|
Resolution number HM/2014/69
MOVED
by Member WW Flaunty, seconded by Member BA Brady:
That the Henderson-Massey Local
Board:
a) Does not support local rates
b) Notes a targeted rate is already available to enhance service
levels above an agreed standard service level, once standard service levels
are established
c) Note that local rates can lead to inequity and affordability
issues.
d) Note that local rates could lock in legacy council funding models
e) Notes that under the policy a single Board cannot add a budget
line to the locally driven initiatives fund as the entire budget line would
be divided between all 21 local boards, leaving the originating board unable
to fund the project. The Board believes this will reduce the ability of
individual boards to act strategically and will make operation of the policy
unwieldy.
f)
Notes that staff have advised the board
that the figures in the local board policy review document are likely to
change.
g) Points out that if the figures in the local board funding policy
review document change, the review document may not represent the final
outcomes at all.
h) The board is disappointed that the information presented to
decision makers is constantly changing. Presentations appear to be tailored to
specific audiences, with important information being omitted or changed.
Feedback is difficult to provide when the content changes regularly.
i)
Notes that the 10% weighting for
deprivation in the rate allocation scenarios does not make any discernible
difference to funding for deprived areas. A higher weighting for deprivation
is required to ensure deprivation issues are realistically addressed.
j)
Requests again that further general
rate reallocation scenarios increasing the deprivation percentage in 10%
intervals to 50% are presented to the boards.
k) Notes that council has moved towards a single rating system
resulting in the region being rated on an equal basis. However, equity in
asset and service provision has not yet been addressed
l)
Notes that locally driven initiatives
represent 1% of Auckland Council opex and local asset based services account
for 10% of Auckland Council opex, and recommends that an independent review
is undertaken to determine whether 11 percent of Auckland Council’s budget is
an appropriate share for local activities
m) Supports the 20 February 2014 Finance and Performance Committee
resolution directing staff to consider service level equity issues for local
asset based services as part of the development of the Long Term Plan and
asset management plans by engaging with local boards on this and reporting
back on a timetable
n) Requests that the engagement process and the work programme to
address service level equity issues (including asset provision) is agreed
with the local boards
o) Endorse the process and timelines for the Local Boards Funding
Policy, provided that the work on service level equity issues (including
asset provision) is progressed in parallel to the local boards funding policy
p) Request that the work programme to address service level equity
issues (including asset provision) includes a staging of the key
deliverables, with prioritised asset classes and service levels for review be
presented to the Local Boards Funding Policy Political Working Party on 6 May
2014
q) Requests that work be undertaken to:
i.
determine the appropriate amount of
budget for local boards to successfully deliver their role, noting the
current allocation is based on legacy council budgets
ii.
determine whether more activities and
the corresponding funding should sit in the locally driven initiatives
category
iii.
identify programme budgets to move to
local board budgets as current local budgets are dominated by overhead costs
with little funding for programmes.
iv.
Investigate and reallocate programme
budgets held by the Community Development, Arts, Events, Community Safety,
Planning, Economic Development, Streetscape and Environmental Services, in
particular, given the statutory and key role for local boards in all these
areas.
v.
investigate and improve the methodology
of allocating overheads across the local boards as currently different
approaches are used across activities
vi.
determine whether Business Improvement
District (BIDs) corporate overheads should be shifted to local asset based
services, as the administrative components (i.e. staffing) are allocated
based on the rate collected via the BID, and agreed by the BID and the
governing body, not the local boards
r)
Notes that current locally driven
initiative allocations allow for minimal discretion for most local boards and
any reduction will impact on existing service levels
s) Note that each of the general rate reallocation scenarios
(scenarios A, B and F) will lead to funding increases and decreases across
the local boards
t)
Strongly recommends that:
i.
asset based service levels are funded
by the general rate.
ii.
locally driven initiatives are funded
via the general rate as local initiatives are core council activities,
essential to cohesive communities and Auckland being the world’s most
liveable city
u) Recommend that with respect to the allocation methodology for
locally driven initiatives under general rate funding, agree that population
should be the main factor, as population tends to be a key driver of the
demand for services.
v) An adjustment for deprivation should also be applied, as areas of
deprivation have characteristics that may indicate a greater dependency on
local services
w) An adjustment for geographic area should also be applied
x) Prefers scenario B of the options provided, that takes account of
population, deprivation and geographic land area however, the board
recommends that further work be done to develop a more impactful weighting
for deprivation.
y) Forward these resolutions to the Local Boards Funding Policy
Political Working Party and the Finance and Performance Committee for their
consideration.
CARRIED
|
