Agenda of Rodney Local Board

Rodney Local Board

14 April 2014

ITEM TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE

1 Welcome 5

2 Apologies 5

3 Declaration of Interest 5

4 Confirmation of Minutes 5

5 Leave of Absence 5

6 Acknowledgements 5

7 Petitions 5

8 Deputations 5

8.1 Riverhead Tavern 5

8.2 Smokefree Policy - Cancer Society 6

8.3 Raeburn House 6

8.4 Waitemata District Health Board 6

8.5 Whangateau HarbourCare 7

9 Public Forum 7

9.1 Dog Policy and Bylaw 7

9.2 Youth in Rodney 8

10 Extraordinary Business 8

11 Notices of Motion 8

12 Ward Councillor Update 9

13 Warkworth Town Hall Restoration – Developed Design 11

14 Allocation of Community Art Programmes 2013/2014 33

15 Approval to seek expressions of interest for a community lease vacancy at Rautawhiri Park 35

16 Allocation of Funding for Youth Skills and Employment 43

17 Rural Voluntary Libraries Grants 53

18 Auckland Council Property Limited Local Board Six-Monthly Update 1 July to 31 December 2013 57

19 Local Board Transport Capital Fund - Overview of total programme for the current local boards 87

20 Local economic development July to December 2013: Rodney Local Board 101

21 Auckland Transport Update to Rodney Local Board, April 2014 107

22 New Road Name - Munford Lane 119

23 New Road Name - Laly Haddon Place 125

24 New Road Name - Poles Way 131

25 Fees and charges for the hire of community venues, centres and arts facilities – Rodney Local Board 137

26 Local board decisions for 2014/2015 Annual Plan 143

27 Draft Annual Plan Rodney Local Board 2014/2015 submissions analysis and responses to information requests 159

28 Financial Planning for Extreme Weather Events 163

29 Local board feedback on the Local Boards Funding Policy Review 171

30 Rodney Local Board input into the Council-Controlled Organisations current state assessment 183

31 LGNZ conference and AGM 2014 233

32 Establishment of a Rodney Local Board Youth Champion - Key Point of Contact 241

33 Alteration to portfolio name to Libraries and Information Portfolio 243

34 Urgent Decisions - Rodney Local Board Feedback to New Zealand Transport Agency Funding Assistance Review and feedback on Auckland Transport's Code of Practice 245

35 Deputation/Public Forum Update 257

36 Rodney Local Board Workshop Records 261

37 Consideration of Extraordinary Items

PUBLIC EXCLUDED

38 Procedural Motion to Exclude the Public 273

C1 Special Housing Areas: Tranche 3 273

1 Welcome

2 Apologies

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

3 Declaration of Interest

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

4 Confirmation of Minutes

That the Rodney Local Board:

a) confirm the ordinary minutes of its meeting, held on Monday, 10 March 2014, and the minutes of the Annual Plan Hearings – Rodney, held on Monday, 24 March 2014, as a true and correct record.

5 Leave of Absence

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

6 Acknowledgements

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

7 Petitions

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

8 Deputations

8.1 Riverhead Tavern

Purpose

1. Paula and Stephen Pepperell of Riverhead Tavern will be in attendance to address the Rodney Local Board on their plans to develop conference facilities, a specialist gift shop and a small boutique hotel next to the Riverhead Tavern.

Recommendation/s

That the Rodney Local Board:

a) thank Paula and Stephen Pepperell for their presentation on their plans to develop conference facilities, a specialist gift shop and a small boutique hotel next to the Riverhead Tavern.

8.2 Smokefree Policy - Cancer Society

Purpose

1. Representatives from the Auckland Cancer Society will be in attendance to address the Rodney Local Board on the Smokefree Policy and how this could be implemented in the Rodney Local Board are.

Recommendation/s

That the Rodney Local Board:

a) thank the representatives from the Auckland Cancer Society on how a smokefree policy can be implemented in the Rodney Local Board area.

8.3 Raeburn House

Purpose

1. Representatives from Raeburn House will be in attendance to address the Rodney Local Board on the outcomes achieved by Raeburn House in the Rodney Local Board area and the future plans and projects of Raeburn House in the Rodney Local Board area.

Recommendation/s

That the Rodney Local Board:

a) thank the representatives from Raeburn House on their presentation on the outcomes achieved and the future plans and projects in the Rodney Local Board area.

8.4 Waitemata District Health Board

Purpose

1. Representatives from Waitemata Health will be in attendance to address the Rodney Local Board on a new model of partnership with its communities and clinicians using a locality planning approach. A ‘locality’ is a geographical area that includes all people who live in the area. Locality planning aims to put local communities at the heart of how health services are planned and where and how they are delivered. One of the first localities is ‘West Rodney’ which includes the townships of Dairy Flat, Helensville, Huapai, Kaukapakapa, Kumeu, Muriwai, Parakai, Puhoi, Riverhead and Waimauku.

Recommendation/s

That the Rodney Local Board:

a) thank the representatives from Waitemata Health on their presentation on locality planning and the proposal to introduce this model to West Rodney.

8.5 Whangateau HarbourCare

Purpose

1. Representatives from Whangateau HarbourCare will be in attendance to address the Rodney Local Board on three issues;

· Sewage from Matakana into Whangateau Harbour

· Ongoing damage to the esplanade reserves by residents

· To request support for the Unitary Plan submission regarding the zoning of the Whangateau Harbour catchment.

Recommendation/s

That the Rodney Local Board:

a) Thank the representatives from Whangateau HarbourCare on their presentation regarding sewage from Matakana into Whangateau Harbour, ongoing damage to esplanade reserves by residents and Unitary Plan zoning of the Whangateau Harbour catchment.

9 Public Forum

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

9.1 Dog Policy and Bylaw

Purpose

1. Jill Parsons will be in attendance to address the Rodney Local Board on the summer beach times and seasons rules in the Dog Policy and Bylaw.

2. Currently the time and season dog access rules of the legacy Rodney District Council continue to apply for the Rodney Local Board area.

3. On July 2013, the standardised summer time and season of 10am to 5pm, Labour Weekend to 1 March will start to apply to future decisions about dog access, which are part of a comprehensive review being undertaken by Auckland Council. It is anticipated that the review of the Rodney Local Board area will be undertaken in late 2014/2015.

Recommendation/s

That the Rodney Local Board:

a) thank Jill Parsons for her presentation on the summer beach times and season rules regarding the Dog Policy and Bylaw.

9.2 Youth in Rodney

Purpose

1. Tracey Martin will be in attendance to address the Rodney Local Board regarding youth in Rodney.

Recommendation/s

That the Rodney Local Board:

a) thank Tracey Martin for her presentation on youth in Rodney.

10 Extraordinary Business

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

11 Notices of Motion

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

Rodney Local Board

14 April 2014

Warkworth Town Hall Restoration – Developed Design

File No.: CP2014/05805

Purpose

1. To seek approval of a developed design for the restoration of Warkworth Town Hall and approval to progress to the delivery stage of the project.

Executive Summary

2. The Warkworth Town Hall is an important municipal building for the local community. Since 1993, reports have identified that the Warkworth Town Hall has a number of deficiencies that need to be addressed. These relate to fire hazard, seismic risk and the roof being beyond temporary remedial action. The hall closed for public use on 31 December 2011 and the regular users of the hall were assisted to find alternative venues.

3. Following the development of restoration options and public consultation, council has made available $2.750M over financial years 2013/2014 and 2014/2015 to address the known problems and restore the facility for public use.

4. At a workshop on 16 December 2013, various concepts for the restoration/ redevelopment of the Warkworth Town Hall were presented to the Rodney Local Board. The Board indicated the following intentions for the Warkworth Town Hall. That;

· the building is ready for community use as soon as possible

· the preferred concept is to restore the existing hall, create new spaces that will house a multi-functional rehearsal room/green space, new toilets, office, meeting space, gallery foyer and a lift to the first floor mezzanine. The mezzanine will be upgraded with the control room brought forward and a multi-use area created

· staff proceed to detailed design and develop a ‘future proofed’ design that will, in time, provide the functionality of the preferred concept

· staff develop the design in such a way that it can be implemented in stages.

· staff work with the local board and the Warkworth Town Hall Advisory Committee to explore fundraising opportunities to enable the progression of the further stages.

5. The basic concept focuses on the restoration of the existing building and making it usable as a community space. Following a quantity surveyor analysis it is clear that this can be achieved within the available budget of $2.750M. The preferred concept involves a more significant addition to the hall and will require a further $1.250M.

6. The developed design, (Attachment A), has been workshopped with the local board and the advisory group. The design philosophy for the refurbishment is primarily focused on retaining the heritage features of the building, especially the original 1911 brickwork. It will retain the Deco style addition built in 1937 and add a further modern addition that will enable the relocation of the existing toilets and kitchen. The three historical stages of the building will remain distinct to ensure its history is retained and recognisable.

7. The gallery-foyer will provide a separation between the old and new, a naturally-lit link through the site from Alnwick Street through to the car park. The space is linked to the main foyer of the hall and is intended to work as an extension of the existing hall foyer space. It is designed as a dynamic open area that allows views of the Clark blocks on the east wall of the hall. It provides a flexible space that can be used for gatherings and displays and highlighting historical information about the hall.

8. A staged approach to the development is suggested that would see the first stage of restoration of the existing hall undertaken to make the hall structurally sound as well as the partial completion of a new addition that will include a future meeting room, toilet area and the structure for a lift installation. The total cost of this first stage is estimated at $3.037M and it is recommended that the extra $287,000 be underwritten with the existing local board community facilities renewal budget. Work is underway to secure the extra funding required for stage 2 through the advisory committee. The current kitchen would be retained in the first stage. Stage two of the project will see the removal of the old kitchen and construction of a new kitchen, green room and dressing room facility at a cost of $963K.

9. This report seeks approval of the developed design for Stage One to enable the project to proceed to the procurement and construction phase within the budget available. The key project milestones for this project are;

Developed design approved	April 2014
Detailed design completed	July 2014
Construction commenced	September 2014
Construction completed	August 2015
Hall reopens for public use	October 2015

Recommendations

That the Rodney Local Board;

a) approves the developed design attached as Attachment A in the agenda report and titled ‘Warkworth Town Hall – proposed alteration and addition - developed design’, dated February 2014 by Matthews and Matthews Architects Ltd for the restoration of the Warkworth Town Hall.

b) notes that the preferred concept will cost $4M and a staged approach to the
development is being recommended while further funding is sought by the community.

c) notes that the first stage will include the structural restoration of the existing building and partial completion of the proposed addition and is costed at $3.037M.

d) underwrites $287,000 from the Rodney Local Board’s community facilities renewal fund to the project to complete Stage One.

e) requests officers to continue working with the Warkworth Town Hall Advisory
Committee to secure future funding for Stage Two of the restoration project.

f) approves the project proceeding to the delivery phase with the following identified project milestones for Stage One;

Developed design approved	April 2014
Detailed design completed	July 2014
Construction commenced	September 2014
Construction completed	August 2015
Hall reopens for public use	October 2015

Discussion

9. The Warkworth Town Hall is an important municipal building for the local community. It was originally constructed in 1911 as a single storey hall and was later extended into a two storey construction in 1937. The structure was built using the T E Clark Patent Glazed Stoneware Hollow Building Blocks. Over the years there have been many building changes such as a new upstairs galley added in 1937 and designed to accommodate 217 people, a new kitchen block and a single storey addition at the front in 1971.

10. The building was registered with New Zealand Historic Places Trust (NZHPT) as a Category 1 Historic Place, registration number 7709 on 22 June 2007. Category 1 status is given to ‘places of special or outstanding historical or cultural heritage significance or value’.

11. Since 1993, reports have identified that the Warkworth Town Hall has a number of deficiencies that need to be addressed. These relate to fire hazard, seismic risk and the roof being beyond temporary remedial action. The issues were raised in a report to the Rodney Local Board on 12 September 2011.

12. As a result of a review of the earlier reports, a heritage assessment and an inspection of the Warkworth Town Hall that occurred in December 2011, a report was prepared to the Rodney Local Board on the issues with the building, and the risk to public safety arising from these. This report was discussed at the 12 December 2011 Rodney Local Board meeting, at which the Board resolved the following:

13.

b) That a comprehensive design solution and budget estimates be developed for the
Warkworth Town Hall to:

i) Provide for wider use of the building and safety of the public and remove the current limitation on the numbers of occupants through addressing the fire rating and egress from the building.

ii) Strengthen this building to meet current Building Code requirements as per the Auckland Council, Earthquake Prone Dangerous and Insanitary Building Policy and as this building has heritage significance, a higher threshold for upgrading is recommended.

iii) Replace the existing roof to prevent further water ingress and damage to the
structure of the building. (Resolution number RD/2011/271)

14. The local board also agreed that the existing tenancies be terminated and community use of the facility cease until the building was safe and fit for use. The hall closed for public use on 31 December 2011 and the regular users of the hall were assisted to find alternative venues. A business case was developed for public consultation with four options, and quantity surveyors appointed to undertake initial costings. The public consultation confirmed a preference to retain the hall for public use and to seek funding from council and other sources for it to be restored.

15. An investment proposal was prepared for funding of $2.687M over financial years 2013/14 and 2014/15 and received support through the annual plan process. With an inflation adjustment this budget is now $2.750M. Stage One is now estimated to cost $3.037M and $287,000 is the current shortfall between the current budget and the funding required. Stage One and Stage Two is estimated to cost $4.0M.

16. Following confirmation of the annual plan support and the funding available, council staff have completed the following actions;

· building structural analysis

· drainage inspection

· geotech investigation and report

· engagement of a Fire Engineer

· engagement of an Electrical Engineer

· engagement of an architect

· consultation with the Warkworth Town Hall Advisory Group

· meeting with the Historic Places Trust

· development and costing of four redevelopment concepts.

These actions were undertaken to inform the initial design exercise, to identify potential risks to the project and the costs involved in their mitigation. As a result of these actions it is confirmed that the restoration of the hall is viable and achievable within the funding available. The work has helped to identify community aspirations for the building and confirmed that it could be reopened as a functional community venue.

17. A workshop was held with the Rodney Local Board members on 16 December 2013 to update the Board on actions undertaken since the business case sign off and to present four concepts for the future of the Hall. The workshop sought to confirm the preferred redevelopment approach and funding.

18. At the workshop the local board indicated the following intentions that;

§ the building is returned to the community use as soon as possible.

§ the preferred option is Concept 2a. This concept involves the restoration of the
existing hall, a more significant addition to the hall that accommodates a multi-functional rehearsal space/green room, meeting space, office, toilets, lift and development of a multi–use area on the mezzanine floor.

§ staff proceed to detailed design and develop a ‘future proofed’ design that will
provide the functionality of Concept 2a.

§ staff to develop the design in such a way that it can be implemented in stages. That is to build option 1 first and then add on option 2a additions as further resourcing becomes available.

§ staff work with the local board and the Warkworth Town Hall Advisory Committee to explore fundraising opportunities to enable a progression of the preferred concept.

19. The basic concept primarily focuses on the restoration of the existing building and following a quantity surveyor analysis this can be achieved within the available budget of $2.750M. The preferred concept involves the restoration of the existing hall and construction of a more significant addition that accommodates a multi-functional rehearsal space/green room, meeting space, office and toilets. The current kitchen is removed and becomes part of the proposed addition and a lift is installed along with the development of a multi-use area on the mezzanine floor. There is a gallery foyer between the existing hall and these additional spaces. This concept has been evaluated by a quantity surveyor who has identified that it will cost $4M.

20. The developed design has been progressed and has been workshopped with the local board and the advisory group. The design philosophy for the refurbishment is primarily focused on retaining the heritage features of the building especially the original 1911 brickwork. It will retain the Deco style addition built in 1937 and add a further modern addition that will enable the relocation of the existing toilets and kitchen. The three historical stages of the building will remain distinct to ensure its history is retained and recognisable.

21. The gallery-foyer will provide a separation between the old and new, a naturally-lit link through the site from Alnwick Street through to the car park. The space is linked to the main foyer of the hall and is intended to work as an extension of the existing hall foyer space. It is designed as a dynamic open area that allows views of the Clark blocks on the east wall of the hall. It provides a flexible space that can be used for gatherings, displays and providing historical information about the hall.

22. This design will ensure that the building is structurally sound and meets earthquake standards. The stage area will comply with safety regulations and toilet facilities provided that will be able to cope with projected user numbers. There will be access to the mezzanine floor by lift and key operating systems upgraded for safety and efficiency. A pre consent meeting has been held with the aim of completing resource and building consent processes by April 2014. This report is seeking approval of the developed design to enable the project to proceed to the procurement and construction phase within the budget available. The key project milestones are;

Developed design approved	14 April 2014
Detailed design completed	25 July 2014
Construction commenced	1 September 2014
Construction completed	1 August 2015
Hall reopens for public use	October 2015

23. Ideally the budget of $4M would be available now to enable the full preferred concept to be undertaken. A staged approach is suggested that would see the first stage of restoration of the existing hall undertaken to make it structurally sound within the budget of $2.750M. Further construction of a meeting room, relocation of the toilets, lift installation and a foyer would be partially completed within the allocated 2.750M budget but for full completion of this and the mezzanine area, further funding of $287,000 would need to be secured. Stage two of the project will see the removal of the existing kitchen and construction of a new kitchen and green room alongside the new toilet and foyer addition at a cost of $963K.

Consideration

Local Board Views

24. Two workshops have been held with the Rodney Local Board to discuss the restoration priorities for this facility and the views of the local board have been incorporated into the restoration planning.

Maori Impact Statement

25. The restored facility will be of benefit to all members of the community including Maori.

General

26. Views from the community for the restoration of the Warkworth Town Hall have been sought through a community consultation undertaken following the development of a business case where four options were identified. The developed restoration plans have been workshopped twice with the Warkworth Town Hall Advisory Committee.

Implementation Issues

27. To meet the priority of returning the building to community use as soon as possible it is important that approval be received to proceed to the procurement and construction phase. The availability of further funding that would enable the preferred option to be developed, needs to be identified as soon as possible preferably before the procurement phase is initiated.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Detailed Design, Warkworth Town Hall	17

Signatories

Authors

Peter Loud - Team Leader Community Facilities

Authorisers

Louise Mason - Manager Community Development, Arts and Culture

Lesley Jenkins - Relationship Manager

Rodney Local Board

14 April 2014

Allocation of Community Art Programmes 2013/2014

File No.: CP2014/05360

Purpose

1. To seek approval from the Rodney Local Board for the allocation of $36,676 from the Community Art Programmes North budget line for 2013/14.

2. At the 9 September 2013 meeting of the Rodney local board it was resolved that:

“operational funding for arts centres in Rodney of $17,440 from the Community Arts Programmes budget line be divided equally between Helensville Arts Centre, Kumeu Arts Centre and Kowhai Arts and Crafts” (RD/2013/272).

3. At the Arts portfolio meeting on 27 February 2014 the allocation of the remaining $19,236 in the Community Arts Programmes budget line was discussed.

4. Arts Portfolio holders support the following allocations:

· $8,000 for two free Mātariki Concerts featuring The Modern Māori Quartet

· $5,000 to Kumeu Arts Centre to run six free visual arts workshops for youth

· $5,000 to Helensville Arts Centre to run free Sculpture workshops for youth.

5. With the above allocations $1,236 will remain in the Community Arts Programmes budget line. Council staff recommend that these funds be allocated before the end of the financial year and that this amount is evenly distributed between Kumeu Arts Centre and Helensville Arts Centre bringing the allocations to those two centres to $5,618 each.

6. Council staff support the suggested allocations of the Community Art Programmes budget line.

Recommendations

That the Rodney Local Board:

a) approves the following allocations from the Community Art Programmes budget line:

i) $8,000 to Mātariki Concert events featuring The Modern Māori Quartet

ii) $5,618 to Kumeu Arts Centre to run visual arts workshops with youth

iii) $5,618 to Helensville Arts Centre to run construction workshops for youth

Discussion

7. At the Arts portfolio meeting on 3 December 2013 members discussed the allocation of the remaining $19,236 in the Community Art Programmes budget line. Local board members requested proposals from Kumeu and Helensville Art Centres for community art programmes for youth, for a budget of $5,000 each. Local board members also requested a detailed proposal for the Mātariki programme for a budget of $8,000. With these allocations $1,236 remains unallocated and the funds need to be spent before the end of the financial year, therefore it is recommended that this amount is divided between Kumeu Arts Centre and Helensville Arts Centre.

8. At the 27 February 2014 Arts portfolio meeting, members reviewed proposals for Mātariki and proposals from the Kumeu and Helensville Art Centres.

9. Arts portfolio holders supported the allocation of $8,000 for two performances by the Modern Māori Quartet as part of Mātariki Festival 2014. The concerts would be free music/theatre/comedy/cabaret for all ages, presented at two Rodney marae. Estimated audiences per performance are 250-300 people.

10. Arts portfolio holders supported a proposal from Kumeu Arts Centre to run six free visual art workshops for youth. The workshops include: Drawing for Teenagers, Painting Workshop for Teenagers, Abstract Sculpture for Teenagers, Clay Workshop, Printing Techniques and a class for children and adults. Each workshop will be three hours with four sessions, run over the course of the month. The six workshops will be delivered with a budget of $5,618.

11. Arts Portfolio holders supported a proposal from Helensville Arts Centre for a free sculptural project where 12 participants will create three courtyard sculptures from recycled materials sourced from the Helensville Transfer Station. The project would take place over five three-hour sessions, and would be delivered with a budget of $5,618.

12. Staff presented a proposal for the IDenTity – Youth Dance Project. Free youth dance workshops would be run by two leading contemporary dancers, Justin Haiu and Tupua Tigafua. The project would take place over seven weeks, consisting of Saturday Youth Dance Workshops from 9.30am-3pm. Ages would range from 12 to 22, with capacity for up to 50 participants. A final free performance of students’ work alongside a performance by Justin Haiu and Tupua Tigafua would be held at the completion of the project. Estimated attendance at the performance is 250 people. The budget for this project is $10,000. Arts portfolio holders plan to meet with Community Development staff to discuss the funding of this project.

13. The Rodney Local Board Community Art Programmes budget line is made up of funds from a legacy North Regional Community Art Programmes budget.

Consideration

Local Board Views

14. The allocation of the Community Art Programmes budget line has been discussed at three Arts portfolio meetings between December 2013 and February 2014. Local board members requested proposals from local community art providers. These proposals have been incorporated into final recommendations.

Maori Impact Statement

15. The proposed Mātariki concerts by the Modern Māori Quartet will feature Māori performers and will take place in two marae in the Rodney local board area. These performances will be by Māori primarily for Māori and will be a part of the regional Mātariki Festival. Performances by the Modern Māori Quartet will activate local marae for Mãori and non-Māori in the Rodney Local Board area.

16. The workshops at Kumeu and Helensville Arts Centres, and the IDenTity – Youth Dance project, are open to all youth including Maori.

Implementation Issues

17. There are no implementation issues with the proposed community art projects.

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Signatories

Authors

Rebecca Kunin – Arts and Culture Advisor North/West

Authorisers

Louise Mason - Manager Community Development, Arts and Culture

Lesley Jenkins - Relationship Manager

Rodney Local Board

14 April 2014

Approval to seek expressions of interest for a community lease vacancy at Rautawhiri Park

File No.: CP2014/06053

Purpose

1. This report seeks the approval of the Rodney Local Board to advertise the community lease vacancy at Rautawhiri Park and seek expressions of interest from interested parties in accordance with Auckland Council’s Community Occupancy Guidelines 2012.

Executive Summary

2. The Rautawhiri Park Trust (the Trust) held a community lease with the former Rodney District Council for the area of 15260m² being part of Rautawhiri Park described as portions of Te Tou Kauri and Rautawhiri No. 3 Blocks (Attachment A). The term of the community lease was 19 years commencing 1 December 1994 with final expiry date 30 November 2013.

3. The Rautawhiri Park Trust (the Trust) surrendered its community lease on the final expiry date of 30 November 2013 and in accordance with the conditions of the document, all improvements subsequently reverted to Auckland Council as at 1 December 2013.

4. The area previously leased to the Trust comprises; eight netball courts, a sports pavilion and eight tennis courts, two of which are Astroturf (Attachment B). The facility is of significant value to the local community and is well utilised.

5. Council is seeking a new lessee for the site. In accordance with the Auckland Council Community Occupancy Guidelines 2012, it is recommended that the premises be advertised seeking expressions of interest from eligible community organisations wishing to secure a community lease.

6. Applicants must meet eligibility criteria including legal status, provide programmes or activities that align with the Rodney Local Board plan, meet identified needs in the area and have some alignment with the management philosophies of the reserve management plan.

7. The land known as Rautawhiri Park is held in fee simple by the Auckland Council as a classified recreation reserve and subject to the provisions of the Reserves Act 1977.

Recommendation

That the Rodney Local Board approves:

a) the advertising of the area of 15260m² being part of Rautawhiri Park including the building known as the Rautawhiri Park Trust pavilion and associated hard court surfaces, seeking applications from interested recreation and community organisations in accordance with the Auckland Council Community Occupancy Guidelines 2012 for a community lease.

Discussion

8. Rautawhiri Park is located on Rautawhiri Road in Helensville. The Rautawhiri Park Reserve Management Plan was adopted in 1998 which stated the intention to classify the reserve for recreation purposes. The park was later classified as a recreation reserve pursuant to Section 16 (2A) of the Reserves Act 1977.

9. The Rautawhiri Park Trust (the Trust) held a community lease with the former Rodney District Council for the area of 15260m² being part of Rautawhiri Park described as portions of Te Tou Kauri and Rautawhiri No. 3 Blocks (Attachment A). The term of the lease was 19 years commencing 1 December 1994 with final expiry date 30 November 2013.

10. The Rautawhiri Park Trust (the Trust) surrendered its community lease on the final expiry date of 30 November 2013 and in accordance with the conditions of the agreement, all improvements subsequently reverted to Auckland Council as at 1 December 2013.

11. The area previously leased to the Trust comprises; eight netball courts, a sports pavilion and eight tennis courts, two of which are Astroturf (Attachment B). The facility is of significant value to the local community and is well utilised by various sporting codes and many different community groups.

12. Council is seeking a new lessee for the site and in accordance with the Auckland Council Community Occupancy Guidelines 2012, it is recommended that the premises be advertised seeking expressions of interest from eligible community organisations wishing to secure a community lease.

13. The eligibility criteria for applicants includes;

· Legal status i.e. all applicants must be not for profit charitable trusts or incorporated societies

· Applicants must provide programmes or activities that align with and promote the strategic outcomes defined in the local board plan

· Meet the needs identified by the local board and the community within the local board area

· Have a clear and effective governance structure

· Demonstrate that the proposed activity shows some alignment with the objectives and management strategies for the Rautawhiri Park Reserve Management Plan.

Consideration

Local Board Views

14. In accordance with the Auckland Council Community Occupancy Guidelines 2012, it is recommended that the premises be advertised seeking expressions of interest from eligible community organisations wishing to secure a community lease.

15. The proposal to seek approval to advertise for expressions of interest was discussed with the Rodney Local Board Community Facility Portfolio Holders at a meeting on 17 February 2014.

Maori Impact Statement

16. There is no significant change or impact for Maori associated with the recommendations in this report.

General

17. The local board’s decision on this report will not trigger Auckland Council’s Significance Policy.

Implementation Issues

18. The costs involved with advertising to seek expressions of interest will be borne by the Community Development Arts & Culture Department of Auckland Council.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Attachment A Rautawhiri Park described as portions of Te Tou Kauri and Rautawhiri No 3 Blocks	39
b View	Attachment B The site to be advertised for expressions of interest as outlined in red	41

Signatories

Authors

Karen Walby - Advisor Community Lease

Authorisers

Louise Mason - Manager Community Development, Arts and Culture

Lesley Jenkins - Relationship Manager

Rodney Local Board

14 April 2014

Allocation of Funding for Youth Skills and Employment

File No.: CP2014/06571

Purpose

1. To allocate funding for youth skills and employment from the Economic Development budget line in the 2013-2014 financial year.

2. To outline the proposal from the Huarahi Makuru Trust to develop and provide a youth skills and employment programme in the Warkworth-Wellsford subdivision of the Rodney Local Board area.

Executive Summary

3. The Rodney Local Board approved a budget of $60,000 for the further development of youth skills, training and employment programmes in the 2013-2014 financial year.

4. The Huarahi Makuru Trust (the Trust) is seeking funding of $60,000 from the Rodney Local Board to co-ordinate, administer and manage a business mentoring/internship programme in the Warkworth and Wellsford areas. Young people participate in a twenty week internship programme with a local business mentor and gain NZQA qualifications during this time.

5. A primary goal is to increase the number of training and learning opportunities in the area by building relationships with new training providers and encouraging them to provide relevant courses, particularly at Level 3 NZQA and above. There are currently very few opportunities in Warkworth and Wellsford to obtain post-secondary qualifications.

6. Some of this work has been undertaken on a voluntary basis since October 2013 and there has been considerable interest from the business community, education providers and young people.

7. In order to grow the programme to its full potential, the Huarahi Makuru Trust wants to employ a paid co-ordinator.

Recommendations

That the Rodney Local Board:

a) allocate $60,000 from the 2013-2014 youth skills and employment budget line to the Huarahi Makuru Trust for the purpose of establishing a business internship programme in the Warkworth-Wellsford subdivision.

b) if supported, agree to grant funding to the Huarahi Makuru Trust subject to Council officers negotiating a funding agreement with the Trust.

Discussion

8. In the Rodney Local Board Agreement 2013-2014, a budget line of $60,000 from the Economic Development budget was approved for initiatives and projects that included:

· Provide programmes to create local job opportunities and develop skills for partnering with business and providers such as Springboard Community Trust

· Support youth employment and training initiatives, such as the Ngati Whatua o Kaipara housing project.

9. This money has not been allocated to date and if it is not spent before 30 June 2014 it will forfeited.

10. The Huarahi Makuru Trust is an incorporated charitable trust based in Warkworth that is focused on implementing a business linked internship programme for young people. The trustees include established members of the business community and the chair of the Board of Trustees of Mahurangi College.

11. The Business Linked Internship Scheme (b.l.i.s.) aims to increase education and training opportunities for young people in Warkworth and Wellsford. The programme provides young people work experience with a business mentor for twenty weeks and during this time they gain NZQA qualifications. The model is based on the Otorohanga Youth Connections initiative but has been adapted for local conditions with increased emphasis on education and training.

12. A real issue for young people in Warkworth and Wellsford is the lack of local post-secondary training opportunities. While a number of providers offer NZQA Level 1 and 2 courses (the very basic school leaving standard), there are few options for young people beyond this. They generally have to move away or travel long distances if they want to continue learning and gain qualifications after leaving.

13. A report commissioned by ATEED in September 2012, Job Skills Audit for Youth Employment in the Warkworth, Wellsford and Snells Beach Areas, highlighted the need to expand training provision in the north. It identified the lack of local relevant training as a barrier to apprenticeship pathways and limiting potential opportunities for growth in areas such as horticulture, engineering, early childhood, hospitality, health support, joinery manufacturing, mechanics and specialist driving.

14. While there are other organisations working to increase employment outcomes, they are generally funded to work specifically with marginalised young people who are struggling with a multitude of issues. The gap that b.l.i.s. intends to fill is the lack of training opportunities and practical career support for the 60% of “average” young people leaving the two local colleges.

15. The main focus of b.l.i.s. is to create and support relationships between young people and business mentors that will increase learning opportunities and ultimately lead to quality employment outcomes. The key components of their programme include:

· Developing a database of local businesses

· Hosting business champions events

· Organising individual meetings with potential businesses and assessing their employment needs

· Promoting the programme to young people

· Working with young people to establish vocational pathways including individualised education/employment plans

· Supporting young people to gain interview, presentation and employment practice skills

· Matching student employment interests with employer requirements

· Follow up and tracking student pathways to further education, training or employment

· Building relationships and collaboration amongst key stakeholders.

16. There is a particular emphasis in the proposal on building relationships with and attracting more training providers in the area to provide a wider range of local learning opportunities. This includes industry training organisations, technical institutes and private providers.

17. The first 12 months of the programme is essentially an establishment period with a focus on building relationships, developing systems and processes and gaining credibility. During this period the Trust intends to:

· Sign up 30 business champions

· Place 20 young people in internships/apprenticeships/cadetships

· Attract 8 NZQA accreditors.

18. Some of the work and collaborative relationship building outlined in the proposal is already underway as there has been a b.l.i.s. co-ordinator working on a voluntary basis since October 2013. This includes:

· Database of more than 300 local businesses created

· Business Champions Breakfast attended by 70 people

· Businesses (20) confirmed offer internships and career support

· Meetings with Mahurangi College, Mahurangi Technical Institute, Futureworks, Career Services, Ministry of Education, Industry Training Organisations and a range of other training providers

· Beginning of more collaborative working relationships across the education, training and business sectors.

19. This initial groundwork has been important in gauging the potential success of this model. There has been significant interest from businesses, colleges, training providers and young people.

20. The Trust wants to build on this momentum and is seeking funding to employ a paid b.l.i.s. co-ordinator to develop and implement the programme in 2014. Funding is sought to cover the period 1 April 2014 to 31 March 2015. Details of the proposed expenditure are on page 5 of the proposal (Attachment A).

21. From 2015, there are a number of other funding options the Trust intends to explore which include:

· Accessing the Auckland wide Youth Connections funding pool supported by the Tindall Foundation

· Partial funding (the pastoral care component) from the Youth Guarantees programmes – available where an NCEA certificate is offered

· Ministry of Social Development – may redirect current regional contracts to local providers.

22. The ability of the Trust to access these and other avenues of funding will be significantly enhanced if it has a successful first year of operation. This is commonly acknowledged as a difficult field to work in because of the complex interface of skills required (the ability to work with young people, training providers and businesses). Programmes that can show they are making a real difference to young people’s training and employment prospects tend to be both supported and replicated.

23. Both the Manager of the Business and Local Economic Development Planning Team and the Project Manager of Youth Connections are supportive of this initiative. They see it as well aligned with other Youth Connections activities and believe it has significant potential to achieve improved economic outcomes.

24. The Economic Development Team recommend that sufficient funding is allocated to allow the programme to operate effectively and meet its goals in the first year without the need to be constantly looking for additional funding.

25. If funding is approved, a funding agreement will be negotiated that will include clear expectations, outcomes and deliverables. It will also include processes for reporting back to the Local Board.

Consideration

Local Board Views

26. The purpose of this report is to obtain a decision from the Rodney Local Board.

Maori Impact Statement

27. The b.l.i.s. programme acknowledges that Maori are underrepresented in educational achievement outcomes and that Maori will be users of this programme. Discussions have been held with Ngati Manuhiri.

General

28. This report does not invoke the Auckland Council Significance Policy.

Implementation Issues

29. There are no implementation issues.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Youth Connections Programme for the Warkworth Wellsford	47

Signatories

Authors

Sue Dodds – Senior Community Development Project Leader

Tony Rea - Manager Community development & Partnerships – West

Authorisers

Louise Mason - Manager Community Development, Arts and Culture

Lesley Jenkins - Relationship Manager

Rodney Local Board

14 April 2014

Rural Voluntary Libraries Grants

File No.: CP2014/06160

Purpose

1. To seek approval to release the 2013-2014 grants to the rural voluntary libraries at Leigh, Point Wells and Tapora.

2. To seek approval to release the grants in the 2014-2015 and subsequent years without seeking approval from the Local Board, while the status quo remains.

Executive Summary

3. Grants have been paid out annually in the past to the rural voluntary libraries at Leigh, Point Wells, and Tapora.

4. These grants began around 1990 when National Library support to rural voluntary libraries was withdrawn. The three grants’ amounts were relevant to the size of the three local populations at the time.

5. There is budget for the three grants in the 2013-2014 Libraries operational budgets. The respective amounts for which this report seeks approval are:

· Leigh Library of $2,588

· Point Wells Library of $2,070

· Tapora Library of $518.

6. Auckland Libraries is aware of two other rural voluntary libraries within the Rodney Local Board area which operate independently of Auckland Libraries and which have not sought financial support.

7. In the future, Auckland Libraries may create a more coordinated and consistent approach to levels of support for rural voluntary libraries across the region. In the meantime, support comprising annual grants, bulk loans of library materials and professional advice will continue as status quo.

Recommendation/s

That the Rodney Local Board approve:

a) payment of grants from the 2013-2014 Auckland Libraries operational expenses

budgets to the voluntary libraries as follows:

i) to the Leigh Library, $2,588.

ii) to the Point Wells Library, $2,070.

iii) to the Tapora Library, $518.

b) that these grants may be released by Auckland Libraries in 2014-2015 and subsequent years without specific approval being required from the Rodney Local Board.

Discussion

8. In the past council has made grants to the rural voluntary libraries at Leigh, Point Wells, and Tapora. The historical context indicates that:

· The Libraries operational budget included funds for grants starting around 1990 when the National Library Service ceased site support visits to the libraries

· the grants’ various amounts were relative to the size of the three local populations at that time

· the grants’ amounts have not been reviewed since they were set up

· the payment process has not required grants applications being made to council by the rural voluntary libraries.

9. These grants were paid annually prior to the November 2010 Auckland Council amalgamation, and have also been released each financial year since then. The amounts in the past have been: Leigh $2,500, Point Wells $2,000, and Tapora $500. Since 2012-13 inflated amounts paid have been Leigh $2,588; Point Wells $2,070; and Tapora $518.

10. There is a slight variation to the way grants have been used to date by these three rural voluntary libraries but in general are used to fund book acquisitions and minor operating supplies and equipment. The Point Wells Library’s grant has all been used to purchase books and they have held a garage sale once a year to raise funds for other expenses.

11. In addition to the grants, Auckland Libraries provides ongoing support to these libraries in terms of bulk loans of library materials, and professional advice.

12. A snapshot of information about the three libraries is below:

LIBRARY	Memberships	Visitor numbers per month	Items borrowed per month	Total book stock	Volunteer hours per month
Leigh	137 families	N/A	254	4,490	26
Pt Wells	438	N/A	438	8362	132
Tapora	30 (approx.)	N/A	30 (approx.)	900 (approx.)	10 (approx)

13. Hours of opening are:

LIBRARY	Monday	Tuesday	Wednesday	Thursday	Friday	Saturday	Total hours open per week
Leigh		7 - 8pm	2 - 4pm			9.30 - 11.30am	5
Pt Wells	7 - 8pm		9am - noon		3 - 5pm	10am - noon	8
Tapora			10.30am - 12.30pm				2

14. Other known rural voluntary libraries in the Rodney Local Board area are the Kaipara Flats Library and the Puhoi Library. In the past, these libraries were also supported through the provision of professional advice and bulk loans of books.

15. There are over a dozen rural voluntary libraries throughout the Auckland region, with a range of different legacy arrangements with Auckland Council. Auckland Libraries proposes to continue support to these three rural voluntary libraries. This support comprises:

· annual grants,

· bulk loans of library materials, and

· professional advice.

16. Auckland Libraries may, in the future, create a more coordinated and consistent approach to levels of support for rural voluntary libraries across the region.

Consideration

Local Board Views

17. Supporting rural voluntary libraries aligns to the Rodney Local Board’s Plan 2011 priority “Engage with our diverse communities and provide for their social and cultural needs”. In particular, “Supporting each community to maintain its own identity and ensuring quality of life for all happens in many different ways. … It happens… through social and community services such as… libraries.”

18. The local board has sought further information to support the grant payments. At this time the further information has not been provided.

Maori Impact Statement

19. There are no particular impacts on Maori which are different from general users of the rural voluntary libraries.

Implementation Issues

20. There are no known implementation issues.

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Signatories

Authors	Mirla Edmundson - Manager Local Libraries North & West
Authorisers	Allison Dobbie - Manager – Libraries and Information

Rodney Local Board

14 April 2014

Auckland Council Property Limited Local Board Six-Monthly Update 1 July to 31 December 2013

File No.: CP2014/05858

Purpose

1. To update the Rodney Local Board of the activities of Auckland Council Property Limited (ACPL) for the six months 1 July to 31 December 2013.

Executive Summary

2. ACPL’s goal is to be recognised as a “centre of excellence” that brings commercial expertise and provides value for money to Auckland Council across a discrete property portfolio valued at approximately $1 billion. ACPL provides commercial expertise in property management, the buying, selling of properties and by strategically developing council assets. As a substantive CCO with a commercial focus ACPL provides crucial support to a council organisation that efficiently and effectively achieves social, economic, cultural and environmental outcomes for Auckland.

3. In order to achieve our goal and meet the expectations of the Mayor and the council, ACPL will work towards seven key outcomes over the next three years. These are:

· Properties managed for the council and Auckland Transport (AT) are fit for purpose and net returns optimised.

· Place-shaping partnerships are effectively planned and managed to project completion and in accordance with Auckland Plan objectives.

· ACPL identifies housing opportunities and collaborates with partners to deliver exemplar housing developments, particularly in the more affordable spectrum of the market.

· Council business interests are managed to protect long term value and achieve budgeted net return.

· Property acquisitions are undertaken in a commercially robust manner and in accordance with the council and AT agreed requirements and relevant legislation.

· Council and AT property disposals are undertaken in a commercially robust manner.

· The council is provided with a commercial perspective on planning and development initiatives to support effective implementation of those initiatives.

4. A summary of ACPL activities specific to the Rodney Local Board is outlined in the discussion section of this report with supporting detail included in Attachments B, C and D.

Recommendation/s

That the Rodney Local Board:

a) accept the Auckland Council Property Limited Local Board Six Monthly Update Report 1 July to 31 December 2013.

Discussion

Principles for working together

5. ACPL’s Local Board Engagement Plan (LBEP) states that a successful working relationship between local boards and ACPL is founded on the following high-level principles which will guide our engagement with the local boards:

· a shared understanding of and mutual respect for the roles, responsibilities and decision-making authority of local boards, the governing body and ACPL;

· transparent and timely communication with no surprises;

· understanding and acknowledgment of shared responsibilities between the parties;

· a commitment to a timely response to and resolution of issues raised by local board members;

· a commitment to early inclusion in the planning and decision making process where issues have a specific relevance to a Local Board;

· a commitment to flexibility in terms of engagement, recognising differing levels of interest and local relevance across the Auckland region.

6. ACPL’s commitment to the local boards is outlined in detail in our LBEP, which is attached as Attachment A for reference.

Workshops and Meetings

7. A schedule of Rodney Local Board workshops and meetings attended by ACPL representatives from July to December 2013 is attached as Attachment B. The list includes property specific meetings and workshops relating to general property management and the ongoing portfolio Rationalisation Process.

Property Portfolio Management

8. ACPL manages all non-service properties. These are properties not immediately required for service delivery or infrastructure development that are owned by Auckland Council or Auckland Transport. The current property portfolio includes industrial sites and buildings, retail tenancies, cafés, restaurants, offices and a substantial portfolio of residential properties. ACPL’s improved property knowledge and understanding has enabled it to optimise revenue streams and identify future opportunities.

9. The property portfolio has continued to grow during the last six-months and now totals 1095 properties. Rent arrears and vacancies were effectively managed throughout the period. During Q1 the average monthly collectable arrears rate and vacancies rate were respectively 1.35% and 2.93%. ACPL’s return on the property portfolio for the quarter ending 30 September 2013 provides the shareholder a net surplus above YTD budget of $2m.

10. Property portfolio information detailing current ACPL managed commercial and residential property within the Rodney Local Board area is attached at Attachment C of this report. The report includes each property’s classification or reason for retention along with additional notes to identify the nature of the property, such as a café within a library, or a residential property with tenancy in place. It has also been updated to show properties for which council directs that the operating budget and lease revenue will be included in local board budgets from July 2014.

11. A report indicating portfolio movement in the local board area is attached as Attachment D. The report details all new acquisitions including the reason for acquisition, any transfers and the reason for transfer, and any disposals.

Portfolio Review and Disposals

12. ACPL is required to undertake ongoing rationalisation of the council’s non-service assets. This includes identifying properties from within council’s portfolio that may be suitable for potential sale and development if appropriate. ACPL has a particular focus on achieving housing outcomes. Identifying potential sale properties contributes to Auckland Plan outcomes by providing the council with an efficient use of capital and prioritisation of funds to achieve its activities and projects. ACPL and Auckland Council’s Property Department work collaboratively on a comprehensive review process to identify such properties.

13. Once identified as a potential sale candidate a property is taken through a multi-stage Rationalisation Process. The agreed process includes engagement with; council, CCOs, local board and mana whenua. This is followed by ACPL Board approval, engagement with local ward and the Independent Maori Statutory Board and finally a governing body decision. A detailed process flowchart is provided as Attachment E.

14. Council is budgeting to receive proceeds from the sale of surplus properties of $80 million in 2012/2013 and $58 million in 2013/2014. The financial implication of not achieving these budgets would be higher debt and therefore higher interest costs compared to budget.

15. Properties currently under review for future use opportunities in the Rodney area are listed below. The list includes any properties that may have recently been approved for sale or development and sale by the governing body. Further details are included in Attachment C.

PROPERTY	DETAILS
906 Leigh Road, Big Omaha	Greenfield site adjacent to stream. Processing through Rationalisation Process to evaluate future use requirements and considerations.
35 Mill Road, Helensville	Legacy approved sale. Rodney Local Board is progressing a business case to retain the property for use for a housing refit and training scheme project with local iwi. The Special Housing Action Master-planning unit has confirmed that the Ngati Whatua business case fulfils the requirements of the Housing Action Plan. Council’s Solid Waste Business Unit (SBU) is leading investigation to evaluate whether the full site could be used by three groups (recycling transfer station, housing refit and training scheme and commercial lease by Downers). SBU to submit a business case to council’s Portfolio Review Steering Group April 2014 meeting encompassing retention of the full site and including consideration of the above described co-location options.
493 State Highway 16, Kumeu	Purchased for use as a cemetery by the former Rodney District Council. Processing through Rationalisation Process to evaluate future use requirements and considerations.
14, 18 & 19 Weza Lane, Kumeu	Cleared by Stormwater as no longer required for infrastructure purposes. Some town centre linkages and esplanade reserve to be preserved as part of any disposals process. Progressing through Rationalisation Process with disposal recommendation anticipated early-mid 2014.

Place Shaping and Housing Initiatives

16. ACPL is contributing commercial input into around 40 council-driven place-shaping and housing initiatives region wide. Involvement extends from provision of initial feasibility advice through to implementation, with projects ranging in size from $400,000 to in excess of $100million.

17. There are no ACPL led place-shaping or housing initiatives or proposals currently underway in the Rodney Local Board area.

Acquisitions

18. ACPL continues to support Council and Auckland Transport programmes and projects by negotiating required property acquisitions. All such acquisitions are funded through approved Council or Auckland Transport budgets. We also provide advice to assist with budgets, business cases and strategy to support an acquisition.

19. A total of 54 property purchases to the value of $8.9m were completed during Q1. The number of acquisitions under active negotiations at the end of Q1 was 300 (253 AT and 47 AC).

20. Recent council acquisitions have included;

- meeting open space requirements, particularly for subdivisions

- City Transformation projects

- Heritage projects

- Storm water projects.

21. Current acquisitions programmes for AT include;

- AMETI (Auckland Manukau Eastern Tamaki Initiative)

- CRL (City Rail Link)

- Te Atatu Road, Te Atatu road widening

- Dominion Road, Mt Eden road widening.

22. All properties were purchased within the valuation threshold agreed with Auckland Council and Auckland Transport.

23. Due to commercial sensitivities any Rodney Local Board specific acquisitions detail will be provided direct to the local board by the Auckland Council or AT project owner.

Business Interests

24. ACPL manages eight business interests region wide on council’s behalf. This comprises two forestry enterprises, two landfills and four quarries.

25. An update on ACPL managed business interests in the Rodney Local Board area is outlined in points below.

- Araparera Forest: The Araparera forest is a joint venture between the Maori Trustee, on behalf of the Landowners, and Auckland Council (AC), assigned from Rodney District Council (RDC), has been in place since 1984 and is for the planting and harvesting of a forest on 600ha of land in several parcels. Auckland Council Property Limited (ACPL) currently manages the Joint Venture (JV).

The share of the proceeds will be based on financial contribution to the JV inputs over the duration of the JV, with the RDC/AC contribution funded by a targeted rate from selected rate payers and the general rates. The AC share of the proceeds from the JV are to be spent on roads within the northern ridings of the ex-Rodney Council.

Once the JV is wound up and profits distributed, the landowners are expected to replant the land in a variety of trees.

The final harvest of the trees is now expected to be completed before June 2014, with the delay being as a consequence of access issues into the more difficult areas.

- Ti Point Forest: This approximately 14ha stand of trees is on the slopes surrounding the closed landfill on the corner of Leigh and Ti Point Roads and is due for harvesting.

Management is now expected to complete the harvest of the trees before June 2014, as the Kauri Snail population has been appropriately managed with some being transferred to the Auckland Zoo. The detail of the timing of the harvest and replanting of the land has yet to be determined.

Consideration

Local Board Views

26. This report is for the Rodney Local Board’s information and seeks the views of the local board.

Maori Impact Statement

27. During the past six months ACPL has further developed our Maori engagement initiatives. Our enhanced process engages with the 19 key mana whenua groups in the Tamaki region on three fronts: identifying cultural significance concerns regarding disposal properties, flagging commercial interests and development partnering discussions. ACPL also engages with relevant mana whenua in respect of development outcomes for ACPL lead projects. ACPL has additionally undertaken to be part of council’s Maori Responsiveness Plan pilot programme. The project’s key output will be an operational document outlining how ACPL will contribute to council’s strategic and operational commitments to Maori. The Current State Assessment phase of this project has been completed and we are now in the Improvement Planning phase. ACPL will advise the Rodney Local Board as appropriate of any specific discussions that arise in the local board’s area.

General

28. This report is intended to help ACPL meet its statutory obligations under the Local Government Act 2002. The relevant sections of the Local Government Act 2002 are noted below for information.

29. As provided in section 59(1) of the Local Government Act 2002, the principal objective of a CCO is to:

(a) achieve the objectives of its shareholders, both commercial and non-commercial, as specified in the statement of intent; and

(b) be a good employer; and

(c) exhibit a sense of social and environmental responsibility by having regard to the interests of the community in which it operates and by endeavouring to accommodate or encourage these when able to do so; and

(d) the CCO is a council-controlled trading organisation, conduct its affairs in accordance with sound business practice.

30. As provided in clause 1 of Schedule 8 of the Local Government Act 2002, the purpose of the SOI is to:

· state publicly the activities and intentions of a CCO for the year and the objectives to which those activities will contribute;

· provide an opportunity for shareholders to influence the direction of the organisation; and

· provide a basis for the accountability of the directors to their shareholders for the performance of the organisation.

Implementation Issues

31. There are no implementation issues.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	ACPL Draft Local Board Engagement Plan	63
b View	Schedule of Meetings and Workshops	79
c View	Properties Managed by ACPL in the Local Board area	81
d View	Property movemnet in the Local Board area	83
e View	Rationalisation Process Flowchart	85

Signatories

Authors	Caitlin Borgfeldt – Local Board Liaison
Authorisers	David Rankin – Chief Executive ACPL

Rodney Local Board

14 April 2014

Local Board Transport Capital Fund - Overview of total programme for the current local boards

File No.: CP2014/05986

Purpose

1. The purpose of this report is advise all twenty-one Local Boards of the current status of the Local Board Transport Capital Fund Programme, in particular the need to urgently identify new project proposals that will enable the total budget that needs to be spent in the electoral term of the current Local Boards to be spent by the end of June 2016.

Recommendation/s

That the Rodney Local Board:

a) urgently identify new project proposals for the Local Board Transport Capital Fund programme by 31 August 2014 so that subsequent initial assessment, detailed design including consultation and statutory approvals, and construction can be completed by 30 June 2016.

Discussion

Background

2. The total annual budget for the Local Board Transport Capital Fund is $10M. This was assigned to the twenty-one Local Boards based on population, except for the Waiheke and Great Barrier Local Boards who received nominated sums.

3. The programme commenced in September 2012 following resolution of the use of the fund by the Auckland Council Strategy and Planning Committee in August 2012.

Budget Considerations

4. One of the requirements of the Local Board Transport Capital Fund is that the budgets must be spent within the same electoral term. Budgets can be moved from year to year within the electoral term, subject to Auckland Transport having the ability to manage the cash flow, but carry forwards to subsequent political terms are not allowed.

5. The total amount spent on Local Board Transport Capital Fund projects in the 2012-13 financial year was $1.3M. This was due to the late start of the programme in that year so Auckland Council was asked to relax the “no carry forward” rule in this inaugural year of the programme. This one-off carry forward of the unspent balance of $8.7M was subsequently approved.

6. Therefore the total budget that must be spent on Local Board Transport Capital Fund projects in the current political term is as follows:

· The carry forward from 2012-13 = $8.7M

· The 2013-14 Budget = $10M

· The 2014-15 Budget = $10M

· The 2015-16 Budget = $10M

This is a total of $38.7M

7. In order to fully spend this amount by 30 June 2016 the following spending profile will be required.

· 2013-14 Forecast = $8.6M (actual current forecast)

· 2014-15 Forecast = $10.1M (latest forecast)

· 2015-16 Forecast = $20.0M (latest forecast)

8. The 2013-14 figure is the currently expected end of year result for 2013-14. The end of the 2013-14 financial year is the end of the second year of the four year Local Board Transport Capital Fund programme that needs to be completed by 30 June 2016, and only $9.9M of the $40M will be spent. i.e. only 25% spent in half the available time.

9. Conversely, the required spend in the last two years (2014-15 and 2015-16) is $30.1M, being a threefold increase in the spend compared to the first two years. At the current rate of spending this $30.1M target will not be achieved.

10. In addition, the current Local Boards are allowed to spend some or all of the 2016-17 Local Board Transport Capital Fund budget as their elected term finishes three months into this financial year on approximately 30 Sept 2016. This means there is an additional $10M available that could also be spent.

Value of Projects

11. Of the 228 proposals submitted to date 64 are not proceeding (not meeting criteria, funded elsewhere, deferred to future years, or not chosen by Local Boards). The total value of the remaining 164 projects that range from being in the initial assessment phase to having the construction fully complete is $14.9M.

12. Assuming that all of these projects are completed they represent only 37% of the total Local Board Transport Capital Fund programme that needs to be delivered in the current electoral term.

13. Conversely an additional $25.1M worth of projects need to be identified in order to deliver the programme by 30 June 2016.

Forward Planning to Ensure Programme Delivery

14. Additional project proposals need to be identified urgently by ALL Local Boards in order for the programme to be delivered on time.

15. As the spending of the budget is heavily weighted towards the 2015-16 financial year and to a lesser extent the 2014-15 financial year, the issue of Auckland Transport being able to manage the work in those years and the contracting industry being able to carry out the large volume of work become factors in the overall delivery of the programme.

16. Accordingly construction approval will be required for all projects in the programme by 30 May 2015 at the latest so that the last of the physical works construction of the works (in fact half of the whole programme) can be spread out over the entire 2015-16 financial year. Many of these approvals will be required much earlier in order to deliver $10M of work in the 2014-15 year.

17. In order to achieve the 30 May 2015 construction approval date, detailed design approval will need to be provided for all projects no later than 30 November 2014 in order to allow six months for detailed design including consultation and statutory approvals to be completed so that construction approval can be provided on time. As with the construction approvals, much of this detailed design has to happen much sooner in order to deliver the 2014-15 programme.

18. Accordingly the identification of new projects by ALL Local Boards to the total value of at least $25.1M needs to happen by 31 August 2014 at the latest in order for them to be assessed and project scopes and rough orders of cost provided back to the Local Boards for their consideration for detailed design approval. Ideally more projects need to be identified in case some don’t meet the necessary criteria.

19. As the four year programme budgets for each Local Board can be considered as a single budget there is opportunity for Local Boards to consider larger projects that can be funded over more than one year, or that are funded jointly between more than one Local Board. A fewer number of larger projects will be easier to manage and will make delivery of the programme much easier.

20. If the above programme timing is not met Auckland Transport cannot guarantee that the Local Board Transport Capital Fund programme will be able to be fully delivered in the current electoral term.

Project Management Process

21. The time required for managing the various stages of a project can vary significantly depending on the nature and size of the project.

22. Initial assessments of project proposals including the development of Rough Orders of Cost can be relatively quick in the case of simple projects such as new footpaths or the installation of new bus shelters where the work is straight forward and is carried out on a regular basis under other Auckland Transport work streams. In these cases typical costs are known and a turn-around of a few weeks can be achieved.

23. However other one-off projects that may have safety implications that require the gathering of data (site specific surveys, and information such as traffic counts) to determine whether or not the project meets traffic warrants, standards or regulatory requirements, or projects that require initial community input can take up to three months to assess.

24. Detailed design and the development of Firm Estimates of Cost can also vary significantly in terms of the overall time required. Some simple projects require very little design and can take a matter of a few weeks.

25. Other more complex projects require time to gather detailed site information, to carry out consultation with stakeholders, to carry out design including inputs from specialists, to apply for resource consents, and to obtain regulatory approvals such as traffic resolutions or speed limit changes. These projects can take more than six months to design.

26. Construction timeframes can vary significantly depending on the size of the project. Lead time to supply specialist materials for construction, often from overseas, can delay projects. Timing of works to avoid the wetter winter months can also impact on when tenders are let. Delaying of weather sensitive works to construct them at the right time of the year can impact on the overall timing of project delivery.

27. In addition, spreading out the delivery of the construction of works over the whole year can provide a more even workload to the contractors which can result in more favourable overall costs to AT and the Local Boards.

28. All of the above highlights that the timing of the various stages of projects can vary significantly. Straight forward projects can be delivered in a single year; whereas it is not possible to deliver more complex projects within a single year. Many of the Local Board projects fall into this second category.

Auckland Transport Programme Management Process

29. A review of the internal Auckland Transport processes has highlighted a number of improvements that will be made in order to assist with the delivery of this programme of work.

30. Timing of responses back to the Local Boards on initial assessments and on the completion of detailed designs will be monitored more closely to ensure there is no slippage in these approval processes.

31. Rough Orders of Cost and Firm Estimates of Cost will be provided in ranges of price rather than a single dollar figure because of the uncertainty of providing exact figures in the early stages of projects. Rough Orders of Cost carried out at the start of the project can vary by up to 30%, whereas Firm Estimates of Cost carried out in the detailed design phase can vary by 15%.

32. There are examples where previous estimates that have been provided have been too low and additional approvals have been required from the Local Boards. This has caused problems with the Local Board expectation of project costs. More care will be taken in future to provide accurate estimates.

33. It should be remembered that these figures are still estimates and the true cost of the work will only be known when the construction is complete. The reason for this is that there are many factors that can affect the final cost of a project compared to the Firm Estimate of Cost. Three of these are the tendered price from the contractor, unforeseen ground conditions, and relocation/protection of underground services. Every endeavour will be made to keep project costs within the approved budgets.

Consequences of not Delivering the full Programme

34. Auckland Transport CAPEX underspend including from within the Local Board Transport Capital Fund remains under sustained scrutiny by Auckland Council.

35. Auckland Transport is accountable for the current underspend on this significant budget allocation, and reports every quarter to Auckland Council on the accuracy of its CAPEX spend forecasts.

36. It is important that this fund is fully spent each year to ensure that neither its amount nor its process are put at risk when consistently reporting underspends to Counci

Summary of the Budgets and Project Values by Local Board

Local Board	Total Budget 2012-13 to 2015-16 (four years)	Total Value of all Approved Projects and Proposals Being Assessed	Value of New Projects Still to be Identified
Albert Eden	$2,659,732	$1,302,567	$1,357,165
Devonport Takapuna	$1,540,120	$1,104,960	$435,160
Franklin	$1,739,864	$946,555	$793,309
Great Barrier	$400,000	$278,476	$121,524
Henderson Massey	$2,993,512	$1,012,988	$1,980,524
Hibiscus and Bays	$2,399,540	$763,330	$1,636,210
Howick	$3,487,612	$1,147,000	$2,340,612
Kaipatiki	$2,318,064	$1,244,711	$1,073,353
Mangere Otahuhu	$2,071,016	$609,364	$1,461,652
Manurewa	$2,373,256	$472,116	$1,901,140
Maungakiekie Tamaki	$1,979,028	$800,000	$1,179,028
Orakei	$2,199,796	$852,633	$1,347,163
Otara Papatoetoe	$2,197,168	$1,098,584	$1,098,584
Papakura	$1,224,736	$904,747	$319,989
Puketapapa	$1,526,468	$373,000	$1,143,468
Rodney	$1,477,044	$733,000	$744,044
Upper Harbour	$1,348,264	$674,132	$674,132
Waiheke	$800,000	$211,943	$588,057
Waitakere Ranges	$1,324,608	$140,000	$1,184,608
Waitemata	$1,879,156	$192,470	$1,686,686
Whau	$2,071,016	$0	$2,071,016
TOTALS	$40,000,000	$14,862,576	$25,137,424

37. It should be noted that the possible spend of the 2016-17 budget is not included in the above figures.

Suggestions of Projects to be funded from the Local Board Transport Capital Fund

38. Attached is the Pick List of the types of projects that could be funded from the LBTCF programme that has previously been circulated to Local Boards for their information. This list will assist Local Boards to identify potential projects in their areas.

Consideration

Local Board Views

39. This report is for the local board’s action.

Maori Impact Statement

40. No specific issues with regard to the Maori Impact Statement are triggered by this report.

General

41. The activities in this report do not trigger the Significance Policy, all programmes and activities are within budget/in line with the Council’s Annual Plan and LTP documents and there are no legal or legislative implications arising from the activities detailed in this report.

Implementation Issues

42. There are no implementation issues.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Projects that could be considered by local boards	93
b View	Financial Updates for the individual local boards	99

Signatories

Authors

Phil Donnelly – Team Leader East, Road Design and Development, Capital Development Division, Auckland Transport

Authorisers

Andrew Scoggins, Group Manager Road Design and Development, Capital Development Division, Auckland Transport

Jonathan Anyon, Elected Member Relationship Team Manager, Auckland Transport

Rodney Local Board

14 April 2014

Local economic development July to December 2013: Rodney Local Board

File No.: CP2014/05124

Purpose

1. This report provides an update for the Rodney Local Board on local economic development activities delivered by the Economic Development Department for the period July to December 2013.

Executive Summary

2. The 2013/2014 local economic development work programme in the Rodney Local Board area includes:

· An economic development overview presenting a range of indicators on the Rodney economy, issues and opportunities

· Support for the business associations in Kumeu/Huapai, Helensville, Warkworth and Wellsford

· Support for the roll out of ultrafast broadband and the rural broadband initiative, and the sustainable and targeted provision of public WiFi.

3. Existing activities will continue in the 2014/2015 work programme, with the addition of a proposed Rodney Local Economic Development Action Plan.

Recommendations

That the Rodney Local Board:

a) approves the indicative 2014/2015 local economic development work programme as:

i) Economic analysis and planning for the local economy in Rodney.

ii) Initiation of a Rodney local economic development action plan with total project funding of up to $27,000 from the Rodney economic development implementation plan budget FY14/15, subject to confirmation in the Local Board Agreement 2014/2015.

iii) Support for Business Improvement District Partnership programme establishment in SH16 and the business association in Warkworth.

iv) Support for the roll out of ultrafast broadband and the rural broadband initiative, and the sustainable and targeted provision of public WiFi.

b) nominates local board member(s) to attend the Business Improvement District Policy (2011) review workshops and represent the view of the local board.

Discussion

4. The Economic Development Department champions Auckland’s Economic Development Strategy (EDS), which aims to develop an economy that delivers opportunity and prosperity for all Aucklanders and New Zealand. The department works with ATEED, business, Government and community stakeholders to lead local economic development, regional economic strategy and policy advice, economic analysis and advocacy, digital policy and international relations on behalf of Auckland Council.

5. This report focuses on local economic development activities in the Rodney Local Board area. An overview of the regional economic work programme undertaken by the Economic Development Department and ATEED to implement the EDS is provided to the Economic Development Committee, and is made available for information to local boards.

6. Under the guidance of global city development expert Greg Clark, and with the assistance of representatives from business, the wider Auckland Council and Government, critical priorities for Auckland’s future economic performance have been identified. These are to:

· Establish a new Auckland Leadership Team

· Raise youth employability. At the local level this means:

o increasing the number of opportunities for young people to gain work experience

· Build, retain and attract talent. At the local level this means:

o encouraging our businesses to invest in skills

o thoroughly understanding Auckland’s skills shortages

· Build the Auckland business proposition for a business-friendly city

· Boost the investment rate into Auckland’s economy and infrastructure

· Motivate greater investment in products, services and markets. At the local level this means:

o promoting the benefits of innovation and entrepreneurship

o creating and connecting spaces for innovation and entrepreneurship

· Increase Auckland’s visibility internationally

· Optimise Auckland’s platforms for growth: housing, transport and availability of employment land. At the local level this means:

o developing and adopting a new implementation model to achieve growth in key locations – CBD and metropolitan centres

o leveraging the fibre network to its full potential

· Support improved performance of Māori businesses. At the local level this means:

o working to support Māori businesses to grow.

7. We are planning a workshop with local board economic development portfolio holders, ATEED and the Economic Development Committee on making local economic development in Auckland more strategic, focused and united. Further information will be provided through the Local Board Advisors.

Economic Development Overview

8. An economic development (ED) overview has been prepared for the Rodney Local Board area and was presented to the local board in 2013. The overview outlines the current economic picture in Rodney, recent trends, and identifies particular strengths or points of difference the local board area has in comparison to the region wide picture. It is primarily a data driven view drawing on the statistics available covering a range of indicators including demographics, incomes and housing, education and skills, employment and occupation, sectoral strengths, business growth and development trends.

9. The overview has been distributed to local board members, Council departments and BIDs. It can inform the Local Board Plan process currently underway and will provide the evidence base for developing the proposed Rodney Local ED Action Plan.

Proposed Local Economic Development Action Plan

10. The Rodney Local Board has approved in principle the development of a Rodney Local Economic Development Action Plan in 2014/2015 with funding of up to $27,000 from the Rodney economic development implementation plan budget (Resolution number RD/2013/216). This was subject to approval in the 2014/2015 local economic development work programme and confirmation of funding is now sought from the local board.

11. A Local ED Action Plan is a collation of local economic development activities and opportunities in the local board area.

12. Local ED Action Plans recognise that local boards cannot progress economic development alone and that opportunities lie in developing actions in partnership with other organisations in order to maximise economic outcomes at the local level. The action plan will be created by consultation with stakeholders including the local board, Business Associations, Auckland Council, CCOs and private sector companies.

BID Partnership Programme and Business Associations

13. The Business Improvement District (BID) Partnership Programme approach is a public-private partnership between business associations that have a commitment to develop and promote their local business environment and Auckland Council. In work to date since Auckland Council was established there has been a focus on sharing best practice and developing consistent governance, processes and practices across the region’s 46 BIDs.

14. Each BID has signed a Partnering Agreement with Auckland Council. These agreements define the relationship between Auckland Council and individual business associations operating as BIDs. Several have also signed a discretionary Memorandum of Understanding with their local board. The MOU is an opportunity to agree mutual goals and objectives and to support each other’s programme of work where applicable.

15. BID Partnership Advisors hold monthly networking meetings for BID managers and interested business associations that focus on professional development and sharing information and best practice. Topics covered from July to December 2013 include:

· Auckland Transport (importance of good parking in our centres)

· AGM checklist and meeting procedures

· ATEED – local events

· WiFi– how to make the most of Apps

· Overseas conferences–report back and learnings from BID attendees

· Signs and alcohol bylaws

· Social enterprises

· Using Marketview results for business attraction

· Media awareness

· Your Website – how to review it and improve it

· Using information from Local ED Overviews and opportunities to engage with Local ED Action Plans

16. A refresh of the Auckland Region Business Improvement District Policy (BID Policy 2011) will be undertaken in 2014. The proposed BID Policy will go before the Regional Strategy and Policy Committee for final approval in November 2014.

17. The process to review the BID Policy will involve consultation with both business associations and local board representatives. Separate workshops will initially be held for the two stakeholder groups, followed by a combined workshop with both the business associations and local board representatives. Local board representative(s) are sought for involvement in the review process.

18. Any suggestions made at these workshops to amend the existing BID Policy (2011) will be brought before the local board for its consideration and feedback.

19. There is much activity happening with the establishment of new BID areas (including State Highway 16 and Devonport, who will be balloting in March 2014). Several other locations are actively working with the BID team on preparatory work towards establishment. Existing BIDs undertaking expansion ballots prior to June 2014 include Otahuhu and Manukau Central.

20. Twenty-seven existing BIDs have chosen to increase their amount of target rate for the 2014/2015 financial year. Every one of these proposed increases has followed the process of advising all members and receiving approval of the proposed new amount from members at Annual General Meetings.

State Highway 16: Kumeu/Huapai and Helensville business areas

21. Kumeu/Huapai Coast and Country and Helensville District Business Associations have amalgamated. The new entity is officially known as the North West District Business Association and was incorporated in Auckland in 2013. The North West District Business Association has become the driving entity for the BID establishment project.

22. In July 2013 a project group was identified and a project manager was contracted. Work began on compiling an eligible voter database, developing a dedicated website, strategic plan, BID collateral material and hand-outs, BID communication and coordination of the public meetings.

23. Although there was an initial aim of holding the BID ballot in November 2013, it became apparent to all parties that this timeline was not achievable due to the amount of engagement required to establish a BID of this scale and nature. By October 2013 the parties agreed to focus on the original March 2014 ballot timeframe.

24. By the end of December 2013 a number of actions were completed as per the Auckland Regional BID policy including hosting two of three public meetings, developing a comprehensive business eligible voter database, completion of a final BID map showing the BID boundary, and a website that captured all the relevant information about the BID and the North West District Business Association and executive committee.

25. The current focus is on completing the remainder of the Auckland Region BID policy requirements and undertaking the BID ballot which runs 10 March to 31 March 2014.

Warkworth

26. At the September 2013 Local Board business meeting, funds for pre-BID establishment activities for the Warkworth business area were approved. Work has commenced on the development of a business survey (to encompass both the central retail area and the Woodcocks Road commercial area). The results from this work will enable Warkworth Area Business Association (WABA) to judge if there is sufficient interest in working collaboratively across the areas and if the BID approach is an option.

27. Further information from the survey results will be presented to the Local Board at a later date.

Wellsford

28. The business association continues to receive the BID Partnership team’s communications and invites to network meetings.

Rural Broadband Initiative (RBI)

29. The Rural Broadband Initiative (RBI) is nearing the end of year three of a five year build programme and expansion is progressing well. The current year began in July 2013 and will finish in June 2014. Both the fixed line and wireless upgrades are on track for completion by June 2016.

30. Actual coverage and quality depends on a range of factors including distance and line of sight from cell phone towers for wireless coverage, and distance from the closest telecommunications cabinet or exchange for fixed-line coverage.

31. Planned wired coverage can be found by clicking on the RBI Broadband layer on the map at:

· http://www.chorus.co.nz/fibre-rollout-map

Ultrafast Broadband

32. The third year of the rollout of Ultrafast broadband (UFB) ends on 30 June 2014. The rollout is a third of the way through the nine year programme. So far over 60,000 premises region wide can connect to UFB with just over 11% of these premises connected. This is in line with the rate of uptake predicted at the start of the UFB rollout.

33. Chorus intends to provide updates to local boards on the progress of the rollout in each area and Council officers will work with Local Board Services to arrange times in the appropriate local board workshops as the updates become available.

Public WiFi

34. Public WiFi is available in all 56 libraries and in 23 public open spaces around Auckland. In January 2014 the Libraries WiFi service was used 173,000 times by 110,000 people totalling 7.7 million minutes of free Wi-Fi usage. The public open space service has been experiencing network stability issues and this has limited usage. These issues are now resolved and we expect to see usage grow in line with Libraries usage. The public open space service was used 49,631 times by 44,419 people totalling 893,494 minutes of free WiFi usage.

Work programme 2014/2015

35. The proposed 2014/2015 local economic development work programme in the Rodney Local Board area is set out below.

OPEX Project description

Economic analysis and planning for the local economy in Rodney.

Initiation of a local ED Action Plan.

Support for BID Partnership programmes establishment in SH16 and the business association in Warkworth.

Support for the roll out of ultrafast broadband and the rural broadband initiative, and the sustainable and targeted provision of public WiFi.

Consideration

Local Board Views

36. This report informs the Rodney Local Board on progress implementing the agreed local economic development work programme. Feedback from the local board is welcome to shape ongoing activities.

Maori Impact Statement

37. Matters relating to Māori wellbeing are addressed as part of specific projects and are reported in the relevant local board and committee reports.

General

38. Not applicable.

Implementation Issues

39. There are no implementation issues.

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Signatories

Authors

Trudi Fava - Strategic Planner

Authorisers

Lesley Jenkins - Relationship Manager

Janet Schofield - Business Area Planning Manager

Rodney Local Board

14 April 2014

Auckland Transport Update to Rodney Local Board, April 2014

File No.: CP2014/06353

Purpose

1. To respond to local board requests on transport-related matters and to provide information to elected members about Auckland Transport (AT) activities.

2. The report provides an update on transport matters for the information of the Rodney Local Board and a register of transport issues in the local board’s area, as collated by Auckland Transport’s Elected Member Relationship Manager North.

Recommendation/s

That the Rodney Local Board:

a) confirm its approval for the following Local Board Transport Capital Fund projects to proceed to construction based on the tender prices shown:

· Project 177

New footpath Coatesville Riverhead Highway, eastern side, Elliot Street to bridge.

$41,000

· Project 179

Extending the loose metal bridle trail on the northern side of Coatesville Riverhead Highway from east of Glenmore Road to 264 Coatesville-Riverhead Highway.

$30,000

· Project 180

New footpath Mahoenui Valley Road opposite the school to intersection of Coatesville-Riverhead Highway.

$40,000

Discussion

Update on Local Board Transport Capital Fund (LBTCF)

3. Construction of the following projects has been completed:

· Mountable kerb outside 336 Mahurangi East Road, Snells Beach (Project 118);

· Footpath extension on Fordyce Road, Parakai (Project 174).

4. Tenders for the following projects have been received; however the tender prices vary from the firm cost estimates previously approved by the local board:

Project No.	Project	Approved FEC $	Tender Price $	Variation $
177	New footpath Coatesville Riverhead Highway, eastern side, Elliot Street to bridge	39,000	41,000	+2,000
179	Extending the footpath on the northern side of Coatesville Riverhead Highway from Glenmore Road to 250 Coatesville-Riverhead Highway	36,000	30,000	-6,000
180	New footpath Mahoenui Valley Road opposite the school to intersection of Coatesville-Riverhead Highway	31,000	40,000	+9,000
Totals		106,000	111,000	5,000

5. It is therefore requested that the local board confirm its approval for these projects to proceed to construction based on the tender process shown. Should confirmation be received at this meeting, the work will be carried out during April/May.

6. Project 175, local access road improvements, 338 – 382 Main Road, Huapai, will be managed by the Northern Infrastructure Development Team. The work is not weather dependant so, while no date has been set for construction to begin, it can proceed during the winter months.

7. After further discussion with the local board’s Transport Portfolio Leads (TPLs) and AT’s Road Corridor staff, a safety audit is being carried out to determine the nature of the guard rail required for Project 116, a footpath opposite 95 Mahurangi East Road. The local board will be advised of a revised estimate for this project once the audit has been completed and costings reviewed.

8. It is anticipated that Project 190, a new footpath on Rodney Street, Wellsford, will be constructed during April by the Road Corridor Maintenance team’s Northern contractor.

9. Various options for the following projects are being considered and will be discussed further with the local board’s TPLs as and when the relevant information becomes available:

· Puhoi Pedestrian Bridge (Project 113);

· New footpath on Waitoki Rd, Waitoki (Project 161);

· Puhoi Road footpath (Project 162);

· Point Wells Road footpath (Project 205).

10. The local board’s TPLs have been provided with options for a footpath on Oaia Road, Muriwai (Project 163), and AT is now awaiting instructions as to how the local board wishes to proceed.

Early Engagement on Transport Planning - Workshop with AT Senior Management

11. Elected Members were invited to a meeting with AT’s CEO David Warburton and his Executive Leadership Team on Thursday, 10 April to advise AT of their priorities and involve them in shaping the plans for transport in Auckland from 2015. AT is required to deliver the transformational shifts outlined in the Auckland Plan – especially providing outstanding public transport and quality urban living – within tight funding constraints. Members’ assistance is being sought to plan for how these transformational shifts will translate into specific initiatives at a local level.

12. To achieve this, AT is updating its plans for the period 2015-2025, and is seeking local board and councillor input at an early stage. The objective is to understand and assess local boards’ and councillors’ input prior to the development of the first draft so that the document circulated for formal consultation can more closely reflect both political aspirations and operational and technical needs.

13. A series of five workshops for local board members, councillors, iwi and transport interest groups was hosted by AT in April to listen to views on both local and regional issues. Other issues discussed included implementation of the Auckland Plan, the Mayor’s direction, how major projects benefit local communities, the funding challenge, local transport initiatives and the role of local leadership in delivering these.

14. Formal consultation on the Transport component of Auckland Council’s Long Term Plan, and on Auckland Transport’s Regional Land Transport Programme, will take place in January and February 2015.

Auckland Transport completes AT HOP rollout

15. AT has completed the rollout of AT HOP, its reusable pre-pay smart card for travel on trains, ferries and buses, following its introduction in October 2012. There are now more than 250,000 AT HOP cards being regularly used by customers around the region on different modes of transport and with different public transport operators.

16. Introduction of AT HOP is significant for further developing public transport in New Zealand’s largest city and the rate at which public transport users have taken to the new system so far bodes well for on-going patronage growth. Other transformational projects such as the fleet of new electric trains, improved reliability of all services and a major focus on customer needs and satisfaction levels are also vital elements in delivering a world class public transport system.

17. Mayor Len Brown is a regular user of public transport and also acknowledges what a significant milestone completion of the AT HOP rollout is, noting that the transformation of Auckland’s public transport system is well and truly underway and that the completion of the AT HOP rollout is a critical part of that. He has congratulated AT for delivering the project in an effective and timely way.

18. The project has been delivered in partnership with the New Zealand Transport Agency (NZTA). Making public transport easier and more attractive for people is a key priority for NZTA, so, after seven years of development and a $73 million investment from the national land transport fund, NZTA is pleased with the resulting sophisticated platform, underpinned by a national ticketing standard that could support integrated ticketing systems across the country.

19. More information on AT HOP is available at: www.AT.govt/athop.

Issues Update

20. The following Issues Update comprises issues raised by Elected Members and Local Board Services staff to 1 April 2014:

	Location	Issue	Status
1	Taiapa Road, Muriwai	Request for sealing of Taiapa Road, Muriwai.	On 19 December 2013 a resident of Taiapa Road, Muriwai, advised Cr Webster that a stretch of road 800 metres long connecting the corner of Coast and Motutara Roads and the Golf Club in Coast Road had been sealed, noting that there are two rate paying houses and one golf course on this stretch of road, while the gap of unsealed road on Taiapa Road, where there are 22 rate paying houses and the dust nuisance is a serious concern, is 2kms long. The resident asked for an explanation as to why the access road to the Golf Course was prioritised over sealing the small stretch of Taiapa road with its much greater number of ratepayers. Cr Webster was advised that Coast Road is managed by Auckland Council as part of Muriwai Regional Park and its reseal was therefore carried out by Auckland Council. She was also advised that Taiapa Road is listed in the 10 - 20 year programme for seal extension.
2	School/Ocean View Roads and School/Mangawhai Roads, Tomarata	Request for 'School' sign at the intersections of School/Ocean View Roads and School/Mangawhai Roads, Tomarata.	Cr Penny Webster asked on 21 January 2014 that a previous negative response for two additional ‘School’ signs, one at the intersection of School/Ocean View Roads, Tomarata, and the other at the intersection of School/Mangawhai Roads, Tomarata, to indicate the direction to Tomarata Primary School, be reconsidered. On 29 January 2014 Cr Webster was advised that Auckland Transport follows national guidance on the provision of direction signs, which allows the use of road name and destination signing but resists using guide signs for but a few, specific amenity types such as Police Stations or Libraries. There is therefore no permitted sign stating 'School' currently available. In the past, Rodney District Council occasionally provided signs to some schools, and some examples of school signs remain on the road network today. However, with the establishment of Auckland Transport as a regional entity, the individual signing strategies of the former councils had to be rationalised into one policy, which is to follow the national signing guidance for a consistent approach across the region. The request could therefore not be granted.
3	Kaipara Hills Road, Glorit	Request for improvements to Kaipara Hills Road, Glorit	Rodney Local Board staff asked on 30 January 2014 that claims made by a resident that Kaipara Hills Road is unsafe and therefore needs to be stabilised, with appropriate runoff controls established, be investigated. The resident noted that the road becomes unsafe for cars during periods of rain due to poor sediment control above and below the road and there is a lack of appropriate grade gravel on the road surface. On 3 March the Board's TPLs were advised that the road was inspected in mid-January and again over the week 24 – 28 February. It was noted that the road surface on the eastern length of the road had recently been graded and that the engineer was happy with its condition. It was also noted that, while erosion is evident on private property both above and below the road, and that being unsealed there is bound to be run-off during wet weather from the road surface, there is no specific erosion problem in relation to the road itself.
4	Makarau Road, Kaukapakapa	Safety concerns on Makarau Road, Kaukapakapa.	Cr Webster's PA requested on 11 February 2014 that investigation into a resident's concerns regarding safety on Makarau Road, Kaukapakapa, raised in December 2013, be expedited. A copy of the response to the concerns was forwarded to Cr Webster and the TPLs on 6 March 2014. The letter advised that a 'side road' or 'T-intersection' sign would be installed at the intersection of Mick Dillon and Tahekeroa Roads, and that measures would be taken to provide improved delineation, reflective marker posts and warning of the tight bends.
5	2 Omana Avenue, Shelly Beach	Mowing of berm at 2 Omana Avenue, Shelly Beach.	Member Steele received a complaint from a customer on 14 February 2014 who was assured in November that the berm at 2 Omana Avenue, Shelly Beach, would be mown in the near future. This had not transpired despite a follow up phone call to Auckland Transport Customer Response staff early in February. On 10 March the Chairperson and TPLs were advised that Auckland Transport’s contractors had been instructed to carry out the mowing and to add this area to the future maintenance programme.
6	Red Hills Road, Taupaki	Request for white shoulder signs, repair of directional signage on Red Hills Road, together with complaints re reinstatement of berm at the Red Hills Road/Sunnyvale Road intersection.	Member Flaunty advised on 17 February 2013 that an area of Red Hills Road had still not been repaired nor marked with new white shoulder lines, though it had been swept. Repairs to directional signage on the bend had also not been carried out. He also identified an area on the corner of Red Hills Road and Sunnyvale Road where the berm has been damaged by Auckland Transport’s contractors, who had used the area as a base for sealing roads. On 28 February Member Flaunty and the TPLs were advised that the signage was repaired over the week 24 - 28 February and that an urgent request had been sent to the contractors to install the line marking as soon as possible. The storage site on the corner of Red Hills Road and Sunnyvale Road had been programmed for minor repairs and these would be undertaken by the end of March 2014. In response to further queries, Member Flaunty and the TPLs were advised on 7 March that the damaged area had been cleared and levelled. Sunnyvale Road to the intersection of Red Hills Road was being rehabilitated and the intention was to tie in the shoulder areas on this corner, so there will be a sealed pull-off zone, designed to accommodate the future rural bus shelter Members were advised about on 5 February. If possible, the new bus shelter will be retro-fitted into the extended sealed area, allowing for improved safety and parental pick-up and drop-off areas. The outer shoulder opposite the proposed bus shelter will also be reinstated with topsoil and seeded.
7	Worker Road, Wellsford	Request for information regarding the unformed portion of Worker Road, Wellsford.	At the TPL meeting on 19 February Member Colville queried the length of the unformed portion of Worker Road, Wellsford, and arrangements in place for its maintenance. On 24 March the TPLs were provided with a GIS screen shot showing the unformed section of Worker Road and advised that Auckland Transport currently maintains 1.44km at the southern end from SH 1, which is sealed, and 0.528km at the northern end from Wellford Valley Road. The portion between these two lengths was/is not formed to Rodney District Council’s/Auckland Transport’s standards, i.e. it is paper road, and is therefore not maintained by Auckland Transport. With regard to the suggestion that metal be laid on the unformed/paper road portion so that parents taking their children to school could use this as a short cut, Members were advised that this would not bring the road up to Auckland Transport Code of Practice standards and, because Auckland Transport could therefore be held responsible for any accidents that occurred, the request would not be granted.
8	Mahurangi East Road, Snells Beach	Request for information about plans to address a slip on Mahurangi East Road, Snells Beach.	Member Garner raised concerns about a slip to the west of Mahurangi East Road between Arabella Lane and Muncaster Road, Snells Beach, during a meeting with Auckland Transport's Maintenance Contracts Manager on 19 February. On 7 March the local board's TPLs were advised that this is a historic slip, dating back at least 20 years, which has been stable for a number of years. As it is not affecting the carriageway there are no plans to complete any works this financial year; however, the project is on the forward works programme and will be addressed when funding becomes available.
9	Sandspit, Warkworth	Request for free parking at Sandspit Car Park, Warkworth.	Member Houlbrooke asked on 28 February 2014 why there has been a change in policy in relation to free parking provided previously for many years to families participating in an annual fishing contest at Sandspit Wharf, Warkworth, asking that the previous years’ arrangements be reinstated. On 10 March Member Houlbrooke and the TPLs were advised that Auckland Transport staff have confirmed with the Warkworth Lions Club that, while it’s not possible to offer free carparking, Auckland Transport will support the event by charging the $7 discounted rate charged for Kawau Island ratepayers and DOC volunteers. The car park will be in demand on the day of the fishing competition, with the Friends of Mansion House also holding a picnic. Given that the car park is a commercial operation which provides services for all users, Auckland Transport is obliged to determine the best use of the available spaces. While it is regrettable that free parking cannot be provided, it was noted that free parking is not generally made available in any Auckland Transport car parks.
10	Kahikatea Flat Road, Dairy Flat-Kaukapakapa	Request for maintenance on Kahikatea Flat Road, Dairy Flat.	Cr Penny Webster referred a request from a constituent on 27 February 2014 regarding the condition of Kahikatea Flat Road from Dairy Flat to Kaukapakapa, where there were dangerous corners due to the collapse of the road, together with areas which were patched 12 months ago and not repaired. Cr Webster and the Rodney TPLs were advised on 10 March that engineers acknowledged that three locations had deteriorated between Frost Road and Whitehills Road. These three areas are edged with trees and, due to the long period of dry weather, the roots had pulled in any moisture available, causing the road surface to slump. This is a recurring problem with the lack of rainfall being experienced. The patches referred to were previous repairs addressing the same issue. To rectify the situation temporary sign posting to highlight the uneven road surface will be installed for the interim and the slumped area will be programmed to be reconstructed before May 2014. With regard to concerns regarding prioritisation, all road maintenance and renewals in Auckland are driven by needs-based criteria. The network is reviewed annually before a programme of roads that require attention is agreed. It was confirmed that Wainui Road met these criteria in recent years and required rehabilitation and resurfacing in places, as did sections of Kahikatea Road east of Waitoki, where a considerable amount of money had been spent to maintain the road to an acceptable condition.
11	Matakana Valley Road, Matakana	Seal extension work on Matakana Valley Road, Matakana.	A draft works notification letter regarding seal extension work planned on Matakana Valley Road, Matakana, was forwarded to the local board Chair, TPLs and Cr Webster on 28 February 2014, together with a plan of the catchment area to be targeted, with a request for comments no later than Thursday, 6 March. Cr Webster provided comments, but none were received from local board members.
12	Proposed safety improvement works in Queen, Neville and Baxter Streets, Warkworth	Request for feedback on proposed safety improvement works in Queen, Neville and Baxter Streets, Warkworth.	Documentation illustrating proposed safety improvement works in Queen, Neville and Baxter Streets, Warkworth, was forwarded to the TPLs on 5 March 2014, with a request for responses no later than 4 April. Member Garner advised his support of the proposals, suggesting however that it would seem more logical to install pedestrian refuges rather than the zebra crossings at the intersection of Baxter and Neville Streets adjacent to the proposed roundabout to improve traffic flow. Member Garner's comments were forwarded to the engineers for consideration.
13	Matua Road, Kumeu	Request for advice about speed limits on Matua Road, Kumeu.	Member Pirrie advised on 6 March that he had been contacted by a resident concerned about the speed of motorists on the southern end of Matua Road, specifically where it changes from 50km/h to 70km/h. With development occurring in this area he asked whether, once development is completed, the speed limit will automatically be reduced. On 11 March the TPLs were advised that this particular area of Kumeu/Huapai is already being investigated following advice from Auckland Transport’s consents specialists of the amount of subdivision occurring. Auckland Transport intends to redefine the extent of the Urban Traffic Area at Huapai to include the area where the new subdivisions are taking place, which will allow the new subdivision roads to vest as 50km/h zones. The speed limit on part of Matua Road and two side roads (Gilbransen Road and Robert Might Road) will also be changed from 80km/h to 50 km/h, although these changes will be delayed until sufficient houses are built for the lower speed limits to appear credible. The local board will be asked to comment on the proposed changes once the investigations have been completed. Compliance with the existing 50km/h speed limit in Matua Road is a Police matter. However, the problem may be exacerbated because, except for the last 200 metres at the southern end adjacent to Oraha Road, the area does not give the impression of a credible 50km/h urban zone. While existing compliance is poor, it should gradually improve as more houses are constructed in the new subdivision within the existing 50km/h zone and the road takes on the appearance of a more urbanised area.
14	Puhoi Road, Puhoi	Request for footpath on Puhoi Road, Puhoi.	The Office of Mark Mitchell MP forwarded a request from a Puhoi resident on 6 March 2014 for a footpath from Puhoi Close to the existing footpath at 80 Puhoi Road. On 7 March he was advised that local board has two projects in the Puhoi area which it is paying for from its Local Board Transport Capital Fund - a footpath on the Eastern side of Puhoi Road from Puhoi Library to the Krippner Road Bridge; and installation of a pedestrian bridge on the corner of Puhoi and Krippner Roads. Funding allocated to Auckland Transport by Auckland Council for new footpath construction is very limited - $7m over the 2012-2015 period, so requests are ranked on proximity to schools, public transport and community facilities, existence of footpaths parallel to the requested location (areas with no footpaths scored higher), addressing gaps in the existing footpath network, and inclusion in the Metropolitan Urban Limit boundary identified in the Auckland Plan. The 2013/2014 final programme for new footpath construction has recently been approved and projects in the Rodney Local Board area include Morpeth Street, from Bertram Street to path at east end of road, Rautawhiri Road from No.53 to No.77 and Gumdiggers Lane/Applemoors Way from School Road to end of road in the Rodney Local Board area. Prioritisation work on the 2014/2015 Regional New Footpaths Programme has already commenced, with the new programme expected to provide for an overall spend of approximately $2m in 2014/2015. While the request for extension of the existing footpath south to Puhoi Close will not be considered in these works, it will be added to the list for future consideration.
15	Warkworth Bus Service	Request to expedite the New Network bus service review for Warkworth.	At the Rodney Local Board’s business meeting on 10 March 2014 Member Garner asked what the possibility was for the review of bus services to/from Warkworth being brought forward. On 13 March the local board's TPLs were advised that it had been decided to include consultation with Warkworth residents on the use of a proposed service between Warkworth and the Hibiscus Coast Busway Station at Silverdale as part of the Hibiscus Coast consultation, with a separate consultation leaflet being sent to Warkworth residents. Precise timing for the consultation is not yet known but is likely to be mid-2014.
16	Waimauku School, Waimauku Station Road, Waimauku	Request for information about Auckland Transport's work with Waimauku School, Waimauku Station Road, Waimauku.	At the Rodney Local Board’s business meeting on 10 March 2014, Member Pirrie asked whether Auckland Transport was working with Waimauku School in general, but also with regard to keeping children safe at the Waimauku Station/Muriwai Roads/SH16 intersection. On 12 March the TPLs were advised that Waimauku School completed its baseline survey in Term 4, 2013, and that the analysis of the data was only recently received. A baseline survey report is now being prepared and will be presented to the school so that the process of developing a safe school travel plan can begin. The school will therefore feature in future Quarterly Reports with regard to the how its safe school travel plan is progressing. Auckland Transport's Community Transport Coordinator for the area advised that she would be grateful for any input Member Pirrie had about issues around the school and would be happy to discuss these further with him.
17	Barrett Road, Riverhead	Safety concerns on Barrett Road, Riverhead.	Member Garner asked on 12 March 2014 that a request to improve safety on Barrett Road, Riverhead, perhaps by sealing the road, be escalated. On 25 March TPLs were advised that a response to the customer's concerns should be available by 8 April. With Road Corridor Operations for investigation.
18	Pakiri Road, Wellsford	Concerns regarding maintenance on Pakiri Road, Wellsford.	Having driven over Pakiri Road recently, Member Garner noted with concern on 18 March 2014 that the road has no metal on it and the unsealed section from Goat Island to Pakiri appears to have had little or no recent maintenance. He asked that he be advised of what the situation is with this road. On 28 March the TPLs were advised that the section of Pakiri Road between Pakiri and M Greenwood Road at the top of the hill will be metalled, graded and rolled over the week 31 March-4 April, weather permitting. Member Garner was further advised on 1 April that this section of Pakiri Road was spot graded on 21 February 2014, and had a full grade and roll prior to Christmas, over the period 18 – 20 December 2013. Pakiri River Road will be included in the work scheduled for the week 31 March-4 April.
19	John Andrew Drive, Warkworth	Request for 'No Through Road' signage for John Andrew Drive, Warkworth.	While a ‘No Exit’ sign was installed on John Andrew Drive, Warkworth, in 2013, Cr Webster advised on 20 March 2013 that this was still confusing and that the sign should indicate that John Andrew Drive is not a through road. She therefore requested that more appropriate signage be installed. Referred to Road Corridor Operations.
20	South Head Road, South Head	Sunken approach to one-way bridge on South Head Road, South Head.	Following a meeting with the South Kaipara Residents' and Ratepayers' Association on 20 March 2013, Member Flaunty advised there was a sunken approach to a one way bridge in the vicinity of the property at 2300 South Head Road, South Head. On 28 March the TPLs were advised that the Association's representative had been contacted by Auckland Transport’s roading contractor and informed that there are currently no structural issues with the bridge, but that it will be monitored for any decline.
21	Constable Road, Muriwai	Request for traffic counts for Constable Road, Muriwai.	Member Pirrie asked on 21 March whether there were any recent and historical traffic counts available for Constable Road, Muriwai, noting that there had been a counter installed on the road recently. Historical counts from 2004 were provided on 1 April and Members were advised that these were the most recent on record, though a count is programmed for Constable Road over 2014/2015. Auckland Transport's contractor also confirmed that they had not received any one-off requests for counts in this area so staff were not able to advise who was responsible for the recent count.
22	Coatesville Riverhead Highway, Riverhead	Concerns about bleeding of the seal on Coatesville Riverhead Highway, Riverhead - State Highway 16.	On 24 March 2014 Member Flaunty raised concerns about bleeding of the seal on Coatesville-Riverhead Highway from SH16 to the end of Riverhead township, following recent warm weather. Referred to Road Corridor Maintenance staff for investigation.
23	Woodcocks Road, Warkworth	Request for installation of a seat on Woodcocks Road, Warkworth.	Member Garner asked on 27 March 2014 that a seat be installed on Woodcocks Road, Warkworth, between Morrison Drive and Mahurangi College. The road is walked by a large number of people, many older, so it is considered that a seat would be well used and very appropriate. Referred to Assets and Facilities staff for consideration.
24	Leigh Road, Whangateau	Access to Whangateau Trustee Cemetery, 483 Leigh Road, Whangateau.	On 27 March 2014, the Secretary/Treasurer of the Whangateau Cemetery Trust asked the Chair, Brenda Steele, for an assurance that access via a paper road to the cemetery, situated at 483 Leigh Road, Whangateau, will be assured for the future. Referred to Property staff for investigation and response.
25	Matakana Road, Matakana	Proposed minor safety improvements on Matakana Road, Matakana.	A plan showing proposed minor safety improvements on Matakana Road, Matakana, was forwarded to the Board's TPLs on 28 March 2014, with a request for comments no later than Friday, 11 April.

Consideration

Local Board Views

21. This report is for the Local Board’s information.

Maori Impact Statement

22. No specific issues with regard to the Maori Impact Statement are triggered by this report.

General

23. The activities detailed in this report do not trigger the Significance Policy, all programmes and activities are within budget/in line with the Council’s Annual Plan and LTP documents and there are no legal or legislative implications arising from the activities detailed in this report.

Implementation Issues

24. There are no implementation issues.

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Signatories

Authors	Ellen Barrett – Elected Member Relationship Manager, Auckland Transport
Authorisers	Jonathan Anyon – Elected Member Relationship Team Manager, Auckland Transport

Rodney Local Board

14 April 2014

Fees and charges for the hire of community venues, centres and arts facilities – Rodney Local Board

File No.: CP2014/06011

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 Rodney Local Board Agreement.

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

3. It also seeks the Rodney 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

1. 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.

2. 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, bookable spaces in parks, sport and recreation facilities, or in libraries.

3. 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.”

4. The project has resulted in three main changes:

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

b. the Rodney Local Board can now select activity types to receive discounts to reflect the 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 local boards.

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

Recommendations

That the Rodney Local Board:

a) confirms the activity types eligible for priority discounts for hire of local council-run facilities as per Attachment A (dated 1 April 2014) to the agenda report.

b) notes the administrative changes to facilitate implementation.

Discussion

Background

6. 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.

7. 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

8. 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 2014-2015 year.

9. 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

10. 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.

11. The proposed fee schedule will be presented as part of the 2014/2015 Rodney 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

12. 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 Rodney Local Board Priorities

13. In line with 2014/2015 Rodney 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.

14. The Rodney Local Board will support discounts for not-for-profit charities and community organisations that clearly benefit the community.

Consideration

Local Board Views

15. This report reflects the engagement with the local boards.

Maori Impact Statement

16. 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

17. This report does not trigger the Significance Policy.

Implementation Issues

18. 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	Principles for bookings, fees and discounts for Rodney Local Board	141

Signatories

Authors

Valerie Proud - Principal Policy Analyst

Authorisers

Penny Pirrit - Regional & Local Planning Manager

Lesley Jenkins - Relationship Manager

Rodney Local Board

14 April 2014

Local board decisions for 2014/2015 Annual Plan

File No.: CP2014/06006

Purpose

1. This report provides guidance for local boards on finalising budgets and other decisions required for local board agreements and the Annual Plan 2014/2015.

Executive Summary

2. 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.

3. 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.

4. 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

That the Rodney Local Board:

a) agrees a balanced budget for 2014/2015 and outer years for the Annual Plan 2014/2105 that reflects the allocation of decision-making.

b) confirms as updated list of advocacy areas for the Governing Body and Council Controlled Organisations, for inclusion in the Annual Plan 2014/2015.

c) does not support an increase in fees and charges for 2014/2015 for community halls and facilities booked by council.

d) supports the inflation adjustment for 2014/2015 for community committee run halls and facilities.

e) requests that staff provide usage statistics and asset costs for community halls and facilities to enable the local board to properly assess future fees and charges.

f) resolves on any feedback on regional proposals being considered as part of the annual plan process for Governing Body consideration:

i) Stadium Strategy; that the Rodney Local Board supports the speedway remaining at Western Springs with no further limitations to operation.

ii) Fluoride; that the Rodney Local Board supports the fluoridation of water.

g) requests the governing body funds the shortfall of $287,000 to complete Stage One of the Warkworth Town Hall upgrade.

h) requests the governing body provides $10m per year for the next 10 years for road sealing in Auckland.

i) requests that community and transport infrastructure is provided in the growth areas of Warkworth and Kumeu/Huapai in response to the draft Proposed Auckland Unitary Plan and Special Housing Areas.

j) notes that:

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

ii) If budgets do not balance 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 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.

Discussion

5. 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, 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 this local board will be tabled on the day.

Next steps to finalise local board agreements

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

11. 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.

12. 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.

13. 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 Board Views

14. 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

15. Many local board decisions are of importance to and impact on Māori. The annual plan and local board agreements are important tools that enable and can demonstrate the council’s responsiveness to Māori. 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.

16. 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 Issues

17. 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.

18. 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	147
b View	Budget refresh model	149
c View	Local community and arts facilities - community committee run facilities	151
d View	Local community and arts facilities - booked via Auckland Council	155
e View	Advocacy Action Plan	157

Signatories

Authors

Kate Marsh – Financial Planning Manager – Local BOards

Authorisers

Matthew Walker – Manager Financial Planning, Policy and Budgeting

Lesley Jenkins - Relationship Manager

Karen Lyons – Manager Local Board Services

Rodney Local Board

14 April 2014

Draft Annual Plan Rodney Local Board 2014/2015 submissions analysis and responses to information requests

File No.: CP2014/06015

Purpose

1. To provide analysis of the annual plan submissions from the Rodney Local Board area, and further information to support the local board in its decision-making.

Executive Summary

2. The Rodney 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 Rodney Local Board area, including local and regional submissions.

5. Subject matter expert responses to requests for further information from the hearings will be distributed as available.

Recommendation/s

That the Rodney Local Board:

a) confirms the amendment to the 2014/2015 budget as follows:

i) reallocates $15,000 opex from discretionary budget to develop a Greenways Plan for the Wellsford area.

ii) Reallocates $5,000 opex from the “Local board community facilities initiatives” budget line to fund the advertising of new leases and reclassifications under “local community leases.”

iii) Reallocates $60,000 opex from the “Local job opportunities/skills development” budget line in the Economic Development activity to the Community Development Arts and Culture activity to fund Youth Connections.

iv) Reallocates $40,000 capex from the “Toilets and changing rooms – new” budget line to a new budget line to enable minor parks works to be undertaken.

v) Reallocates $30,000 opex from the “Local board community facilities” budget line to a new budget line to progress a business case for an aquatic facility in Warkworth.

vi) Reduces the “Local board community facilities” budget line by $4,000 opex increasing to $13,960 per year for all subsequent years of the Long-term Plan to enable a conversion to $150,000 capex for the upgrade of mainstreet toilets.

b) advocates to the governing body and Council Controlled Organisations on the items included in Attachment A to the agenda report.

c) provides the following feedback on regional proposals arising from the special consultative procedure for the Annual Plan 2014/2015.

i) supports the speedway remaining at Western Springs with no further limitations to operation.

ii) supports the fluoridation of water.

d) request Auckland Transport investigate and report back on the following general transport issues raised in submissions:

i) speed reduction (particularly on Riverhead Rd, Oraha Rd and Koraha Rd)

ii) upgrading a section of Monowai Road.

e) request that the Parks department and Auckland Transport investigate issues around weed control, particularly removal of privet, and report back to the local board.

f) expresses the concerns of submitters to the governing body regarding the format of the Annual Plan 2014/2015 submission form and the need for a clearer separation of regional and local issues to make the form more user-friendly.

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 95 were received from the Rodney Local Board area. 16 submitters in the Rodney Local Board area indicated they wished to be heard.

9. The Rodney Local Hearings Panel held its hearings on the draft Annual Plan 2014/2015, including the Local Board’s draft Local Board Agreement 2014/2015 on 24 March 2014.

Subject matter expert responses to requests for information

10. Following the hearing, the panel had a number of requests for further information. These were sent to the relevant subject matter experts for response. The responses were distributed to local board members.

Local submissions from the Rodney Local Board area

Key themes and issues from the submissions commenting on local issues include support for:

· A pedestrian/cycleway bridge over Matakana River.

· More road sealing.

· Continued focus on local parks initiatives – coastal access, walkways in reserves and playgrounds.

· Local community facility upgrades, in particular the upgrade of the Warkworth Town Hall.

· A Greenways Plan for Wellsford.

· Aquatic facility for Warkworth.

· Upgrade of mainstreet toilets, in particular Wellsford.

Regional submissions from the Rodney Local Board area

Feedback on regional proposals:

· The Stadium Strategy – the Rodney Local Board has no stance on the Stadium Strategy, but the local board noted the many submissions in support of Western Springs retaining the speedway and in line with those submissions it supports the speedway remaining at Western Springs with no further limitations to operation.

· The local board noted there were some submissions in opposition to fluoridation of water, however the local board is supportive of fluoridation of water.

· The Arts Festival proposal – the local board has no stance on the Arts Festival proposal but noted that a number of local submissions indicated that this was held centrally and therefore of limited relevance.

There was also feedback on the following:

· Acknowledging general transport issues across the local board area including public transport, footpaths, road safety, speed reduction (particularly on Riverhead Road, Oraha Road and Koraha Road) and upgrading a section of Monowai Road. The general transport issues will be referred to the Transport Portfolio for further consideration. The speed reduction and upgrading of a section of Monowai Road will be referred to Auckland Transport.

· Requests of a Bridleway Strategy.

· Acknowledging that infrastructure issues need to be dealt with prior to growth occurring.

· That weed control, particularly removal of privet is addressed by council’s Parks department and Auckland Transport in the case of road corridors.

· Support for community led planning and initiatives for townships, i.e. Wellsford and Kaukapakapa.

· The local board noted that the proposed budget changes for Rodney Local Board on the Wellsford Greenways Plan, advertising new community leases and reclassifications, youth connections realignment, minor parks projects, aquatic facility for Warkworth and mainstreet toilets upgrade drew limited responses in the submissions.

· Acknowledging the concerns expressed by submitters regarding the format of the submission forms – the local board considered there needs to be a clearer separation of regional and local issues to make the form more user-friendly.

Consideration

Local Board Views

11. 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 SCP process.

12. 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

13. 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

14. 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

There are no attachments for this report.

Signatories

Authors

Michelle Sanderson – Local Board Advisor

Kathryn Martin – Senior Local Board Advisor

Authorisers

Lesley Jenkins – Relationship Manager

Rodney Local Board

14 April 2014

Financial Planning for Extreme Weather Events

File No.: CP2014/06707

Purpose

1. This report provides an overview of the current financial management practice for dealing with extreme weather events in local parks assets across the region. There are a number of issues and inconsistencies with the current practice and therefore it is recommended that a new and consistent approach be adopted.

Executive Summary

2. Auckland is prone to a range of extreme weather events including tornadoes, high tides, high winds, high rainfall and drought, all of which can contribute to sudden erosion, plant loss, tree fall, fixed asset damage and land slips. 12 local boards have some funding to deal with land slips and other effects from extreme weather but it is rarely sufficient when serious issues arise. Nine boards have no inbuilt financial capacity to cope with the impact of weather events.

3. Council has an obligation to plan for extreme weather events. There is a legal and moral obligation to ensure that some rates funding is set aside for this purpose given that weather damage, while unpredictable in timing and location, is none-the-less a constant in the Auckland region as a whole.

4. Three options are considered in this report. This first is to continue with the ad-hoc funding arrangement i.e. do nothing. The second is to pool local board funding to essentially develop a regional self-insurance fund (local unallocated budget). The third is to seek a regional fund, controlled by the governing body, which is applied for on a case by case basis. The second approach is recommended. The current arrangement will result in the need for local boards to cut existing budgets from time to time to react to weather events and overspend or approach the governing body regarding unforecast over expenditure. The second option, which involves funding moving to the area of greatest need, is likely to cover most weather events, without changing existing regional expenditure, and minimizes the time delays/bureaucracy involved.

5. In 2011, storms affected many areas and resulted in a number of severe slips on Waiheke Island. In 2012 the Upper Harbour Local Board was hit by a major cyclone event and dealt with the extensive damage via cuts in their current work and over expenditure. In 2013 all boards were affected by drought and a number of local boards have been affected by slips and erosion. The Hibiscus and Bays Local Board and the Waitemata Local Board, in particular, are finding their current liabilities well beyond their individual ability to fund the remedies. In general terms, extreme weather events affect coastal areas and older suburbs more than rural, flat or inland areas however all areas are prone to wind, drought and flooding.

6. The financial information relating to events that have occurred in the last three years is poor due to the fact that funds were taken from a variety of Auckland Council sources and expenses were not labelled consistently. As such the average financial risk for the region over the last three years is not specifically known. While it is possible for damage to be catastrophic and incalculable (if there is a regional disaster) it is only the common weather occurrence that is contemplated in this report. Over the last three years costs have been in the realm of six figures every year and the burden has traversed local boards.

7. Current budgets are operational. Damage from extreme weather events often results in the need for the development of new retaining or structures to protect existing assets from ongoing slips or similar. There is currently no capital funding sitting with local boards specifically tagged for storm damage remediation. It is recommended that a portion of the existing funding be allocated to capital budgets to provide for this eventuality.

Recommendation/s

That the Rodney Local Board:

a) fully support the development of a local unallocated fund to insure against unforeseen impact of extreme weather events to parks and that such funding can be on an as required basis.

b) support a portion of the pooled operating budgets being allocated to local unallocated capital funding.

c) note that expenditure against the local unallocated operational and capital storm damage budgets will be reported to all local boards annually.

Discussion

8. Auckland is prone to a range of extreme weather events including tornadoes, high tides, high winds, high rainfall and drought all of which can contribute to sudden erosion, plant loss, tree fall, fixed asset damage and land slips.

9. The scale or impact of extreme weather events is particularly felt in urban parks where space is at a premium and landscapes are heavily developed. Although weather events still have an impact on regional parks the scale of the regional park landscapes and the management of those landscapes (i.e. a lot more fully restored streams and coastal dunes) means the impact of extreme weather events can usually be tolerated without affecting the day to day use of the park. In general terms, extreme weather events also affect coastal areas and older suburbs more than flat or inland areas however all areas are prone to wind, drought and flooding.

10. The financial impact of managing damage associated with extreme weather events in the urban park environment has historically been dealt with in three ways:

· Self-insurance – a fund is kept to call on for unforeseen damage

· Reforecasting – no funds are set aside for unforeseen damage and as a result current projects and operational expenses are put on hold while funding is diverted to managing the impact of extreme weather events.

· Overspend – where neither of the two options above are possible then some costs have been worn as an overspend

11. Auckland City Council held specific “storm damage” budgets for parks and other Council’s had a level of self-insurance against unforeseen damage. Others had nothing.

12. Upon amalgamation the funding pool held by Auckland City Council was divided amongst the local boards in those areas. Local boards in the old Manukau City had some funding allocated to cater for this possibility in their local budgets. This resulted in very small buckets of money being allocated to 12 local boards.

13. This local board budget allocation has largely defeated the purpose of the self-insurance fund as extreme weather events do not happen regularly in any given area. They can affect a localised area or a large scale area that has no correlation to local board boundaries. This means that individual local boards can go many years without an extreme weather event while its neighbor or another local board may have several events in short succession. This random occurrence is normal and the current budget allocation does not befit this natural phenomenon.

14. The current operational “storm damage” budgets held across the region are:

	YTD Actual (Feb)	Budget
Albert-Eden		$77,558
Maungakiekie-Tamaki		$96,947
Orakei	$13,101	$109,874
Puketapapa	$2,197	$64,632
Waiheke		$19,389
Waitemata	$7,508	$102,894
Franklin		$20,371
Howick		$30,451
Mangere-Otahuhu		$15,515
Manurewa		$16,926
Otara-Papatoetoe		$16,715
Papakura		$11,158
Total	$22,806	$582,431

Note: there are a number of commitments or costs expected in Waitemata and Orakei that are not yet shown in the these budgets

Consideration

15. Council has an obligation to plan for extreme weather events. Under property law there is term known as lateral support which is about the right of a landowner to have their land physically supported in its natural state by both adjoining land and underground structures. There are around 4000 local and sports parks and each of these parks have neighbours. Any excavation or alteration council makes to park land may, at a later time, damage and affect a neighbour and leave council liable. Our neighbours have a right to enjoy their land in its natural condition. This includes the right to have their land held in place from the sides by the neighbouring land unless both are subject to unforeseen natural events.

16. In addition to this legal obligation to neighbours, some extreme weather events come at such a substantial cost that the budget available to an individual board is either unable to wear the cost of the recovery or the cost of recovery affects a range of other activities within a local board area. This budget shortfall creates a liability and its own set of risks for council and the community.

Options

17. The following options have been considered for ongoing/future management of storm damage:

	Option	Pro’s	Con’s
1	Do nothing: Some boards have limited funds available, others have nothing	· No change to boards budgets. A small contingency fund remains available for those boards with funding.	· No boards have sufficient funding to deal with medium size weather event – this exposes council to a range of risks
2	Create local unallocated fund (self-insurance): This would be a ring fenced fund for all boards to access allocated to the local and sports parks activity. It would be established from existing storm damage budgets held by some local boards.	· Funding is accessible across the region i.e. funds go where the storm goes · The size of the fund, pooled across the region, is more likely to accommodate regional extreme weather events than current arbitrary and small funding base available to those boards that have funding · Can be established immediately (providing all the boards agree) thereby helping with current liabilities	· Risk of the fund being inappropriately used for day to day weather events. This is a current risk and can be more readily mitigated as a local unallocated fund. It is recommended that there would be a single Tier 4 manager with a regional view determining a consistency of approach. · Some boards contribute to this solution while others benefit without contribution – may be seen as inequitable
3	Ask governing body to cater for most impacts of extreme weather events on a case by case basis.	· No change needed and governing body would pick up costs of damage (if agreed/funding found). Local boards that have existing funding would potentially need to show expenditure of current budgets before being eligible.	· The time delay and bureaucracy involved in making this happen means that most applications will be retrospective and expose the Council to financial risk · No funding is currently available at a governing body level. May take time to advocate for/secure

Local Board Views

18. This report is being circulated to all local boards to canvas their views on this issue.

Maori Impact Statement

19. In many cases extreme weather events can damage archeological sites or sites of significance to Tangata Whenua. This can trigger the need for cultural impact assessments and more careful/expensive restoration works to protect the values of the site. Without a fund to support rehabilitation or restoration work recently discovered or damaged sites of significance cannot be attended to as there are no funds. A regional self-insurance fund would help to mitigate risk for council.

General

20. As previously mentioned a variety of extreme weather events have affected parks over the years. For instance in 2011 storm damage caused extensive slips across Waiheke. Repair work is ongoing and existing storm damage funding has been insufficient to cope. In 2012 a tornado hit Hobsonville causing widespread damage to trees and houses. The arboricultural and general cleanup was unforeseen and no budget for this kind of work was available to the Upper Harbour Local Board. In this case the cost of repair was funded by savings in the local board budget combined with a budget overspend.

21. During September last year, a major storm event hit the east coast beaches, particularly in the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board area but also affecting Rodney, Orakei and Howick Local Boards. A storm surge of 0.8 metres on top of high tide caused substantial erosion. Orewa Beach was hit the hardest with significant sand loss and coastal structure damage.

22. Weather events are part of the life of Auckland. The current inconsistent, and in many cases non-existent, planning for extreme weather events is a risk and exposes council to a high likelihood of budget blowout in any given year and local board area.

23. The unpredictable nature of extreme weather events means that we cannot anticipate what portion of funding is needed for capital and operational funding. However, based on the last three years weather events, we know that there is a need for both operational and capital funding. It is therefore recommended that a portion of the current operational funds be allocated to capital funding to offset these costs.

Implementation Issues

24. If a regional self-insurance fund, initially created from existing local board funds, is universally supported by formal resolution from all local boards then this fund can be created in the current 2013/14 financial year.

25. The expenditure against the local unallocated operational and capital storm damage budgets will be reported to all local boards annually.

26. There are currently several areas affected by storm damage that have projected funding shortfalls that could benefit from immediate implementation of the regional solution. The beneficiaries from this fund will change from year to year. Some recent historical events and current events and associated funding requirements are detailed in Attachment A.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Historical and current events and associated funding requirements	169

Signatories

Authors

Jane Aickin, Manager Local and Sports Parks Central

Martin Van Jaarsveld, Manager Local and Sports Parks North

Malcolm Page, Manager Local and Sports Parks , South

Grant Jennings, Manager Local and Sports Parks West

Authorisers

Ian Maxwell, Manager Parks, Sports and Recreation

Karen Lyons, Manager Local Board Services

Rodney Local Board

14 April 2014

Local board feedback on the Local Boards Funding Policy Review

File No.: CP2014/06320

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 Rodney 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

No.	Title	Page
a View	Local Boards Funding Policy Review (Under Separate Cover)
b View	Guidelines for local board feedback	181

Signatories

Authors

Aaron Matich - Principal Advisor Modelling

Andrew Duncan - Manager Financial Policy

Authorisers

Chris Carroll - Manager Planning and Policy

Lesley Jenkins - Relationship Manager

Rodney Local Board

14 April 2014

Rodney Local Board input into the Council-Controlled Organisations current state assessment

File No.: CP2014/05553

Purpose

1. This report seeks input from the Rodney Local Board into the first phase of the council controlled organisations review (CCOs): the current state assessment.

Executive Summary

2. Auckland Council is undertaking a review of its seven substantive CCOs.

3. The first step of this review consists of an assessment of the current state. Council has prepared a preliminary assessment reviewing the experience of the council and its CCOs over the last three years from a council perspective, along with a discussion document to guide input.

4. Local boards are invited to provide their input based on the discussion document. Feedback will be reported back to the governing body and will inform the first phase of the CCO review: the current state assessment as well as subsequent phases of the review.

Recommendation/s

That the Rodney Local Board:

a) provides feedback into the CCO review current state assessment, as per Attachment A to the agenda report, by 30 April 2014.

Discussion

5. Auckland Council is undertaking a review of its substantive CCOs: Auckland Transport, Auckland Council Property Ltd, Auckland Council Investments Ltd, Auckland Waterfront Development Agency, Auckland Tourism Events and Economic Development, Regional Facilities Auckland and Waterfront Services Ltd.

6. The review aims to determine whether there is a need to change the scope of activities and functions within any CCO, the structures that the CCOs operate within, or any accountability mechanisms between the CCOs and council.

7. Governing body members, local board chairs, the CCOs and the Independent Māori Statutory Board were all given the opportunity to provide feedback into the draft Terms of Reference. Common themes amongst the feedback received included:

a) the need to reduce duplication between council and CCO activities

b) views as to where responsibility should lie for strategy/policy development

c) questions around effectiveness where an activity is split between council and one or more CCOs

d) the need to assess the impact of change on outcomes and delivery

e) the need for effective communication and collaboration across organisations

f) the need to achieve constructive and positive engagement with Aucklanders.

8. The feedback contributed to the development of the Terms of Reference. The final version was adopted by the governing body on 27 February 2014. It is presented in Attachment A.

9. The Terms of Reference specify the objectives of the review of CCOs as follows:

a) To ensure the governance structures and accountability mechanisms:

- Facilitate appropriate alignment of the CCOs operations with the Auckland Plan and other council strategies and policies

- Provide an effective and efficient model of service delivery for Auckland Council and Aucklanders

- Provide a sufficient level of political oversight and public accountability.

b) In addition the review will seek to:

- Provide clarity of role and responsibilities e.g. development of strategies, prioritisation of work programmes

- Eliminate duplication and gaps between the Auckland Council group organisations

- Identify any opportunities for better integration of activities and functions.

10. The intention is to complete the review and be ready to implement agreed outcomes by 30 June 2015, which aligns the CCO review with the Long-term Plan process. This timeline is extended from what was initially proposed to allow for full participation and feedback at the appropriate points of the process.

Current state assessment: preliminary findings

11. The first step of the CCOs review consists of an assessment of the current state. Auckland Council has prepared a report reviewing the experience of the council and its CCOs over the last three years from a council perspective.

12. The report, entitled “Auckland Council CCO Review, Current State Assessment (Council Persective) (CSA)”, is presented in Attachment B. It is referred to as the CSA in the rest of this report. The CSA is based on interviews with governing body members and input from Auckland Council staff.

13. Key preliminary findings in the CSA are as follows:

· CCOs were seen to deliver well for Auckland, and significant progress has been made over the last three years.

· Some governing body members are considering fine tuning the model while others expect more significant change.

· Views differ about the relative role of the council and its CCOs in developing mid-level strategies – i.e. strategies that bridge the gap between the Auckland Plan and implementation plans

· The majority view is that the formal accountability framework between the council and its CCOs needs to be simplified and streamlined, with more rigorous debate when priorities are being communicated through the letter of expectations.

· Informal accountability and communication is seen just as important as the formal accountability framework.

· Feedback was received on the importance of integration within the council group for effective operation, and of a strong culture of collaboration, as well as other integration mechanisms.

14. The CCOs have prepared a report to reflect their own perspective, with support from PricewaterhouseCooper (PWC) and informed by interviews with CCO board members and staff of each of the seven CCOs. The CCOs perspective was sought in recognition that the experience of the CCOs is different from that of council, and to utilise the considerable skills and experience within the CCOs to help inform the review.

15. The intention is to augment the current state assessment with input from local boards.

Local board feedback into Auckland Council’s discussion document

16. CCOs, as delivery agents of council, have the potential to have a significant impact on positive outcomes for Auckland residents, ratepayers, and visitors. Local boards have an interest in the extent to which CCOs can contribute to their priorities, in projects being undertaken in their area, and in being kept up-to-date on wider regional projects. While the CCOs are accountable to the governing body as shareholder, they also have relationships with local boards who share decision-making responsibilities of the council with the governing body.

17. Local boards’ views on the CCO current state will enrich the council perspective and local boards are invited to provide feedback based on the discussion document prepared by council. The discussion document, entitled “Auckland Council CCOs, Current State, Council Perspective: Discussion and Questions for Local Boards” provide a series of questions addressed to local boards. It is presented in Attachment C.

18. The local boards are encouraged to:

· reflect on their experience working with the CCOs over the last three years

· reflect on what worked well and what can be improved

· provide feedback on the issues and opportunities that the CCO review may address.

19. In providing their feedback, local board members are invited to base their comments on experience and to provide examples to illustrate the local board’s views.

20. Local board input will inform the analysis of CCOs and related activities and functions as part of the first phase of the CCO review: the current state assessment as well as informing subsequent phases of the review.

Consideration

Local Board Views

21. This report seeks the views of the local board, which will inform the CCO review.

Maori Impact Statement

22. The Independent Māori Statutory Board and Te Waka Angamua will be involved at several points in the process of reviewing the CCOs. They have inputted in the development of the Terms of Reference and have been asked to provide comments on the discussion document

23. Consultation with Māori, including mana whenua, mataawaka and iwi, would form part of any public consultation, should this occur during the third phase of the review.

Implementation Issues

24. There are no implementation issues at this stage of the CCO review.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Review of Auckland Council CCOs: Terms of Reference	187
b View	Auckland Council CCO Review, Current State Assessment (Council perspective)	193
c View	Auckland Council CCOs, Current State, Council Perspective: Discussion and Question for Local Boards	209
d View	Rodney Local Board feedback on the CCO Review	227

Signatories

Authors

Carole Canler – Advisor, Local Board Services

Anna Bray - Policy and Planning Manager, Local Board Services

Authorisers

Karen Lyons - Manager Local Board Services

Lesley Jenkins - Relationship Manager

Rodney Local Board

14 April 2014

LGNZ conference and AGM 2014

File No.: CP2014/05627

Purpose

1. This report informs local boards about the Local Government New Zealand (LGNZ) Annual General Meeting (AGM) and conference in Nelson from Sunday 20 July 2014 to Tuesday 22 July 2014 and invites local boards to nominate a representative to attend as relevant.

Executive Summary

2. The Local Government New Zealand Annual Conference and AGM takes place in Nelson from Sunday 20 July to Tuesday 22 July 2014.

3. The AGM takes place on the first day of the conference. Auckland Council is entitled to 4 official delegates to the AGM, one of whom is the presiding (or voting) delegate. The governing body will consider this at their meeting on 27 March 2014. The four official delegates are likely to be the Mayor as a member of the LGNZ National Council, the Deputy Mayor as the Mayor’s alternate for this position, Cr Webster as Chair LGNZ Zone One and a member of LGNZ National Council and the Chief Executive.

4. In addition to the official delegates, local board members are invited to attend. Local boards should consider the relevance of the conference programme when deciding on attendance, with the expectation that no local board will approve more than one member to attend the conference.

Recommendation/s

That the Rodney Local Board:

a) nominate a representative to attend the Local Government New Zealand 2014 Annual General Meeting and conference from 20 July 2014 to 22 July 2014 on the basis that the conference programme is relevant to the local board’s work programme.

Discussion

5. The LGNZ Conference and AGM are being held in Nelson. The conference commences with the AGM and technical tours from 10.00am on Sunday 20 July 2014 and concludes at 4.30pm on Tuesday 22 July 2014.

6. The theme of this year’s conference is “Powering Local Economies – building community vibrancy”. The programme includes:

· Paul Pisasale, Mayor of Ipswich, Transforming towns and cities to build strong local economies and vibrant communities

· Rod Drury, Factors that make Wellington based Xero a global success and why businesses locate where they do

· Craig Stobo, Andrew McKenzie and Arihia Bennett, Lifting governance and financial performance

· Caroline Saunders and Ganesh Nana, Future economic thinking: how will the changing social and economic landscape impact on our future development patterns

· Lawrence Yule, LGNZ’s 2014 elections manifesto

· Jonar Nader, Innovation: Something ‘new’ is not always something ‘better’

· Therese Walsh, National events from metro to grass roots – needs, opportunities and key success factors for a town hosting a major event

7. The programme also includes a number of Master Class sessions including:

· New generation funding models for infrastructure

· Funding models and the economic impact of cycle ways

· Transforming local government through smart digital investment

· Improving governance through strengthening capacity and capability

· How do we engage with youth?

Annual General Meeting

8. The AGM takes place on the first day of the conference. Auckland Council is entitled to have four delegates to the AGM, one of whom is the presiding (or voting) delegate. The four official delegates are likely to be the Mayor (or his nominee), the Deputy Mayor, Councillor Penny Webster (as Chair of Zone 1) and the Chief Executive (or his nominee).

9. The Mayor is a member of the LGNZ National Council, the Deputy Mayor is the Mayor’s alternate for this position, Cr Webster is the Chair of LGNZ Zone One and a member of LGNZ National Council and Cr Cashmore is a member of the Regional Sector Group of LGNZ. The governing body will consider an item on AGM attendance at their meeting on 27 March 2014.

10. In addition to the official delegates, local board members are entitled to attend. Local boards should consider the relevance of the conference programme when deciding on attendance, with the expectation that no board will approve more than one member to attend the conference.

Costs

11. The Local Board Services Department budget will cover the costs of one member per local board to attend the conference.

12. Registration fees are $1410.00 (incl GST) if paid by 4 June 2013 and $1510.00 (incl GST) after that. Additional costs are accommodation around $150 per night, plus travel. Local Board Services will be co-ordinating and booking all registrations and accommodation and investigating cost effective travel.

Consideration

Local Board Views

13. This is a report to the 21 local boards.

Maori Impact Statement

14. The LGNZ conference will better inform local boards and thereby support their decision-making for their communities including Maori.

Implementation Issues

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

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	2014 LGNZ AGM and Conference Programme	237

Signatories

Authors

Anna Bray – Policy and Planning Manager, Local Board Services

Authorisers

Lesley Jenkins - Relationship Manager

Karen Lyons – Manager Local Board Services

Chairperson	Brenda Steele
Deputy Chairperson	Steven Garner
Members	James Colville
	Warren Flaunty, QSM
	Thomas Grace
	Beth Houlbrooke
	John McLean
	Phelan Pirrie
	Greg Sayers

Authors	Raewyn Morrison - Local Board Democracy Advisor
Authorisers	Lesley Jenkins - Relationship Manager