Agenda of Extraordinary Meeting of the Ōtara-Papatoetoe Local Board

Ōtara-Papatoetoe Local Board

14 April 2014

Fees and charges for the hire of community venues, centres and arts facilities - Otara/Papatoetoe Local Board Agreement

File No.: CP2014/06016

Purpose

1. Local boards are required to set fees for the hire of local council-managed community venues, centres and arts facilities. The fee schedule will be presented as part of the 2014/2015 Otara/Papatoetoe Local Board Agreement.

2. This report seeks to inform the Otara/Papatoetoe Local Board of administrative changes to the fees and charges framework.

3. It also seeks the Otara/Papatoetoe Local Board’s confirmation of the priority activity types which will be eligible for a maximum discount (i.e. lowest fees per hour).

Executive Summary

4. Local boards have the allocation of setting hire fees for local facilities, to support delivery of services, projects, events and activities for the wider community’s benefit.

5. A project has been under way to develop a more consistent pricing structure for hire of council-managed community venues, centres and houses and arts facilities. Excluded from scope are facilities managed by committees or third parties, and bookable spaces in parks, sport and recreation facilities, or in libraries.

6. Local boards have been engaged in this project through a series of workshops, providing feedback to inform a new fee structure for the hire of local community facilities, with the following purpose:

“To ensure people can access safe and affordable spaces to pursue their interests.”

7. The project has resulted in three main changes:

a. administrative changes to standardise terminology and charge fees on an hourly basis

b. the Otara/Papatoetoe Local Board can now select activity types to receive discounts to reflect your local board Plan priorities.

c. proposed adjustments to the hire fees, to improve consistency across the portfolio of facilities within each local board area, and in similar facilities in adjoining boards.

8. The fees and charges schedule will be presented for adoption as part of the 2014/2015 Otara/Papatoetoe Local Board Agreement

Recommendations

That the Otara/Papatoetoe Local Board:

a) Confirms the activity types eligible for priority discounts for hire of local council-run facilities as per attachment A

b) Notes the administrative changes to facilitate implementation.

Discussion

Background

9. Local boards are allocated the setting of fees and discounts for hire of their local council-run community arts venues, halls, centres and houses. This supports delivery of services, projects, events and activities for the wider community’s benefit.

10. Historical variations in hire fees, terminology and procedures across the Auckland region led local boards in 2012 to request improvements to the customer experience for hirers of local community facilities, and to improve the transparency and quality of information and advice to guide local boards when you set and vary hire fees.

Local Board Engagement

11. At workshops during 2013 and 2014, local boards with facilities in scope had a number of opportunities to engage with the project team and to express their preferred approaches to the hire of local facilities. This report has been informed by the feedback received, and has led to a new hire fee framework and fee structure for the 2014-15 year.

12. Operational considerations have meant that not all views expressed can be incorporated during 2014-15. If you wish to consider more substantial changes to hire fees and charges in future years to ensure alignment across your portfolio, the Long Term Plan process offers an opportunity to consult local communities.

Changes to the Hire Fees and Charges Framework

13. The resulting new hire fee framework takes into account the size, condition and quality of each bookable space, levels of staffing, amenities available, and current patterns of utilisation of the spaces. Some adjustments have been proposed to fees for comparable facilities within each local board area or in adjoining boards.

14. The proposed fee schedule will be presented as part of the 2014/2015 Otara/Papatoetoe Local Board Agreement. While the proposed fee schedules are based on modelling within existing budget parameters, variances may arise due to changing demand and utilisation of facilities. The proposed changes are intended to be budget neutral for each local board, and in most instances, are considered minor in comparison with value for money.

Proposed Administrative Changes

15. In 2014 at a further series of workshops, local boards were informed of operational changes, including standardised fee-naming, and principles for applying discounts:

i) all bookings are treated on a first-come first-served basis

ii) discounts are given for regular bookings and for off-peak times

iii) all hire fees will be charged on a per hour basis, using six simple naming conventions, as in Table 1.

Table 1: Fee Naming Conventions

Naming Convention	Fee Comparisons
Standard	Full rate, no discounts
Standard Off Peak	Full rate, less a discount for time of day or week
Regular	Discount off standard rate for 10 or more bookings per year
Regular Off Peak	Discount off standard rate for 10 or more bookings per year, and a further discount for time of day / week
Local Board Priority Activities	Maximum discount off standard rate
Local Board Priority Off Peak	Maximum discount off standard rate, and a further discount for time of day / week

Consideration of Otara/Papatoetoe Local Board Priorities

16. In line with 2014/2015 Otara/Papatoetoe Local Board Agreement priorities, the local board is now asked to confirm their Local Board Priority Activities, i.e. those activity types the local board wishes to be eligible for a maximum discount.

Consideration

Local Board Views

17. This report reflects the engagement with the local boards

Maori Impact Statement

18. This will affect or benefit Māori communities in the same way it would any other community user in the local board area. No specific need for consultation with Māori was identified for the purposes of this report.

General

19. This report does not trigger the significance policy.

Implementation Issues

20. The new fee framework will be implemented from 1 July 2014. No particular implementation issues are anticipated. It is expected that the clarity and simplicity of the approach will enable more effective promotion of the facilities in the future.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Appendix A: Principles for bookings, fees and discounts for Otara/Papatoetoe Local Board	11

Signatories

Authors

Kat Tierney - Team Leader – Community Facilities, South

Authorisers

Louise Mason - Manager Community Development, Arts and Culture

Carol McKenzie-Rex - Relationship Manager

Ōtara-Papatoetoe Local Board

14 April 2014

Draft Annual Plan 2015/2015 submissions analysis and responses to information requests

File No.: CP2014/06123

Purpose

1. The purpose of this report is to provide analysis of the annual plan submissions from the Ōtara-Papatoetoe Local Board area, and further information to support the board in its decision-making.

Executive Summary

2. The Ōtara-Papatoetoe Local Hearings Panel heard submissions on the draft Annual Plan 2014/2015, including the draft Local Board Agreement 2014/2015 on 24 March 2014.

3. Local boards need to consider any amendments to Local Board Agreements 2014/2015, advocacy areas and any feedback on regional proposals prior to discussions with the Governing Body on 29 and 30 April, and 1 May 2014.

4. This report contains analysis of the submissions from the Ōtara-Papatoetoe Local Board area, including local and regional submissions.

5. Subject matter expert responses to requests for further information from the hearings are attached.

Recommendation/s

That the Ōtara-Papatoetoe Local Board:

a) considers any amendments to its draft Local Board Agreement 2014/2015, advocacy areas and any feedback on regional proposals arising from the special consultative procedure for the draft Annual Plan 2014/2015.

Discussion

6. The Local Government Act 2002 requires Auckland Council to undertake a special consultative procedure (SCP) as part of the development of the Annual Plan 2014/2015, including draft Local Board Agreements 2014/2015.

7. The submission period for the draft Annual Plan SCP ran from 23 January to 24 February 2014.

8. In total, the Council received and processed 1,967 submissions of which 33 were received from the Ōtara-Papatoetoe Local Board area. Eight submitters in the Ōtara-Papatoetoe Local Board area indicated they wished to be heard.

9. The Ōtara-Papatoetoe Local Hearings Panel heard submitters on 24 March 2014.

Subject matter expert responses to requests for information

10. Following the hearing, the panel requested further information arising from several submissions. These were sent to the relevant subject matter experts for response. The responses are attached to inform the Local Board’s decision-making (Attachment A).

Local submissions from the Ōtara-Papatoetoe Local Board area

Local issues raised in submissions

(Number of submitters indicated in brackets ( ).

11. Targeted rates for pool entry (2)

· One submission: against. Wants user pays to enter local swimming pools.

“Get rid of the free adult pool entry. They all afford phones, Ipads etc they can pay.”

· One submission: support board policy and targeted rate. “Fully support to keep free Papatoetoe pool and don’t mind the cost to my rates, BUT why is Papatoetoe so much more than the Mangere pool and leisure centre?”

12. Local parks (3)

· Papatoetoe Athletics club would like consideration given to improving Omana Park - seeing to prickles and potholes in the athletics track and upgrading the appalling state of the Long Jump pit. We also desperately need a 2nd Long Jump pit. All our neighbouring clubs - Manurewa, Papakura, and Pakuranga have 2 Long Jumps.

· I think you are going to spend too much money on parks. The amount should be reduced.

· Park improvement (cos you can't get sponsorship for them - they benefit all) Fund local art, sport events.

13. Local community facilities (4)

· Sistema Aotearoa request support from the Otara-Papatoetoe Local Board. This would take the form of sponsorship of the teaching and reduced rent for offices currently being used at Otara Music Arts Centre and Te Puke o Tara Community Centre, for 2014/15.

· Cambria Park Homestead (2) request: a feasibility study to improve the standard of the grounds at Cambria Park; information about the historical significance of the building and park to be recorded and displayed; confirmation that the current lease will be renewed on expiration in 2015.

· Local historical society welcomes development of Papatoetoe Museum and Arts Facility as the council facility where our museum is currently located is to be demolished in the near future.

14. Local planning & policy (2)

· Get rid of the booze outlets and legal high shops. I teach by a park and the boozers and high users are always there making a racket during school hours and night time noise is heard from my house 200 metres away.

· I support the reduction in the number of local off-licence outlets.

15. Local recreation initiatives (1)

· Increase activities and opportunities for social interaction for older people in our communities and promote and foster intergenerational activities and opportunities for each to discover the other to reduce ageism.

16. Local transport (1)

· Support for the local board aims - St George Street congestion needs to be looked into.

17. Local environment & heritage protection (1)

· Papatoetoe is becoming devoid of trees due to infill housing, Council should be planting trees on the berms to offset this.

18. Local street environment & town centres (1)

· Lawn mowing contractors at Hill Court and Otara Court are too frequent, waste of money.

Regional submissions from the Ōtara-Papatoetoe Local Board area

19. Stadium strategy (16):

· In general submitters supported the region’s stadium strategy.

· Stadiums that have long term agreements with a sporting code, Mt Smart Stadium - rugby league, Western Springs - Speed Ways, and Eden Park - rugby, stimulated higher submission responses. This is more likely to be associated with the activity rather than the stadium hosting the event. Several supported continuation of speedway at Western Springs.

20. Arts Festival (23):

· The majority of these submissions do not support Arts Festivals.

· Comments suggest, smaller and local arts festivals, to minimise disruptions to traffic flows and limit frivolous spend of rate payer’s contributions.

· However, arts festivals provide opportunities to showcase the region’s art, and support the local economy.

21. Regional arts culture and events (3)

· Advocate for council to accommodate and invest into a theatre company

22. Regional communities (2)

· Two issues highlighted - affordable accommodation and access to social networks for the elderly.

23. Regional environment & heritage (1):

· Stop cutting trees and polluting the region’s waterways and beaches.

24. Planning & strategy (2)

· Oppose high rise apartments, as these may develop into slums. Better to have homes with outdoor space for children to play.

25. Governance & democratic process (1)

· Dissatisfied with Mayor and councillors supporting him.

26. Rates (1):

· Against increased rates and favours zero increase.

27. Pensioner housing rent rise - Do not support (3)

· All are against increased rates and favour zero increase.

· We the residents of Hills Court are 100% against the 5% rent increase

· 5% increase too high, should remain as is.

28. Financial Strategy - Debt - too high (1)

· Favours spending cuts and selling council assets

29. Other Comments (4)

· Support council spending;

· Annual Plan 2014/2015 to also be translated into the Chinese language;

· Funds to repair Manukau Velodrome cycle track

· Council does a great job - I am happy with how you spend our money. Wishing Council all the best for 2014.

· I want to have a Chinese version of the draft annual plan 2014/2015 if Auckland Council can provide it?

· Cycling Auckland would like to request an allocation of funding for the following repairs and maintenance work to be carried out at Manukau Velodrome located at Manukau Sports Bowl.

Consideration

Local Board Views

30. The local board needs to consider any amendments to its draft Local Board Agreement 2014/2015, advocacy areas and any feedback on regional proposals arising out of the special consultative procedure (SCP).

31. A separate report on this agenda will address the requirement to agree a final balanced budget, advocacy areas for 2014/2015, and if required, resolve on feedback on regional proposals.

Maori Impact Statement

32. The draft Local Board Agreement 2014/2015 sets out the local activities that Auckland Council will undertake in the Local Board area over the coming year. These activities are likely to have an impact on Māori and iwi in the local board area. Māori and iwi have had the opportunity to submit on the content of the draft Local Board Agreement as part of the SCP process.

Implementation Issues

33. The content of the final Local Board Agreement will set out the local activities to be undertaken by Auckland Council in the Local Board area. Implementation issues will vary depending on the activities undertaken.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Responses to board requests for information	17

Signatories

Authors	Neil Taylor - Senior Local Board Advisor
Authorisers	Carol McKenzie-Rex - Relationship Manager

Ōtara-Papatoetoe Local Board

14 April 2014

Responses to board requests for information

	Request	CCO/ Dept	Response received
40	Who owns the house at the front of Cambria House (at 250 Puhinui Rd) and can the owner help to maintain the grounds of Cambria Park Homestead?	Property	(Kevin Marriott 31/3/14): I have attached below a map of Cambria House. The map shows the house in front of it but it does not appear to be on a legally defined Lot. Therefore there is no rates info recorded in GIS to say who owns it. If it is owned by Council, as I imagine may be the case if it is not a legally defined Lot, then it could be a residential tenancy by ACPL. In this case someone would rent it that would need to maintain their own grounds, and I cannot imagine them really being obliged to assist with the Cambria House grounds. Suggest follow up with ACPL if it is one of her residential tenancies.
41	The Park, Sport, Recreation, department to investigate the costs to improve the homestead’s fence, lighting at the front gate and general upkeep of the garden? And to report back to the board on their findings with an upgrade plan and costings for the board to consider.	Park, Sport, Rec-reation	(Malcolm Page 31/3/14): Work is already underway to improve the gardens and repair the fence. The details will appear on the board’s future work programme for consideration.
42	How can Age Concern Countries Manukau secure a long term and affordable lease agreement for Cambria House?	CDAC	(Kevin Marriott 31/3/14): Age Concern have a 5 year lease for Cambria House from 1/10/2010 to 30/9/2015 at $500 plus GST per annum rent under a legacy MCC lease. If they apply again next year and if they are successful in gaining another lease our guidelines say this would be for a 5 year lease with a 5 year right of renewal. The rent would be $1 per annum however there is a $500 per annum maintenance fee charged to assist Council with the upkeep of the building. These would be our recommendations to the LB.
43	How can the board support the Historical Society’s aspiration to relocate to 17 St George Street, Papatoetoe?	CDAC	(Kevin Marriott 31/3/14): According to GIS Council does own 17 St George Street and it is zoned as Business. So the first step would be to acquire the building within the community facility portfolio as a community lease asset. Naturally there would be costs associated with acquiring, owing and operating another building that would need to be established and agreed with the governing body.
44	How can the board support the above properties development to also include an arts centre and café?	CDAC	(Manoj Ragupathy 3/4/14): We are reporting this project to the Local Board for direction on the 28th of April. With local board approval, we will be undertaking a needs analysis and engaging with key stakeholders on the gaps in the provision of arts and museum services in the area. The results of this will be considered alongside demographic trends and the wider regional network of facilities and services to get an idea of the types of needs the new facility should meet. We are also investigating a specific property in Papatoetoe (which the Board is aware of) to check its suitability to house the new facility. Council is also developing a Community Facilities Network Plan which will influence all requests for new facilities or major upgrades. The Network Plan will determine whether there is a high-level need for the project and whether it should be included in the list of priorities for capital investment. The governing body will then approve the priorities and allocate funding through the long-term plan. Ultimately the decision to progress the facility will be made by the governing body based on the outcome of the planning work. The Board’s portfolio leader will be working closely with the project team in the planning. Any consideration of the types of spaces and services for the facility can be considered and tested by the planning team, and will be reported to the Board and governing body for approval.
45	What is the percentage of businesses who are in the greater East Tamaki Business Assn (GETBA) BID area, within in the Ōtara-Papatoetoe Local Board area?	Local Eco-nomic Development	(Janet Schofield 27/3/14): The Greater East Tamaki Business Association (GETBA) has undertaken a street by street analysis and identified 20% of GETBA BID area’s properties being in the Otara-Papatoetoe Local Board area, that is 399 businesses. The balance (80%) of GETBA business members are located in the Howick Local Board area. According to Statistics NZ data, there were 4792 businesses in Otara-Papatoetoe in 2012. The percentage of businesses who are in the greater East Tamaki Business Assn (GETBA) BID area, within in the Ōtara-Papatoetoe Local Board area is 8.3%. However, care should be taken with this statistic, since 53% of businesses in Otara Papatoetoe employ zero people (i.e. they are owner operators) and 27% employ 1 to 5 people. Whereas, 46% of workers are employed in firms with over 100 employees. These large employers are likely to be located in major business areas, such as East Tamaki. Also the business association database may not be a full record, and the Statistics NZ count includes holding companies and owner operators.
46	Sistema Aotearoa has asked for rent relief when using council facilities, in particular Te Puke o Tara Community Centre and Ōtara Music and Arts Centre: what would be the cost to the board of this, and what are the main component costs, based on the current or last year’s usage?	CDAC	(Kevin Marriott 27/3/14): CDAC are currently in discussion with all local board regarding the development and application of a new fees and charges framework for community centres, arts centres and venues for hire. The framework and recommended fee 14/15 fee schedule will be presented to the board for decision making in April 2014. This will provide the board with the opportunity to identify groups and activities which they believe should benefit from the most heavily subsided community spaces, including spaces that could be made available at no charge. I recommend that the Sistema Aotearoa request be consider in this context.
47	How can the Ōtara-Papatoetoe Local Board best advocate for funding of Sistema to be accepted as a regional programme entitled to governing body funding?	CDAC	(Lisa Traill & Leora Hirsh 28/3/14): Would this question be better put to LB Advisors? There is no regional fund currently, albeit pending the outcome of the Grants Policy and potential investment proposal to establish regional funds there might be in the next few years. Otherwise this is asking about advocacy. My understanding is that an investment proposal would need to go to the LTP, in lieu of the Annual planning round which is not happening this year, if either were to achieve regional funding.
48	What are the recent rent increases for Auckland Council elderly peoples housing in the Ōtara-Papatoetoe Local Board area?	CDAC	(Kevin Marriott 31/3/14): Through the draft annual plan, Council is proposing to increase all housing (housing for older persons) rental charges by 5% for 2014/15. For most tenats this increase equates to an increase of between $3-$4 per week.
49	What are the recent changes in NZ superannuation payments for couples and single people?	CDAC	(Kevin Marriott 31/3/14): A single person living alone receives superannuation of approx. $357 per week. Over the last 6 years superannuation has increased by approximately $80 per week
50	Does the Auckland Council policy on rent increases for elderly peoples housing align with changes to NZ Superannuation? How are rents determined, and what opportunities are there for the local board to comment? How have rents changed since 2010?	CDAC	(Kevin Marriott 31/3/14): Rents have not altered since 2010. In fact in most cases there hasn’t been a rent change for between 3 and 6 years. Part of the reason for this is that council is still working to the various legacy policies regarding the provision and operation of social housing. Council has requested that officers aim to address this situation through the LTP by “ reviewing the disparate charges and levels of service in Council’s social housing”.
51	What is the role of senior citizens advisory panels and the regional senior citizens forum within Auckland Council? Do they have a role in setting elderly peoples housing rents?	CDAC	(Kevin Marriott 31/3/14): Council has specifically requested that staff work consult with the seniors panel and housing tenants in accomplishing the review described above.
52	What outcomes are expected from Special Housing Areas in Auckland? How will Special Housing Areas affect elderly persons housing and affordable housing generally?	planning	(Angela Jones 28/3/14): I attach below some information on Special Housing Areas and affordability for the Otara-Papatoetoe Local Board (310314_Otara-Papatoetoe LB response on affordable housing). Please let me know if there’s more required. The HPO team met with the board on February 14 and March 17.
53	How can the Ōtara-Papatoetoe Local Board best advocate for funding of Auckland Regional Migrant Services Trust (ARMS) to be accepted a regional programme entitled to governing body funding?	CDAC	(Lisa Traill & Leora Hirsh 28/3/14): Would (this) question be better put to LB Advisors? There is no regional fund currently, albeit pending the outcome of the Grants Policy and potential investment proposal to establish regional funds there might be in the next few years. Otherwise this is asking about advocacy. My understanding is that an investment proposal would need to go to the LTP, in lieu of the Annual planning round which is not happening this year, if either were to achieve regional funding.

Question 40: Cambria House Measurements

Question 52: Affordable housing – additional information

How will Special Housing Areas affect elderly persons housing?

• The Housing Project Office (HPO) collaborates closely with the Property Department (ACPD) and the Community Occupancy Team (the team which looks after the Housing for Older portfolio) within CDAC. The Housing Action Plan provides an opportunity for enablement of redevelopment projects of existing Housing for the Elderly (HFTE) sites while maintaining the current number of units across the portfolio. The assessment of this portfolio is ongoing and the Housing Project Office is assisting ACPD, CDAC and ACPL in this project. It is anticipated that the first reports in this regard will be made in June.

• Potentially some of the HFTE portfolio may fall within a Special Housing Area (SHA) and this assessment overlay will be taken into consideration at the appropriate time to get the best possible outcomes for the HFTE portfolio.

• In accordance with the objectives of the Auckland Plan, and the provisions of the Unitary Plan, the HPO, in collaborating with the applicants, will develop masterplans for significant SHAs which will address a range of housing typologies and where possible provision will be made for elderly housing.

How will Special Housing Areas affect …affordable housing generally?

• The purpose of the Housing Accord and Special Housing Areas Act is to “enhance housing affordability by facilitating an increase in land and housing supply”

• In addition, each SHA has to meet one of two possible affordability criteria - either providing up to 10% of the total yield as “Relatively Affordable” (75% of Auckland Median House Price – at the moment that would be $428,000 ) or up to 5% of “Retained Affordable” housing currently valued at about $344,000 that should be acquired by Community Housing Providers.

• Council is working on how developers might be able to provide a mix of the two options above or developer agreements that result in the best affordable outcomes.

What outcomes are expected from Special Housing Areas in Auckland?

The council is now able to identify Special Housing Areas (SHAs) to quickly free up and service development capacity in existing urban areas, and land in new areas for homes.

Special Housing Areas aim to:

• Ensure that critical infrastructure, such as water, stormwater, wastewater and transport, is planned and delivered in the same place at the same time, i.e. zoned development is serviced

• Deliver more homes and require more affordable homes for Auckland families and first-time buyers without compromising quality

• Fast track consents and plan changes

• Contribute to achieving the Housing Accord target of 39,000 new homes or new sites to be consented over the three years the agreement is in place.

The 39,000 can be both inside the SHAs and outside, via our usual resource consenting processes. A dedicated Housing Project Office has been established within the council to identify, master plan and consent the SHAs.

Tranches 1 + 2 locations

Twenty-two SHAs were established last year and these are now legal entities. More will be announced in the middle of this year. The first homes within a SHA are likely to be ready to move into by the end of September this year.

Tranches 1 and 2: yields

As of the end of February 2014, we have had 22 pre-application meetings with developers within the established SHAs. We had also received 12 consent applications, of which 10 are now approved. These 10 have a total yield of 120 new homes and sites. The approved consents have been for SHAs in McWhirter Block, Hobsonville Point and Weymouth.

Based on the conversations we’ve had with developers and landowners to date, we estimate the scale of delivery of sites and dwellings from the first two groups of SHAs could be as follows:

a) Tranche 1 – 5,500 sites or dwellings over 10 or more years, delivering an average of around 500 sites or dwellings per annum

b) Tranche 2 – 10,500 sites or dwellings over 10 or more years, delivering an average of around 1,000 sites or dwellings per annum

These numbers assume developers are doing what they have said they would do if they are inside a SHA. The chart shows year by year delivery expected form Tranches 1 and 2.

For more information:

http://www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/EN/ratesbuildingproperty/housingsupply/Pages/specialhousingareas.aspx

Ōtara-Papatoetoe Local Board

14 April 2014

Local board decisions for 2014/2015 Annual Plan

File No.: CP2014/06129

Purpose

1. This report provides information to support local boards to make decisions required in order to finalise local board content for the Annual Plan 2014/2015.

Executive Summary

2. The draft Annual Plan 2014/2015 was released for public consultation in January, with local board hearings held in March as part of the special consultative procedure. Following consultation, local boards have considered all new and updated information now available in relation to budgets, advocacy areas and regional proposals for 2014/2015.

3. Local boards are now asked to:

i) agree a final balanced budget for 2014/2015 and outer years

ii) agree an updated set of advocacy areas to the Governing Body and CCOs for inclusion in the Annual Plan 2014/2015

iii) agree a local fees and charges schedule for 2014/2015

iv) resolve on any regional proposals being considered as part of the annual plan.

Recommendation/s

a) That the Ōtara-Papatoetoe Local Board:

i) agrees a balanced budget for 2014/2015 and outer years for the Annual Plan 2014/2015 that reflect the allocation of decision-making

ii) confirms an updated list of advocacy areas for the Governing Body and council-controlled organisations, for inclusion in the Annual Plan 2014/2015 (Attachment C)

iii) agrees a local fees and charges schedule for 2014/2015 (Attachment D)

iv) resolves that no feedback on regional proposals in the draft annual plan need to be referred for Governing Body consideration.

b) That the Ōtara-Papatoetoe Local Board notes:

i) local board budgets for 2014/2015 and outer years are required to balance in every year

ii) if budgets do not balance in every year, the Budget Committee will respond to any advice provided by the local board about how to balance its budget if required. If this has not occurred, budgets will be balanced by proportionately reducing the budgets for the local boards discretionary projects to address the overspend

iii) local board budgets will be updated in May to reflect local board prioritisation decisions, any final decisions made by the Budget Committee on 8 May, and updated central cost allocations. Updated financial statements for 2014/2015 will be provided to local boards in time for local board agreement adoption meetings in June.

c) That the Ōtara-Papatoetoe Local Board:

i) recommends that the governing body adopts for inclusion in the Annual Plan 2014/2015 a targeted rate set as a uniform charge per separately used or inhabited part of a property, on residential properties in the Otara-Papatoetoe Local Board area, for the purpose of fully subsidising entry to swimming pools for persons 17 years and over.

ii) notes the rate is estimated to be $31.34 including GST based on current cost estimates and the number of separately used or inhabited parts of a residential property in the Otara-Papatoetoe Local Board area.

Discussion

4. The draft Annual Plan 2014/2015 was released for public consultation in January, with local board hearings held in March as part of the special consultative procedure. Submissions are summarised in the accompanying report, “Draft annual plan submissions analysis and responses to information requests.”

5. Following consultation, each local board has reviewed its 2014/2015 and outer year budgets and considered what, if any, reprioritisation is required in order to finalise budgets for the annual plan.

6. This report provides information on:

· key budget refresh movements to local board budgets

· local board decisions required in April to support the annual plan process

· next steps to finalise local board budgets and agreements for the 2014/2015 Annual Plan.

7. Local boards are now required to make decisions following the consultation and reprioritisation phases to enable local board content to be updated and finalised for the Annual Plan 2014/2015. Local boards are asked to:

i) agree a final balanced budget for 2014/2015 and outer years

ii) agree an updated set of advocacy areas to the Governing Body and CCOs for inclusion in the Annual Plan 2014/2015

iii) agree a local fees and charges schedule for 2014/2015

iv) resolve on any other feedback relating to regional proposals being considered as part of the annual plan.

Budget Refresh

8. A budget refresh was undertaken in February to reflect the most accurate budget based on the latest available information and any changes in the business. Movements are based on factors such as performance year to date and forecast changes in the operating environment.

9. A summary of key areas of impact on local board budgets is set out in Attachment A. There is no impact on service levels as a result of budget refresh movements. Variance analysis for Ōtara-Papatoetoe Local Board is provided in Attachment B.

Advocacy action plan

10. Ōtara-Papatoetoe Local Board held a workshop to review advocacy statements on 22 March 2013, and a revised set of 22 advocacy statements was drafted. The revised advocacy action plan is attached (Attachment C) for approval.

Fees and charges

11. Fees and charges for council services and facilities were included with the draft Annual Plan in the special consultative procedure. Local fees and charges were considered further at a board workshop on 14 March 2014. The resulting schedule of local fees and charges is attached for confirmation (Attachment D).

Swimming pool funding - targeted rate

12. The draft annual plan proposed to continue the board’s policy enabling adults to use the Ōtara and Papatoetoe swimming pools without charge. The rationale is that the board considers that the use of swimming pools delivers important social and public health benefits. As in the previous financial year, the board proposed to fund this policy through a targeted rate on residential properties.

13. The swimming pool targeted rate proposal drew only two submissions, one in support, and one in opposition, as outlined in the accompanying report, “Draft annual plan submissions analysis and responses to information requests.” It is recommended that the board ask the governing body to proceed with the rate.

Next steps to finalise local board agreements

14. Discussions between the Budget Committee and local boards will occur between 29 April and 1 May.

15. Reports will be prepared for the Budget Committee meeting on 8 May providing an update on local board budgets, advocacy and other feedback and seeking any further decisions required to finalise the Annual Plan 2014/2015. At this meeting, the committee will formally consider local board feedback and advocacy.

16. Between 9 and 30 May, local board agreements will be updated and financial statements prepared. Financial statements will reflect budget prioritisation decisions made by local boards, any further decisions made by the Budget Committee and include central cost allocations, such as depreciation, interest and staff costs.

17. Local boards will meet to adopt their local board agreements between 9 June and 19 June, with the Governing Body meeting to adopt the final annual plan, including the 21 local board agreements, on 26 June.

Consideration

Local Boards

18. This report sets out the decisions local boards need to make in order to finalise budgets and agree advocacy areas for the Annual Plan 2014/2015. Local boards may also provide feedback on region-wide policies and proposals being considered as part of the annual plan.

Maori Impact Statement

19. Many local board decisions are of importance to and impact on Maori. The annual plan and local board agreements are important tools that enable and can demonstrate the council’s responsiveness to Maori. The local board agreement is based on the local board plan and the Long-term Plan 2012-2022 which have both been developed through engagement with the community, including Maori.

20. There is a need to continue to build relationships between local boards and iwi, and where relevant the wider Māori community. Ongoing conversations will assist local boards and Māori to understand each other’s priorities and issues. This in turn can influence and encourage Māori participation in council’s decision-making processes. In particular, the 2014 Local Board Plans and the draft Long-term Plan 2015-2025 will influence relevant annual plans and local board agreements.

Implementation

21. Local boards’ financial statements reflect the full cost of undertaking local activities within each board’s area. However, some of these costs are not directly under the control of local boards (e.g. staff costs, corporate overhead, interest and depreciation) and are therefore subject to change outside of the local board’s prioritisation process.

22. These central costs will alter as final budget decisions are made by the Budget Committee on 8 May. As these central costs change, the total funding for each local board will change by the same amount. These changes will have no impact on a local board’s level of discretionary funding.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Budget refresh - Summary of key movements	29
b View	Budget refresh movements	31
c View	Advocacy Action Plan 2014/2015	33
d View	Draft local fees and charges schedule 2014/2015	37

Signatories

Authors	Neil Taylor - Senior Local Board Advisor
Authorisers	Carol McKenzie-Rex - Relationship Manager

Ōtara-Papatoetoe Local Board

14 April 2014

Local board feedback on the Local Boards Funding Policy Review

File No.: CP2014/06323

Purpose

1. This report seeks formal feedback from local boards on the work to date on the Local Boards Funding Policy Review.

Executive Summary

2. Auckland Council is required to adopt a Local Boards Funding Policy. The current policy was developed within a context of retaining and reflecting legacy council service level and funding decisions. After three years more has been learned and a broader policy discussion can be undertaken.

3. The review seeks to find the most appropriate funding mechanisms for local board expenditure on asset based services such as parks, libraries, recreation and community facilities and non-asset based services (locally driven initiatives). During the course of the review, equity issues for asset based service levels have been raised, which cannot be resolved via the Local Boards Funding Policy. Resolving these issues will have implications that can only be addressed as part of the wider planning and budgeting process. The review recommends retaining the current funding model for asset based services, but considers options for changing to a fairer funding model for locally driven initiatives.

4. The timing for the review proposes public consultation in June 2014 to enable a policy to be adopted to form the basis of local board budgets for inclusion in the draft Long-term Plan 2015-2025. In order to meet that timeframe engagement with local boards needs to take place in March and April 2014. This will enable the council to consider local board views in determining a proposal for consultation with the public.

5. A report has been produced setting out options for the Local Boards Funding Policy and the key issues that need to be resolved. This report, “Local boards funding policy review” is appended as Attachment A to this report, and will form the basis of engagement with local boards and the Governing Body to inform decision making on the policy.

6. On 20 February 2014, the Governing Body agreed the parameters for engagement with local boards on the review of the local boards funding policy. These parameters include:

· no changes being made to the split between regional and local activities or to decision making responsibility for setting service levels for local activities

· time frame for the review

· structure of the policy that is to be considered

· Governing Body, via operational groups, will work on equity issues in regard to asset based service levels as part of long-term plan process

· options for a formula based funding allocation

· parameters for the use of local rates

· undertaking a review of the council rates remission and postponement legacy schemes that support community and sports related services, and natural, historic or cultural heritage, alongside the review of the Local Boards Funding Policy.

7. Informal engagement with local boards has been undertaken throughout February and March 2014, and formal feedback is now sought from local boards via resolution.

8. Following the engagement phase of the policy, all feedback will be presented to the Local Boards Funding Policy Political Working Party in early May, and subsequently the Governing Body when considering the draft policy for consultation in late May.

Recommendation/s

That the Ōtara-Papatoetoe Local Board:

a) agree to consider the policy framework for the Local Boards Funding Policy Review and provide formal feedback on the issues discussed and other associated issues.

Discussion

9. At the 20 February 2014 meeting of the Finance and Performance Committee^{^[1]}, the following resolutions were passed to guide the engagement phase of the Local Boards Funding Policy:

a) agree with the following parameters for the review of the Local Boards Funding Policy for engagement with local boards based on the attached report “Local boards funding policy review”:

b) note that the review of the Local Boards Funding Policy will not change decision making responsibility for:

i) the split between regional and local activities

ii) the setting of service levels for local activities.

c) note that the proposed model for funding asset based services is the same model that is currently used.

d) note that the Local Boards Funding Policy cannot resolve issues relating to differing asset based service levels and that the issue will be considered as part of the planning process for the long-term plan

e) agree to adopt the policy by August 2014 to enable clarity in funding decision making to provide predictability of funding in the preparation of local board plans and budgets for the draft Long-term Plan 2015-2025. This will require the policy to be publically consulted on in June 2014.

f) agree that the policy improve alignment between funding and expenditure decisions, by having separate funding mechanisms for:

i) asset based services, such as parks and swimming pools, where service levels in each board area are primarily driven by the Governing Body decisions on the number, nature and location of such assets and the budget available for both capital and operational expenditure on these services.

ii) locally driven initiatives, where local boards undertake activities for the benefit of their local communities, and control decisions on services, service levels and costs. (This may include asset related service level improvements and capital investment within limits approved by the Governing Body).

g) agree that the costs of operating and maintaining asset based services (as defined in f) (i)); as well as the consequential operating expenditure (interest and depreciation) associated with governing body investment in local assets; will be funded from general rates, in accordance with asset management plans and the regional budgeting process

h) agree the next stage of the review will consider options for funding locally driven initiatives (as defined in f) (ii)) by either general rates allocated on a formula basis, local rates collected in each board area, or a mix of general rates allocation and local rates

i) agree that options for determining the relationship between the Governing Body and local boards for the use of local rates are:

i) local boards advocate to the Governing Body for local rates and the Governing Body makes the final decision.

ii) local boards make decisions on the use of local rates, within constraints of regional policy determined by the Governing Body, and the Governing Body implements these decisions.

j) agree that the council’s rates remission and postponement legacy schemes that support community and sports related services, and natural, historic or cultural heritage be reviewed alongside the Local Boards Funding Policy to:

i) ensure consistency between local grants schemes and rates relief schemes

ii) develop a regionally consistent rates remission and postponement policy. Consultation on amendments to the policy should be undertaken alongside consultation on the draft Long-term Plan 2015-2025.

k) agree to direct 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 and engage with local boards on this and report back on a timetable.

10. A full discussion of the options for, and issues associated with, the development of the Local Boards Funding Policy can be found in the attached report “Local boards funding policy review”.

11. The following discussion summarises the issues related to the setting of parameters for engagement with local boards on the options for the funding policy.

Time Frame

12. The adoption of a Local Boards Funding Policy is likely to have an impact on the allocation of council budgets. It is recommended that the Local Boards Funding Policy be adopted by mid-August 2014. This would enable the council to prepare local budgets that reflect the new funding policy for public consultation in the draft Long-term Plan 2015-2025. Adopting the Local Boards Funding Policy in August will also provide local boards with clarity as to who has decision making authority on the level and source of funding for local activities during the finalisation of budgets for local board plans in September.

13. To meet this timeline, public consultation on the Local Boards Funding Policy would need to be carried out through a special consultative procedure undertaken in June 2014.

Scope: Policy structure

14. The Local Boards Funding Policy sets out how local activities are to be funded (the split between rates and fees and charges) and who should pay where rates are used. Decisions on service levels and how much funding is available are made when budgets are prepared each year. The review of the Local Boards Funding Policy does not set, or seek to change, decision making responsibility for:

· the split between regional and local activities

· the setting of service levels for local activities.

15. Expenditure on local activities can be either capital or operational in nature. Capital expenditure is debt funded, but the ongoing costs associated with this expenditure, such as interest charges, depreciation, staff, consumables and maintenance are operational costs. Local boards allocated capital funding to deliver governing body investment decisions on local assets, are also allocated the consequential operational expenditure associated with that capital expenditure. Operational expenditure is funded from local fees and charges and rates. The rate requirement is therefore gross operational expenditure, less fees, charges and other revenue.

16. The ability to undertake capital investment depends on the ability to service the subsequent operational costs. While the Local Boards Funding Policy focuses on funding of operating expenditure, it captures capital decisions by including the subsequent operating costs.

17. Good public policy links decisions on tax with decisions on expenditure (i.e. service levels). Where possible this review has identified where better alignment can be made between funding decisions and decisions on levels of service. This has resulted in a policy framework that differentiates between:

· asset based services such as those associated with parks, swimming pools and community facilities where the Governing Body makes decisions on the location, nature and number of local assets and matches this with funding

· locally driven initiatives, where local boards undertake activities for the benefit of their local communities, and control decisions on who gets funding and the services and service levels to be delivered.

18. The table following describes the Governing Body’s and local boards’ decision making roles in relation to asset based services and locally driven initiatives.

	Governing body role	Local board role
Asset based services	· Allocates capital funding to local boards in accordance with its decisions on new local assets and major upgrades. · Decides approximate location, budget and scope for these projects · Governing body decisions on investment will be guided by regional strategies, which should identify funding priorities based on the need to address service gaps and growth	· Engaged and provide feedback on governing body decisions · Engaged and provide feedback on regional strategies · Decide precise location of new assets · Agrees design of project within scope set by the Governing Body. Can propose to fund increases to project scope as locally driven initiatives · Oversees delivery of project
Asset based services	· Allocates operational expenditure to enable local boards to operate and maintain their local assets in accordance with the asset management plans · Approves asset management plans	· Engaged in development of asset management plans · Operate and maintain local assets in accordance with the asset management plans · Can fund asset related service level improvements as locally driven initiatives
Locally driven initiatives	Approve or reject locally driven projects that exceed governing body set limits on local board capital investment	· Can undertake capital projects within limits set by the Governing Body · May undertake capital projects over limits set by the Governing Body with approval from the Governing Body
Locally driven initiatives		· Decide services and service levels to be provided for community and allocates operating budgets accordingly · Oversee delivery of local services · Can fund asset related service level improvements

19. The review proposes that the existing model for funding asset based services be retained as there is no merit in alternative options for funding these. Under this model asset based services will continue to be funded from general rates. As the distribution of asset based service costs between boards does not align with factors such as local board population size, then funding on this basis will not ensure that local boards can maintain their asset base. There is also:

· a poor relationship between the user catchment for many asset based services and local board populations

· using local rates to fund asset based services would be inequitable, and for some boards unsustainable.

20. Under this funding model, the Governing Body determines how much funding is available to fund agreed service level standards. The Governing Body also has the ability to set regional policies on fees and user charges such as free entry to swimming pools for under 17’s. Local boards undertake an advocacy role in changing agreed service levels and will be engaged in the development of the regional strategies on asset based services that will guide governing body decisions on future investment in assets.

21. Local boards also have decision making on how asset based services are delivered and operated in their board area. They may make decisions on the level of fees and charges within any regional policy set by the Governing Body. In doing so they receive the benefit of increased revenue or fund any shortfall from other funding sources.

22. During the course of the review, equity issues for asset based service levels have been raised which cannot be resolved via the Local Boards Funding Policy. Resolving these issues will have implications that can only be addressed as part of the wider planning and budgeting process and will be considered when developing the long-term plan. As part of this process, local boards will be engaged in the development of asset management plans (AMPs) that will determine service levels and capital programmes for asset based services. Engagement with local boards on the AMPs is currently planned to begin March 2014.

23. Under the current funding model, funding for locally driven initiatives reflects decisions on service levels made by former councils. The review has found that equity in funding for locally driven initiatives between local boards can be improved in one of three ways. These are by using:

· general rates allocated to local boards based on factors such as local board population size, possibly adjusted for factors such as deprivation and remoteness

· local rates collected within each board area

· a combination of general rates allocation and local rates.

24. Under a general rate allocation model the amount of locally driven initiative funding available to each local board is determined by the Governing Body. This is affected by decisions made by the Governing Body on the total level of locally driven initiatives funding available each year and the formula used to allocate this to each local board.

25. A general rate allocation model will see a redistribution of funding between local boards; some will receive more funding while others will receive less. A local board that receives less funding will then have the option to reduce expenditure or to seek an increase in revenue from fees and charges or from local rates.

26. Under a local rate model, funding for locally driven initiatives is provided entirely from a local rate. The level of funding required from the local rate is determined by the decisions on local fees, charges, services and service levels made by the local board. The local rate will show as a separate line item on the rates invoice.

27. A combined model will part fund locally driven initiatives via a general rate allocation with the remainder of the funding provided by a local rate.

28. The proposed Local Boards Funding Policy structure for funding operational expenditure is as follows:

Funding for asset based services

The cost of operating and maintaining asset based services is funded from general rates, and fees and charges revenue associated with individual assets. Funding is allocated to local boards in accordance with asset management plans and the regional budgeting process.

Funding for locally driven initiatives

Locally driven initiatives will be funded from local fees and charges associated with these activities, and from rates funding. There are three options for rates funding locally driven

initiatives:

· general rates allocated to local boards based on factors such as local board population size, possibly adjusted for factors such as deprivation and remoteness

· local rates collected within each board area

· a combination of general rates allocation and local rates.

29. The above structure for the funding policy was agreed by the Governing Body for engagement with local boards. The focus for engagement is on how to best fund the locally driven initiatives component of the policy.

Scope: how local rates are used

30. The use of local rates is an option under any funding model. The review of the local board funding policy provides the opportunity to have greater clarity in the roles that the Governing Body and local boards play in setting local rates. This is particularly relevant where funding decisions are aligned with decisions on levels of service. Legislation constrains this process in that only the Governing Body can set a rate. There are two options for determining the relationship between the Governing Body and local boards, these are:

· local boards advocate to the Governing Body for new local rates or changes to those set by the Governing Body, and the Governing Body makes the final decision. This is a similar process that is currently used for funding of local assets.

· local boards make decisions on the use of new local rates or changes to those set by the Governing Body, within constraints of regional policy determined by the Governing Body, and the Governing Body implements these decisions. This is a similar process that is currently used for local fees and charges.

31. The Local Boards Funding Policy is the appropriate place to set this relationship. The Governing Body agreed the above as relationship options for engagement with local boards.

Policy implementation: Capital expenditure

32. Local boards currently have budgets for capital expenditure from three sources:

· governing body investment decisions on local assets

· legacy capital projects inherited from the previous councils

· an allocation of capital funding for boards to use at their discretion, beginning in the 2012/2013 year.

33. Governing body provided capital funds for investment in local assets are not discretionary for local boards. While each board has decision making on how specified projects are implemented within their area, projects must be delivered within the scope agreed by the Governing Body.

34. The review recommends that the Local Boards Funding Policy only allocates operational expenditure to local boards, and does not allocate capital expenditure. Local boards can still undertake capital projects within the limits set by the Governing Body, so long as they can fund the consequential operating expenditure (including depreciation and interest costs) from their operational budgets. Local boards would need to fund this expenditure either by reprioritising their existing budgets (through efficiencies or reduced service levels), or increasing their revenue from rates or fees and charges. This would see local boards funding capital investment in the same way as the Governing Body does.

35. The review recommends that the few remaining significant legacy capital projects be treated the same as governing body investment decisions. These funds will be considered nondiscretionary, on the basis that it was a governing body decision that these projects continue rather than be reviewed against regional priorities for investment. Consequential operating expenditure associated with these projects will be part of asset based service funding and will not impact on local board budgets.

36. The consequential operating expenditure associated with any remaining discretionary capital funds will be treated as funding for locally driven initiatives. This funding will therefore be included in any reallocation of funding for locally driven initiatives.

Scope: Locally driven initiatives - general rate allocation formula options

37. If the Governing Body determines the total level of funding to be raised through a general rate for locally driven initiatives, some form of allocation method or formula is required. The Strategy and Finance committee agreed at its May 2013 meeting that the following attributes of local boards be considered in the development of the funding policy:

· population

· deprivation

· factors related to rural/geographic isolation

· rates collected.

38. It is recommended that the general rate funding allocation formula be restricted to factors related to population, deprivation and rural/geographic isolation only.

39. Rates collected should not be used as a factor for allocating general rates funding. This is because general rates have an element of both tax and payment for services received. The distribution of rates across groups of ratepayers was a consideration in the development of the rating policy.

40. If funding local boards based on the level of rates collected in the local board area is desired, then local rates should be used. This would make explicit the link between and rates paid and services received, with each board area paying a local rate for the services undertaken by their board. It also directly links a local board’s decision making on service levels with decisions on the rate revenue required to be collected from their local community.

Scope: Transition

41. Under the proposed policy, locally driven initiatives can be primarily funded either through local rates, or by general rates allocated to boards based on factors such as population, or a mixture of the two.

42. A general rate allocation formula will result in significant change in the level of funding for some local boards. As such, the adoption of some form of transition process may be appropriate. The review process will present options for transitioning change as a result of the funding policy over three years, to align with the Long-term plan planning cycle.

43. The level of change associated with the adoption of local rates for funding locally driven initiatives is smaller. Local boards would also have the opportunity to adjust their local rates revenue requirement by adjusting their service levels. A transition process is unlikely to be of value in this case. However if a mixed funding model is adopted, using both general rates allocation and local rates, there may still be a need to transition the allocated portion of funding. Options for managing this change will be presented.

44. It is noted that Great Barrier Island local board will experience high levels of change in funding regardless of what funding model is adopted. Options for treating this board as a special case for funding will be presented by the review.

Policy implementation: Local fees and charges

45. Local boards have the right to set local fees and charges under the allocation of decision making. Under the proposed Local Boards Funding Policy framework, it is recommended that local boards will retain the benefit/bear the cost of any change in fees as a result of their decision making.

46. Local board decisions on fees and charges related to asset based services needs to be balanced against revenue expectations for those services. These revenue expectations inform the requirement for general rate funding for asset based services in the asset management plans. In this case, it is proposed that operating groups will advise boards on the expected revenue targets for their asset based services starting from the status quo. Local boards can adjust fees above or below the recommended target, and will then retain the benefit/bear the cost of any resulting change in expected revenue for the service.

47. In setting fees and charges, there is the risk that actual revenue will vary from expected revenue. If the revenue relates to an asset based service, the operating group will absorb any revenue variance, with any shortfall made up from the groups operating budget. The variance will then be used to inform revenue targets for the service in the following year.

48. The local board will bear the cost or retain the benefit of any variance in revenue related to locally driven initiatives.

Policy implementation: Rates remission and grants schemes

49. The council inherited from the former councils a number of mechanisms that support community and sports related services, and natural, historic or cultural heritage. These included the direct provision of services by the council, grants to third party organisations, and rates remission and postponement schemes.

50. In general the provision of these services and grant schemes have been classed as local activities, and continue to operate in those local board areas from which they originated. The rates relief schemes are part of the council’s rates remission and postponement policy, which is managed regionally, but continue to be available to qualifying properties within those former council areas that originally offered the schemes.

51. As a result of the council retaining these legacy services and schemes, local board areas are providing similar community services using varying delivery models:

· some boards have services, such as community facilities, provided directly by the council

· other boards have grants schemes directly controlled by the boards that are used to fund third parties to provide similar types of services, including the provision of community facilities; as well as to provide support to local community groups and other organisations

· in some board areas, community groups and other organisations have access to rates remission or postponement schemes that are not controlled by the local board in terms of eligibility criteria and approval.

52. The Local Boards Funding Policy has already considered the issue of the use locally controlled grants, compared to where services are being delivered by the council. It is proposed that under the policy, grants that are used to fund local facilities that in other areas are provided by the council, should be funded on the same basis as other asset based services. Grants that are used to fund more discretionary activities, such as one off grants to community groups, will be treated as locally driven initiatives, and be included in the pool of funding for these activities.

53. The Review of Community Assistance has now identified all sources of community funding assistance provided by the council, by local board area. This enables a review of the council’s rates remission and postponement schemes to be undertaken, to develop an approach to supporting community and other organisations that is consistent across the region.

54. The council’s rates remission and postponement policy should be regionally consistent. However most of the rates relief granted under the remission and postponement schemes for community and sports related services, and natural, historic or cultural heritage correspond to grants schemes relate to activities that have been treated as a local board responsibility when support is provided as grants. To ensure consistency, options for moving from rates based schemes to locally controlled grants schemes will be considered, though the financial impact of such a move will need to be assessed.

55. The Governing Body has agreed that the Auckland Council rates remission and postponement policy be reviewed alongside the development of the Local Boards Funding Policy to ensure consistency between local grants schemes and rates relief schemes, and to develop a regionally consistent rates remission and postponement policy.

56. Amendments to the rates remission and postponement policy will be publically consulted on alongside consultation on the Long-term Plan 2015-2025.

Engagement

57. Council staff will be undertaking engagement with local boards on the Local Boards Funding Policy through March and April 2014. The attached report “Local boards funding policy review” will form the basis for engagement on the policy options.

Consideration

Local Board Views

58. This report has been considered by and includes feedback from the Local Boards Funding Policy Political Working Party (LBFP PWP).

59. The purpose of the working party is to provide a joint forum of the Governing Body and local boards to provide guidance and direction with respect to the development of the local board funding policy. This includes development of comprehensive and robust options for the funding of local activities within the Local Boards Funding Policy.

60. This report seeks formal feedback from local boards to be considered by the LBFP PWP in early May and will form part if the consideration by the Governing Body when it adopts the draft policy for consultation in late May.

Maori Impact Statement

61. There are two ways in which Maori could be impacted by the options discussed in this report, these are:

· under a general rate allocation model the level of locally driven initiative funding available to a local board may change

· under a local rate funding model the level of rates paid may change.

62. Maori population is not the same across all local boards. How this will impact on Maori will depend on changes to funding available to local boards and how local boards respond to these changes. This may result in more or less funding being available or lower or higher rates being charged. The impacts by local board will be explored more at the next stage when the draft policy is being considered for consultation.

63. Within a general rate allocation model the choice of attributes may also have an impact on Maori. Some attributes that can be used in the funding formula, for example deprivation, have a greater alignment with the population distribution of Maori. A funding formula that had greater emphasis on these attributes will provide more funding to local boards with higher Maori populations. How this would impact on Maori would depend on the local boards choose to use this funding.

64. The review of the Local Boards Funding Policy will not change the Maori freehold land rates remission and postponement policy.

Implementation Issues

65. There are no implementation issues associated with recommendations in this report.

Attachments