipated that officers will be able to provide an update at the committee meeting.

21. However, what has become evident is that the review provides only a partial view of the council’s investment in community services, not the complete picture. For instance, the scope of the review, set by the Regional Development and Operations Committee, did not include expenditure on parks or property costs related to community facilities which are also arguably ‘community investment’.

22. Furthermore, the complexity of the data and the variances in the ways costs are budgeted and recorded across and within different areas of the business make it problematic to consistently categorise expenditure and compare levels of investment, without applying a number of caveats. This limits the value of the review findings as a wider decision-making tool. However the budget data for grants is sufficiently robust and staff will be able to discuss this with local boards as part of the development of the CGP.

23. The broader findings of the financial review will still be useful to support discussions with local boards on the various models for funding and delivering community services (i.e. ‘outsourced’ versus ‘in-house’ service delivery). However staff consider these issues are more appropriate to consider in the context of the LBFP and as part of operational departments’ service planning through the Long Term Plan (LTP) process, rather than as part of the development of a CGP which is far more limited in scope.

24. Staff propose to provide the review data and findings to the operational departments, the LBFP team, and to local board financial advisors to use to support discussions with their local boards as appropriate.

The Local Board Funding Policy and the Community Grants Policy

25. The purpose of the Local Board Funding Policy (LBFP) is to set out the principles, methodology and formulae for the allocation of funds for local activities. The first LBFP was adopted in 2011, but a review commenced in 2012, led by council’s Finance department.

26. Finance is proposing that all funding for local services not linked to assets should sit with local boards, as they are the decision-makers over those activities and responsible for agreeing service levels. Funding for local services linked to assets would remain at the regional level, acknowledging that decisions on asset-based service levels are primarily driven by governing body decisions on the type and location of assets.

27. The LBFP would determine how local boards are funded to deliver local services to their communities, in terms of the optimal mix of general rates and locally targeted rates, and the formula for allocating any general rate-funded portion between the 21 boards. However decisions on the overall amount of funding available will be made during the wider planning and budgeting process (i.e. the LTP and negotiation of Local Board Agreements). Discussion on addressing equity of funding for local boards needs to be undertaken in this context.

28. The funding method agreed in the finalised LBFP, in combination with the budgeting process, will determine how much funding is available to each local board to deliver locally driven initiatives, which includes local community services, programmes and grants.

29. Local boards would then determine how much within their local funding envelopes to set aside for their grants programme. The role of the CGP will be to provide guidance to local boards on how to allocate their grant funding to help them achieve the outcomes described in their local board plans.

30. It is important that boards receive clear advice around the limited scope of the CGP versus the LBFP, specifically that the CGP will not be able to address broader issues around equitable funding for local activities, or the relative costs and benefits of different operating models for community services. If this limitation of scope is not widely accepted by local boards, then the CGP may struggle to get traction.

Purpose and scope of the Community Grants Policy

31. The CGP will provide guidance to local boards and the governing body on the allocation of discretionary contestable grants to community groups and organisations to deliver a range of activities at both the local and regional level that contribute to council’s strategic objectives and outcomes.

32. In this context ‘discretionary’ is used to mean any community organisation, activity or service that elected members value and want to support, but which is additional to Council’s standard service provision. In other words, council is willing to contribute to the activity or service because it is has community benefit and aligns with council’s own objectives, but council is not obligated or required to support it.

33. ‘Contestable’ is used to mean that any eligible organisation can compete for the grant, opportunities to do so are publicly advertised, applicants formally apply and are consistently assessed, and final allocation decisions are made in a public forum.

34. At the local level the CGP is not intended to be prescriptive, but rather to provide a framework and guidelines that will assist local boards to deliver best practice in grant-making. The CGP will propose a single flexible grants scheme, outlining a ‘tool-box’ of grant types rather than specific activity-focused funding schemes. This aims to provide enable maximum discretion for boards to respond to local priorities within the funding envelope they have set aside for grants.

35. At the regional level the policy will propose activity-focused funding schemes (e.g. arts and culture, events, sport and recreation, community development, environment and heritage) aligned with council's strategic framework.

Out of scope activity – Term grants for outsourced service delivery

36. Council provides services to ratepayers via a range of operating models that vary across the region. Council may deliver services to the community directly – through ‘in-house’ models – or by contracting independent providers to do this on its behalf – via ‘outsourced’ or ‘partnership’ delivery models.

37. Council routinely enters into contracts with community organisations to deliver particular activities (e.g. the operation of community centres) through a partnership arrangement. These types of recurring funding arrangements enable council departments to meet their service responsibilities as defined in the LTP, while providing flexibility to respond to community needs and utilise existing capacity in the community sector. In most cases these arrangements are only partially contestable, as in general, a range of service providers does not exist within the market to provide these types of activities.

38. To address the issue around differing service delivery models, it is proposed that grants to third parties to deliver core services (i.e. services that council delivers in-house elsewhere) will be ring-fenced and treated as part of the operations of the relevant council department and budgeted for alongside other similar in-house activity. These type of grants, to be referred to as Term grants, are proposed to be out of scope for the CGP.

39. The rationale for this is that Term grants are essentially an outsourced service delivery model and therefore should be not be considered within a discretionary grants pool. This will also enable Term grants to be subject to inflationary adjustment. Staff have worked with the relevant business units of council to identify these relationships as part of the completion of the financial review.

40. Ring-fencing Term grants and treating them alongside other operational budgets does not necessarily mean that council will be ‘locked in’ to these arrangements indefinitely. Term grants, like any other service council invests in, are subject to regular review and performance management as part of the ongoing planning and provision of community services.

Out of scope activity – other community assistance policies

41. The Community Grants Policy is one of a suite of policies which will guide the provision of financial assistance to communities and community organisations. It deals specifically with the allocation of discretionary, contestable grants.

42. Related but separate policies under the broader umbrella of community assistance are:

· Community Occupancy (Leases) Policy (completed 2012)

Guides the provision of subsidised leases of council-owned buildings or land to community organisations across the region

· Facility Partnerships Policy (to be developed in 2014/15)

Will govern funding partnerships with community organisations to develop community, arts, cultural and recreation facilities to address gaps in the network of council-owned community facilities

· Community Loans and Loan Guarantees (development to be confirmed)

Will govern the provision of loans and loan guarantees to develop community, arts, cultural and recreation facilities across the region.

· Rates Remittance Policy (being developed by Finance alongside Local Board Funding Policy)

Will govern the remittance of Auckland Council rates for rate-paying community organisations across the region

Key policy issue – multi-board/sub-regional activity

43. The CGP will frame a grants programme that operates at both the local and regional levels, in alignment with the decision-making allocation for the delivery of community outcomes. Grants budgets and decision-making will be held and targeted at the level each governing entity is responsible for. One of the key policy issues for the CGP is how to deal with activities and groups that are ‘sub-regional’, i.e. where the scope and/or scale of the activity is broader than ‘local’ but may not meet the threshold for regional.

44. Within Auckland Council a ‘local’ service or activity is generally defined as one that primarily serves and benefits the residents of a single local board area and is undertaken in that board area. However the boundaries of local boards are relatively arbitrary, and the local/regional separation does not reflect the reality of how much activity in the community is organised and delivered across a broader geographical area – e.g. the ‘west’ or the ‘north’.

45. Many community organisations can demonstrate that they serve or benefit multiple local board areas, reflecting the distribution of their offices / client catchment area / target population, or in some cases, alignment of their organisation’s catchment to legacy council boundaries. However, this does not automatically mean they are ‘regional’ and many would not qualify for regional grant funding. Others may fail to secure regional funding and wish to approach their local boards as a second option.

46. Under the council’s co-governance model and the allocation of decision-making there is no provision for sub-regional or multi-board decision-making. The position is that community service activity is ‘local unless’ it meets clearly specified criteria for being a regional matter. However the legislation does recognise that some activities and services may operate at this level and allows for local boards to work together, at their discretion, to make decisions on matters that may affect them jointly.

47. If grant funding is only provided at the local and regional level, this presents a significant issue and will potentially create a funding gap affecting many groups that span multiple board areas. Considerable time and effort would be required to make multiple applications (potentially to five or more boards), and organisations would face additional uncertainty and risk where local boards have identified different funding priorities. If some boards did not support an application that relied on all of the boards in that area supporting it, this could undermine the overall financial viability of the project, seriously disadvantaging organisations operating at this level.

48. From a community development and customer-centric perspective, it is therefore desirable to establish some mechanism to support multi-board or sub-regional groups and activity, and as noted earlier, there is precedent for a multi-board model in that some local boards are already meeting in clusters to make joint funding decisions.

49. A CGP discussion paper has been developed to provide a basis for engagement with governing body members, local boards and other key stakeholders on this and other issues in March/April 2014. Staff are keen to work closely with both local boards and councillors to arrive at a pragmatic solution that will respond to a very real gap for communities that currently exists with the council’s governance model.

Timeframes for development and implementation of CGP

50. It is proposed that implementation of new community policy is aligned with the LTP (i.e implemented from 1 July 2015) as this will enable any new funding or new budget structures to be implemented alongside the policy.

51. This timeframe will also provide the operational arms of council and grant recipients adequate time to implement and prepare for the changeover to the new policy.

52. What this timeframe mean however is that existing funding arrangements and schemes will need to roll over for the 2014/2015 financial year. This will need to be communicated to grants applicants and affected groups as soon as possible.

53. A summary of the proposed timeline for developing the CGP is as follows:

· Purpose and scope of CGP approved by the Regional Strategy & Policy Committee (RSPC) – March 2014

· Engagement with local boards, RSPC and key external stakeholders on the CGP discussion paper – March/April 2014

· Draft policy developed and approved by RSPC for public consultation – June 2014

· Consultation on draft policy – July/August 2014

· Revised policy completed – September/October 2014

· Final policy approved by RSPC – October/November 2014

· Implementation planning – November to June 2015

· New policy operative – from 1 July 2015

Consideration

Local Board Views

54. Grants are an important tool for local boards to support a wide range of community-led activity that benefits their communities. As a result, board members have a strong interest in any policy that has an impact on how they budget for and allocate grants.

55. In previous engagement on the CGP, local boards have raised concerns about:

· the importance of flexibility to allocate local grants against local priorities

· ensuring equitable levels of funding for local grants programmes

· understanding how grants budgets are distributed across the region versus other forms of community investment (e.g. community leases)

· the need to differentiate between discretionary grants and recurring grants for core services (via a partnership delivery model)

· creating a workable mechanism for funding applications that cross multiple board areas.

56. Staff will be seeking local boards’ input to the further development of the CGP in March via a series of cluster workshops to discuss the above issues and consider the policy options set out in the discussion paper. This will be followed by an opportunity to provide formal feedback on the draft policy in June/July.

Māori Impact Statement

57. Community grants will be of interest to Māori and Māori groups and organisations will be eligible to apply for funding at both local and regional levels. Grants have the potential to make a significant impact on Māori by helping to achieve outcomes in the Māori Plan.

58. In the current interim funding programme there is only one funding scheme dedicated to Māori outcomes (the Marae Development Fund in the former Manukau City area), although a number of Māori groups, activities and events have received Council grant funding through other schemes.

59. As part of the policy development process, staff will outline options for creating a dedicated Māori fund at the regional level – e.g. focused on marae development across Auckland – and/or embedding Māori outcomes across all funding programmes at the local and regional level.

60. Staff will be working with Te Waka Angamua and the Independent Māori Statutory Board (IMSB) to determine appropriate ways to engage with Mana Whenua and Mataawaka on the policy.

General

61. Engagement with key external stakeholders will be undertaken in April 2014 prior to the development of the draft policy in May, with wider stakeholder and public consultation undertaken in July/August once the draft policy has been endorsed for release by the Regional Strategy and Policy Committee.

Implementation Issues

62. Implementation is proposed to commence in the 2015/2016 financial year to align with the new LTP (i.e. becoming operative from 1 July 2015). This will allow sufficient time for operational teams and grant applicants/recipients to prepare for the changeover to the new policy and manage any implications.

63. Any budget and resourcing implications including any investment proposals for additional funding required for the regional funding programmes will be considered by the governing body through the LTP process.

64. Local board budgets will be determined by the LBFP and the LTP processes as outlined. If the revised LBFP is adopted, new local board budgets would take effect from July 2015.

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Signatories

Authors

Rebekah Lauren - Principal Policy Analyst

Liz Civil - Manager Community & Cultural Policy Central

Authorisers

Penny Pirrit - Regional & Local Planning Manager

Roger Blakeley - Chief Planning Officer

Dean Kimpton - Chief Operating Officer

Regional Strategy and Policy Committee

06 March 2014

Community Facilities Network Plan

File No.: CP2014/02097

Purpose

1. To provide an outline of the scope and purpose of the Community Facilities Network Plan which will guide council’s provision of community facilities in the future.

Executive Summary

2. The purpose of the Community Facilities Network Plan is to maximise the use and efficiency of Auckland’s existing network of community facilities, and to guide council’s provision of new community facilities and major upgrades in the future.

3. The intended outcome of the network plan is to ensure Auckland’s community facilities meet expected future demand, population growth and demographic change.

4. The scope of Community Facilities Network Plan covers community centres, venues for hire (halls), arts and cultural facilities, and aquatic and recreation facilities. There are 61 community centres, 132 venues for hire, 43 arts and cultural facilities and 48 aquatic and leisure facilities in the council’s community facilities network.

5. Work on the Community Facilities Network Plan has been divided into two phases; undertaking a current state review and developing the network plan.

6. A region-wide current state report has been completed, outlining what facilities we have, where they are located, who uses them and who doesn’t, how they are used, how they are governed and managed and key provision issues. A high level presentation of some key findings from the current state will be provided to the committee as part of this item.

7. In March 2014, workshops with local boards and the governing body are scheduled to present the findings from the current state report and to receive input on the key components for the development of the draft network plan.

8. The network plan will set out council’s strategic framework for the provision of community facilities, principles for provision, criteria to determine priorities and a development plan with key actions to address areas of need for new facilities, major upgrades and potential rationalisation. In addition, the network plan will also set out process guidelines for the development of community facilities and a toolkit for governance and management of community facilities.

9. A draft network plan is due to be completed in June 2014 so that any resourcing and funding implications can be considered as part of council’s Long-term Plan (LTP) process. Consultation on the draft network plan with local boards and key stakeholders will be undertaken in July and August, with a final network plan completed by October 2014.

10. It is proposed that a “bucket approach” to the LTP is taken, in which the overall capital investment for community facilities to meet provision standards over the next ten years will be identified as an overall figure. The network plan will prioritise areas where further detailed assessment is required to determine the actual amount of capital that needs to be committed to each project from the LTP bucket.

Recommendation/s

That the Regional Strategy and Policy Committee:

a) approve the scope of the Community Facilities Network Plan to guide council’s future provision of community facilities, noting a draft network plan is due to be completed in June 2014 and a final plan by October 2014

b) agree that the report be forwarded to all local boards for their information.

Discussion

11. Community facilities are key social infrastructure that contribute to building strong, healthy and safe communities. They provide space where communities can connect with each other, socialise, learn skills and promote and participate in a wide range of social, cultural and recreational activities. In this way, community facilities contribute to improved lifestyles and a sense of belonging, identity and pride among residents.

12. The development of the Community Facilities Network Plan will guide council’s provision of community facilities to meet future demand, population growth and demographic change and maximise the use and efficiency of the existing network of facilities.

13. The network plan is focused on 61 community centres, 132 venues for hire (previously known as halls), 43 arts centres, and 48 aquatic and recreation facilities.

14. There are a number of other facilities which provide social infrastructure, which are not in scope for the network plan but are being considered as follows:

· Libraries – the Libraries department has already commenced planning for library facilities and officers will adopt a collaborative approach for both work programmes

· Regional facilities - the provision of facilities operated by Regional Facilities Auckland (RFA) is being reviewed independently, however the location of amenities will be considered as part of the network plan, particularly where they serve community needs

· Community leases – there is approximately 651 leases of council buildings and/or land which are not in scope for this project. While these facilities do deliver community outcomes, these buildings do not function in a network and are therefore not in scope

· Schools & tertiary facilities, private facilities, marae, churches and other social infrastructure – the network plan will consider the location, programmes and services provided by these facilities to understand how they contribute to the provision of social infrastructure to meet community needs.

15. The community facilities network plan will focus on:

· Reviewing current provision including non-council provision and governance models

· Understanding needs, demand, trends, gaps, issues, growth

· Defining council’s rationale and objectives for community facilities

· Developing options and indicative benchmarks for provision

· Providing a development plan with actions and criteria to guide future provision.

16. The development of the network plan is divided into two stages. Stage 1 is the current state review and Stage 2 is the development of a region-wide community facility network plan.

17. The purpose of Stage 1, current state review, is to identify:

· What facilities are within the community facilities network

· Where these facilities are located

· Who is using these facilities and who is not

· What catchments these facilities serve

· How these facilities are governed and managed

· Any key issues with the current provision.

18. A region-wide current state report has been developed and will be presented to the governing body and local boards as part of workshops in March 2014. The workshops will provide an opportunity for elected representatives to better understand the needs, demand, trends, gaps and issues relating to the network of community facilities. The workshops will also seek input on key components in the network plan including council’s outcomes for community facilities, principles to guide provision and criteria to determine priorities for future investment in community facilities. The workshops will inform the development of the draft network plan.

19. The community facilities network plan will include:

· Council’s strategic framework for facilities

· Needs, key issues and gaps

· Principles for provision

· Criteria for prioritisation

· Community facilities development process guidelines

· A development plan with key actions for short, medium and long-term (addressing areas of need for new facilities, major upgrades or potential rationalisation)

· A governance and management toolkit.

20. The purpose of the Community facilities development process guidelines is to provide a consistent guide and process for assessing and making decisions on new and/or refurbished community facility space and buildings. The guidelines outline a detailed staged process - from evidence based needs assessment and options analysis, to feasibility, business case and concept design, through to implementation.

21. The outcome of the guidelines will be improved transparency and clarity of decision-making regarding the provision of community facilities. The guidelines are designed for multiple audiences including policy planners and operational business owners, elected representatives (both local board members and councillors) and contracted or fixed-term staff who may be procured to carry out segments of the process.

22. The governance and management toolkit will help decision makers identify and decide on best practice options regarding the governance and management of community facilities in the future. The purpose of this toolkit is to support effective governance and management practice in community centres, venues for hire, arts and cultural venues and sport and recreation facilities.

23. A draft network plan is due to be completed in June 2014 so that any resourcing and investment implications can be considered as part of council’s Long-term Plan (LTP) process. Engagement with local boards and key stakeholders will be undertaken in July and August and the final network plan completed by October 2014.

Consideration

Local Board Views

24. Cluster workshops with local boards will be undertaken in March 2014 to discuss the current state and draft principles, outcomes and criteria. These workshops have already been scheduled in local board calendars.

25. Further engagement with local boards will be undertaken in July and August seeking feedback on the draft network plan. This will be undertaken through formal reports to each local board.

Maori Impact Statement

26. Maori are one of the key user groups of community facilities and it is important to consider their needs in the provision of community facilities. The network plan will identify how the community facilities network will contribute to meeting the desired outcomes of Maori, which is articulated in the Maori Plan, in particular the improved health and wellbeing.

27. Staff are seeking advice on how to engage appropriately with mataawaka and mana whenua.

28. The provision of marae and kohanga reo have been mapped as part of non-council community facilities and the provision of community services from these facilities is being considered within the network plan.

29. Iwi are identified as a potential partners in the provision of community facilities within the community facilities development process guidelines.

General

30. Engagement with key stakeholders of community facilities will be undertaken on the draft network plan in July and August 2014.

Implementation Issues

31. The development of the community facilities network plan is being undertaken by officers from across the council including planning and operation teams.

32. Once the network plan is completed, any resourcing implications for future investment in community facilities will be considered by the governing body through the LTP process.

33. The network plan will identify any business improvements to improve the operation and management of community facilities, such as data collection.

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Signatories

Authors

David Shamy - Policy Analyst

Anita Coy-Macken - Principal Policy Analyst – Central

Authorisers

Penny Pirrit - Regional & Local Planning Manager

Roger Blakeley - Chief Planning Officer

Dean Kimpton - Chief Operating Officer

Regional Strategy and Policy Committee

06 March 2014

Recommended Strategy and Policy Forward Programme

File No.: CP2014/00522

Purpose

1. This report seeks the adoption of the recommended Auckland Council 2014-2016 Strategy and Policy Forward Programme.

Executive Summary

2. The Auckland Plan Committee adopted the Strategy and Policy Forward Programme in December 2012. The programme contained a mix of statutory and non-statutory priority documents and was designed to ensure that council focused on those areas of greatest strategic priority. The Regional Strategy and Policy Committee took over responsibility for the programme and in December 2013 agreed to review and reconfirm it for the next 3 years in March 2014.

3. The 2014-2016 recommended programme contains 28 priority items of which 18 documents are in the implementation phase. There are three proposed additions to the programme (Adult Entertainment Policy; Local Approved Products Policy; and Regional Pest Management Strategy Review).

4. It is recommended that officers continue to provide quarterly status updates and to recommend any changes to the programme to committee. It is also recommended that the committee reviews and reconfirms the programme in March of each year to ensure that it continues to reflect council’s strategic and statutory priorities.

Recommendation/s

That the Regional Strategy and Policy Committee:

a) adopt the Auckland Council 2014-2016 Strategy and Policy Forward Programme (Attachment A to the report)

b) agree for a proposed approach for making changes to the Strategy and Policy Forward Programme to be reported for approval in June 2014

c) agree to receive quarterly progress reports on the Strategy and Policy Forward Programme in line with the previous Auckland Plan Committee (CP2012/22722) and Regional Strategy and Policy Committee resolutions (CP2013/26522)

d) agree to review and reconfirm the programme in March of each year to ensure that it continues to reflect council’s strategic and statutory priorities

e) agree to the circulation of the report to the reporting committees, local boards and to the Independent Māori Statutory Board.

Discussion

5. In December 2012 the Auckland Plan Committee adopted (see Item 10 here) the Strategy and Policy Forward Programme (“the forward programme”). The 2012 forward programme contained a mix of statutory and non-statutory documents and was designed to ensure that the council focused on those areas of greatest strategic priority. The original programme was developed following a stock-take of the organisation’s strategy, policy and planning work. This revealed approximately 130 planned and “in progress” documents. The final programme was agreed through a comprehensive prioritisation exercise which considered:

· Strategic alignment

· Statutory and contractual obligations

· Decision making responsibility, i.e. governing body or local boards

· Inter-dependencies and sequencing of items

· Stage of development, i.e. makes sense to complete and implement

· Contribution to Māori outcomes

· Costs of development and implementation.

6. The Regional Strategy and Policy Committee is responsible for setting and approving the policy work programme for council. In December 2013 the committee agreed (CP2013/26522) to review and reconfirm the programme for the next three years at its March meeting.

7. The recommended 2014-2016 forward programme is attached (Attachment A). The revised programme contains three categories of document: strategies/strategic action plans; policies; and planning documents/frameworks. There are 28 items on the programme of which 18 documents have already been adopted and are at various stages of implementation. The programme is presented within the context of a number of other related council documents including the Unitary Plan, Long Term Plan, Local Board Plans and Area Plans.

8. The 2014-2016 recommended forward programme contains three proposed additions:

· Adult Entertainment Policy – this document is closely aligned with the Commercial Sex Industry Bylaw which is currently being developed. The policy will set out the council’s position on adult entertainment by referencing the relevant rules and regulations contained in a range of council documents such as the Unitary Plan. It is expected to be adopted by July-September 2014.

· Local Approved Product Policy (Psychoactive Substances) – this item responds to the recently passed Psychoactive Substances Act 2013 which gives local authorities the power to develop local approved products policies. This document is expected to be completed by January-March 2015.

· Regional Pest Management Strategy Review – this document will replace the current Auckland Regional Council strategy which expires in December 2014. Recent changes to the Biosecurity Act 1993 mean that the council’s pest management strategy must be consistent with a new National Policy Direction on pest management which is expected to be released in June 2014.

9. The three year time horizon of the programme helps to provide certainty on the priority documents required to implement the Auckland Plan and will help to inform the development of the 2015-2025 Long Term Plan. In addition, the programme will be used to drive and guide the work of the reporting committees and can be used for wider planning purposes including coordinating consultation, engagement and governance activities across related projects.

10. While it is expected that the forward programme will remain relatively fixed, it has been designed to respond to emerging strategic and policy issues. It is recommended that officers continue to provide quarterly status updates and to recommend any changes to the programme to committee. It is also recommended that the committee reviews and reconfirms the programme in March of each year to ensure that it continues to reflect council’s strategic and statutory priorities.

Consideration

Local Board Views

11. Local boards have received copies of the quarterly update reports on the forward programme since its adoption in 2012. Strategy leads are expected to engage with local boards as early as possible to ensure there is adequate time for boards to provide feedback. The forward programme helps to provide visibility of priority strategy and policy work and also helps to ensure that documents are developed in a more coordinated way. A copy of this report will be sent to all local boards.

Māori Impact Statement

12. Officers are expected to integrate the goals of the Māori Responsiveness Framework and to consider the Māori Plan for Tāmaki Makaurau as part of policy development. This is monitored through corporate performance standards which measure the number of documents on the forward programme which are drafted in consultation with Māori and include Māori outcomes. A copy of this report will be sent to the Independent Māori Statutory Board.

Implementation Issues

13. The development and implementation of items on the forward programme requires ongoing resource. Adopted strategies and policies remain on the programme to reflect their role in implementing the Auckland Plan and the significant activities associated with their implementation.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	2014-2016 Strategy and Policy Forward Programme	49

Signatories

Authors

Craig Glover - Principal Strategy Analyst

Authorisers

Grant Barnes - Manager - Auckland Strategy and Research

Roger Blakeley - Chief Planning Officer

Dean Kimpton - Chief Operating Officer

Regional Strategy and Policy Committee

06 March 2014

Auckland Council submission on Smoke-free Environments (Tobacco Plain Packaging) Amendment Bill

File No.: CP2014/03028

Purpose

1. To seek approval from the Regional Strategy and Policy Committee’s (the Committee) for Auckland Council’s submission to the Health Committee on the Smoke-free Environments (Tobacco Plain Packaging) Amendment Bill (the Bill).

Executive Summary

2. The Smoke-free Environments (Tobacco Plain Packaging) Amendment Bill (the Bill) passed its first reading on 11 February 2014 and has now been referred to the Health Committee for review.

3. Given Auckland Council’s commitments to make Auckland smoke-free by 2025 (as stated in the Auckland Plan and the Auckland Council Smoke-free Policy 2013), staff recommend that the council should provide a brief submission on the Bill.

4. Given the short timeframe between the first reading of the Bill and the agenda closing date for this meeting, staff have not had sufficient time to complete the draft submission for inclusion with this report. Staff will therefore distribute copies of the draft submission to committee members prior to the meeting on 6 March 2013. A copy will also be tabled at the meeting to ensure it is available on public record.

5. Staff recommend that Councillor Fletcher, as Chair of the Parks, Sport and Recreation Committee (PSRC) be delegated to approve any editorial amendments following feedback from the Regional Strategy and Policy Committee.

Recommendation/s

That the Regional Strategy and Policy Committee:

a) approve Auckland Council’s submission on the Smoke-free Environments (Tobacco Plain Packaging) Amendment Bill for submission to the Health Committee by 28 March 2013.

b) agree that any editorial amendments be delegated for approval by Councillor Fletcher (as Chair of the Parks, Sport and Recreation Committee) and the Chief operating officer.

Discussion

Background

6. The Auckland Council Smoke-free Policy (‘the Policy’) was adopted by the Regional Development and Operations Committee (RDOC) in July 2013. The Policy makes a commitment to work proactively with others toward making Auckland smoke-free by 2025.

7. While central government has the principal responsibility for tobacco control, the Policy recognises the council’s role in advocating for positive smoke-free outcomes for its communities.

Parks Sport and Recreation Committee

8. In May 2012, a meeting of Auckland Council’s chairs forum and the lead officers for the forums made a decision that reports relating to smoke-free should be presented to the Parks, Recreation and Heritage Forum (PRH Forum).

9. The responsibilities previously allocated to the PRH Forum have been transferred to the Parks, Sport and Recreation Committee (PRSC) in the current term of council. As such, staff recommend Councillor Christine Fletcher, as the Chair of PRSC, be delegated to make changes to the submission, following feedback from Regional Strategy and Policy Committee

Smoke-free Environments (Tobacco Plain Packaging) Amendment Bill

10. The Smoke-free Environments (Tobacco Plain Packaging) Amendment Bill (the Bill) passed its first reading on 11 February 2014. The Bill has now been referred to the Health Committee for review. The Health Committee is receiving public submissions on the Bill until 28 March 2013.

11. Given Auckland Council’s vision to make Auckland smoke-free by 2025, staff recommend that the council should provide a brief submission on the Bill

12. The purpose of the Bill is:

· to reduce the appeal of tobacco products and smoking, particularly for young people

· to further reduce any wider social acceptance and approval of smoking and tobacco products

· to increase the noticeability and effectiveness of mandated health warning messages and images

· to reduce the likelihood that consumers might acquire false perceptions about the harms caused by tobacco products.

13. To achieve this, the Bill would:

· prevent tobacco products from being manufactured, distributed, or sold unless they comply with the requirements of the legislation and any regulations made pursuant to it

· enable regulations to be made to set out detailed requirements for the design and physical appearance of any tobacco product (including packaging)

· amend existing regulation-making powers relating to health warnings on tobacco products to broaden their scope to include warnings of wider adverse social and economic effects and to enable positive health promotion messages

· create new offences with significant penalties to deter and punish non-compliance (and increase the penalties for existing offences related to advertising, promoting, or labelling tobacco products to bring these into alignment with the penalties for the new offences).

14. The Ministry of Health has also indicated that the legislation will not have an effect on intellectual property rights to register, own, and enforce trademarks and copyright in designs.

15. Given the short timeframe between the first reading of the Bill and the agenda closing date for this meeting, staff have not had sufficient time to complete the draft submission for inclusion with this report. Staff will therefore distribute copies of the draft submission to committee members prior to the meeting on 6 March 2013. A copy will also be tabled at the meeting to ensure it is available on public record.

Consideration

Local Board Views

16. Due to the tight timeframes, staff have not had sufficient time to engage with local boards. However, staff have included the views expressed by local boards through the development of the Policy

17. The following table identifies the local boards that had included smoke-free initiatives in their local board plans (2011-2013). It shows that 11 out of the 21 local boards had planned to incorporate smoke-free initiatives in their area.

Local Board	Smoking Initiatives/ Statements
Albert-Eden	· Will support smoke-free parks and reserves.
Devonport-Takapuna	-
Franklin	· Will advocate for smoke-free environments in parks, reserves and open spaces.
Great Barrier	-
Henderson-Massey	· Will support and progress smoke-free initiatives.
Hibiscus and Bays	· Will advocate for smoke-free parks, reserves and sports fields.
Howick	-
Kaipatiki	· Will support smoke-free parks in an effort to protect youth. However, the board will review the effectiveness of current smoke-free initiatives to determine cost effectiveness · will fund a feasibility study of a smoke-free policy for parks from existing budgets.
Mangere-Otahuhu	-
Manurewa	-
Maungakiekie-Tamaki	· At present, community spaces within Maungakiekie-Tamaki are smoke-free. The focus of the smoke-free policy is to reduce further harm from smoking and the likelihood of children starting to smoke · the board will look at opportunities to extend its smoke-free policy to town centres, parks, playgrounds and sports fields. At present, community spaces within Maungakiekie-Tamaki are smoke-free.
Orakei	-
Otara-Papatoetoe	· Will advocate for smoke-free events and public places.
Papakura	· Will take an advocacy role toward making all public places smoke-free in order to progress general community well-being.
Puketapapa	· Aims to make parks and reserves smoke-free.
Rodney	-
Upper Harbour	· Supports the promotion of smoke-free parks, playgrounds and sport grounds as part of a community well-being initiative.
Waiheke	-
Waitakere Ranges	-
Waitemata	· In support of the vision for a smoke-free New Zealand by 2025, the board will lead initiatives for smoke-free playgrounds, sport fields, parks, beaches and events · the board has allocated $2000 towards an initiative to make sport fields and playgrounds smoke-free by 2012.
Whau	-

Maori Impact Statement

18. The New Zealand Tobacco Use Survey (2009) found that the smoking rate amongst Maori (44 percent) is significantly higher than that of the non-Maori population (18 percent). The survey also found that the different between Maori and non-Maori female smoking rates is even more pronounced. The 2009 smoking rate for Maori females (48.3 percent) was three times that of non-Maori females (16.2 percent).

19. Through the development of the Policy, many stakeholders had highlighted the disparity between Maori and non-Maori smoking rates within the region as a cause for disproportionate health outcomes for Maori.

20. The Bill’s intent to reduce the appeal of tobacco products, reduce the social acceptance and de-normalise tobacco smoking, can impact on Maori smoking rates

General

21. There are no general considerations

Implementation Issues

22. There are no implementation issues.

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Signatories

Authors

Jasmin Kaur - Policy Analyst

Michael Sinclair - Team Leader, Regionwide Social Policy

Authorisers

Penny Pirrit - Regional & Local Planning Manager

Dean Kimpton - Chief Operating Officer

Regional Strategy and Policy Committee

06 March 2014

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

That the Regional Strategy and Policy Committee:

a) exclude the public from the following part(s) of the proceedings of this meeting.

The general subject of each matter to be considered while the public is excluded, the reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter, and the specific grounds under section 48(1) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 for the passing of this resolution follows.

This resolution is made in reliance on section 48(1)(a) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 and the particular interest or interests protected by section 6 or section 7 of that Act which would be prejudiced by the holding of the whole or relevant part of the proceedings of the meeting in public, as follows:

C1 Update on proposal to acquire an easement in Newmarket for access purposes

Reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter

Particular interest(s) protected (where applicable)

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

The public conduct of the part of the meeting would be likely to result in the disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding exists under section 7.

s7(2)(i) - The withholding of the information is necessary to enable the local authority to carry on, without prejudice or disadvantage, negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiations).

In particular, the report contains information on property values which could impact on negotiations with landowners.

s48(1)(a)

The public conduct of the part of the meeting would be likely to result in the disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding exists under section 7.

C2 Endorsement of proposed amendments to the Manukau City Council (Regulation of Prostitution in Specified Places) Bill

Reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter

Particular interest(s) protected (where applicable)

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

In particular, the report contains information relating to legislation that is currently before Parliament's Local Government and Environment Committee. The Committee has not yet reported to the House of Representatives. Standing Order 236 states that the proceedings of a select committee remain strictly confidential to the committee until it reports to the House. Standing Order 407(q) states that divulging the proceedings of a select committee contrary to the Standing Orders may be considered contempt of the House of Representatives..

n/a

s48(1)(b)

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

C3 Land Acquisition for Stormwater Purposes

Reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter

Particular interest(s) protected (where applicable)

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

The public conduct of the part of the meeting would be likely to result in the disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding exists under section 7.

s7(2)(h) - The withholding of the information is necessary to enable the local authority to carry out, without prejudice or disadvantage, commercial activities.

In particular, the report contains information which may influence property values.

s48(1)(a)

The public conduct of the part of the meeting would be likely to result in the disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding exists under section 7.

C4 Designation of Land for Stormwater Purposes

Reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter

Particular interest(s) protected (where applicable)

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

The public conduct of the part of the meeting would be likely to result in the disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding exists under section 7.

s7(2)(h) - The withholding of the information is necessary to enable the local authority to carry out, without prejudice or disadvantage, commercial activities.

In particular, the report contains a proposal to designate land which, if approved, will lead to council purchasing the land in the near future.

s48(1)(a)

The public conduct of the part of the meeting would be likely to result in the disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding exists under section 7.

Chairperson	George Wood, CNZM
Deputy Chairperson	Anae Arthur Anae
Members	Cr Cameron Brewer	Cr Mike Lee
	Mayor Len Brown, JP	Member Kris MacDonald
	Cr Dr Cathy Casey	Cr Calum Penrose
	Cr Bill Cashmore	Cr Dick Quax
	Cr Ross Clow	Cr Sharon Stewart, QSM
	Cr Linda Cooper, JP	Cr Sir John Walker, KNZM, CBE
	Cr Chris Darby	Cr Wayne Walker
	Cr Alf Filipaina	Cr John Watson
	Cr Hon Chris Fletcher, QSO	Cr Penny Webster
	Cr Penny Hulse	Member Glenn Wilcox
	Cr Denise Krum