|
Resolution number WTK/2014/139
MOVED
by Member NR Henderson, seconded by Member SR Tollestrup:
That the Waitākere
Ranges Local Board requests that
the following comments be provided directly to the Finance and Performance
Committee when it considers the deferral of 2014/15 capital projects
a) The Waitakere Ranges Local Board would once again like to
express its frustration that cuts are being expected in adopted budgets
because there is a desire from the Mayor’s Office to adopt a lower target for
rates than that adopted in the Long Term Plan.
b) The Local Board feels that there is a
high degree of acceptance politically and within the community of the level
of rates and planned expenditure in the current Long Term Plan, which strikes
a good balance between managing impacts on ratepayers while enabling council to
deliver key new infrastructure along with core services that our communities
expect.
c) The board feels that a 2.5% rates target
would have a significant impact on council’s ability to deliver on its “most
liveable city” vision and core components of the Auckland Plan.
d) Is concerned that this review of its
capital work programme for the current financial year undermines the
democratic process by which we adopt annual budgets. To arrive at our Local
Board Agreement 2014/15, we completed a statutory process including
consulting with our community. The Local Board Agreement is a public
document, which the community would expect to rely on, but now some of the
projects may not go ahead. This potentially undermines public confidence in
the process and in the Local Board.
e) Notes that our area has been
unreasonably hard hit by the proposed deferrals when compared to other areas.
Nearly 50 per cent of the local board’s capital programme is being proposed
for deferral. A fair and equitable approach is needed.
f) Notes that new information has been
presented to the local board since this report was published. Part of the
proposed response to the Mayor’s proposed Long Term Plan is that any projects
deferred through this review will be deferred for 5 -10 years. We therefore
request that a commitment be given that any deferred projects will be
retained for consideration through the Long Term Plan process.
g) The deferral criteria go far beyond
delaying projects that are not ready, and impede the strategic vision of Council.
The criteria mean that projects that have been the subject of lengthy
community consultation, and are ready to go, will be delayed unless some contractual
arrangement has been reached. The adopted approach is not a strategic,
planned approach, but a technical approach, meaning that some projects that
have transformational potential, but do not meet the criteria, will be
delayed. There is real fear from this board that deferral will entail a loss
of priority and momentum, and that some of these projects will not proceed..
h) Requests that the deferral criteria take
into account:
i. Community expectations/support and
level of consultation. With our walkway projects for example, council staff
have worked to overcome the early concerns of adjoining landowners and
engaged with the wider community so while contracts may not have been signed,
there is a level of commitment and momentum that is likely to be lost should
the project be deferred. Glen Eden Town Centre improvements are another such
case where deferral of what are modest projects presents a reputational risk
to Council as it will be seen as not delivering on its promises, and not
doing what it says it will do. For example, the Mayor recently held a public
meeting at Glen Eden to help us generate support for the revitalisation of
Glen Eden, so renegging on promises will only confirm for some that the
Council does not put its “money where its mouth is”.
ii. Time limited opportunities. The Oratia
land acquisition budget needs to be available to make a strategic land
purchase when the opportunity to purchase arises. This strategic acquisition
is a central part of the Oratia Masterplan and Waitakere Ranges Foothills
walkway project. When this land comes back on the market we need to be able
to act.
iii. Making good decisions. We have concern
about deferring funding in areas where we may not have received all the
information, for example community facilities renewals. There is a pattern
of finding out about opportunities that have been missed after the fact. The
local board would like to note its disappointment that it is too often asked
to make decisions on budgets and work programmes without receiving all the
relevant information and options. The Local Board was unable to find the
funds in the 2014/15 budget for a kitchen renewal in the Laingholm Hall as we
believed our budget was completely allocated. Now we are losing some of that
budget because it seems the budget was not completely allocated to specific
projects.
i) Notwithstanding its position in a)
above, the local board recommends that the following projects / programmes
should be retained for the reasons given:
i. Community facilities renewals Retain $184,375
for delivery for repairs to:
• Waitakere Domain Hall $103,125
(bathroom refit, flooring replacement and interior painting) to bring the
facility back into use
• Tititrangi War Memorial Hall kitchen
$56,250
• Laingholm Village Hall, kitchen,
$25,000 to be carried out in tandem with fire damage repair. The local board
previously asked that this happen though was told that funding was not
available, however, it now appears we were misinformed.
ii. The parks improvement general budget Retain
$670,386. The parks improvement budget includes a large amount of renewal
items. Budget needs to be retained to ensure works can be done to protect
public safety and council /community assets:
• Renewals budget of existing parks assets:
Retain $330,000.
• Piha Stream: Retain $350,000 stream
erosion involving a threat to the West Coast Gallery, volunteer fire station,
old school house and nearby road. Works are required this summer before next
seasons wet weather.
• The board also note that the Huia
seawall is requiring serious remediation: coastal erosion from recent high
tide and weather events has caused significant damage to parks such as Huia
Domain and transport assets, and hazard management work is urgently required
to remediate. Costings are yet to be received.
iii. Walkways (Tangiwai/Little Muddy Creek):
Retain $45,000 to progress through resource consent process.
iv. Walkways (Waitakere Ranges foothills):
Retain $75,000 for getting through the resource consent process. The local
board notes that community expectations have been raised about this project
through engagement and consultation.
v. Land purchase (Oratia Domain): Retain $341,060
– recommend the fund remains available to respond to the opportunity for a
strategic purchase as it arises. This budget is to deliver on a key component
of the Oratia Masterplan and Waitakere Ranges Foothills Walkway plan.
Alternatively, a fast-track process should be put in place to respond to such
an opportunity. The local board is concerned about the potential reputational
risk with Oratia residents should this budget be deferred or put into the
regional acquisition pot.
vi. Glen Eden Town Centre revitialisation
projects: Retain $204,600 – strategic investment. Retain full amount of
$204,600 for detailed design of project delivery, including implementing
CPTED (community safety) report recommendations for town centre safety. The
board pulled together this funding when making its decisions on the Local
Board Agreement 2014/2015 to respond to the community view that council needs
to start delivering on this project after three decades of planning and
consulting about improvements.
j) Notes that any projects where timing has been
deferred, but project planning is underway, should be given high priority in
the 2015/2016 capital programme.
CARRIED
|
