|
Resolution number WTK/2014/101
MOVED
by Member S Toms, seconded by Member GB Presland:
That the Waitākere
Ranges Local Board:
a)
Provides feedback on the allocation
of decision making review issues paper and identify any additional issues
relevant to the scope of the review.
b)
Provides the following amended feedback
on the allocation of decision making review issues paper:
1.
The Board welcomes the opportunity to
provide feedback on the Allocation of Decision Making Review.
2.
The Board supports the continued
approach of section 17 of the Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009,
where the legislative presumption is that decisions will be made by local
boards. Decisions made regionally will be the exception, where precise
provisions apply.
3.
With respect to Issue 1: Local asset
renewals
The Board strongly supports any decision-making on local
asset renewals should remain with the local board. This is because keeping
it local allows for budgets to be allocated accordingly, which can reflect
the needs of their constituents. Local boards are best placed to hear the
views of the community and are familiar with and better informed about the
condition of the asset and its appropriateness to the needs/aspirations of
the community.
Therefore it is the Boards view that if this decision
making ability was moved back to the governing body, they would apply a one
size fits all approach which may not be the best solution, given they do not
know those particular needs and aspirations of the local community.
The Board considers that keeping it local could save on
budgets as their view is that the governing body can at times replace assets
on a time schedule basis, when in fact that asset might not require
replacement until a later date. Simple maintenance applied in a timely
fashion may suffice.
4.
With respect to Issue 2: Local economic
development
The Board strongly supports that decision-making
responsibility remains with the local board and does not move to ATEED.
The Boards view is that if the decision-making
responsibility was transferred to ATEED that their focus would be too high
level and not locally focused at all.
Also the Board is concerned that if LED was transferred to
ATEED there could be governance implications. LED activities and initiatives
sit with local boards and the local board plan and should continue to do so.
5.
Additional Feedback
·
Procurement - more ability to have local
procurement, “buying local”;
·
Development Contribution - is a local
issue;
·
The board would wish to see better sharing
of information in a timely manner especially from regional meetings to local
boards;
·
Budgets/money does not promptly or
appropriately follow decisions that come to local boards from governing body;
·
Generally how matters work between local
board and governing body is very haphazard;
·
Decisions made on a regional level needs
better input from local boards;
·
Decisions made regionally impact locally so
local input is essential.
c)
Delegates to Deputy Chair and Member
Tollestrup to make any final minor changes to the feedback
CARRIED
|
