Agenda of Māngere-ŌtāhuhuLocal Board

Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

15 October 2014

Design Framework for Otahuhu Linkages

File No.: CP2014/22423

Purpose

1. The purpose of this report is to seek Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board endorsement of the draft Design Framework for Ōtāhuhu Linkages for the purposes of public consultation.

Executive summary

1. The revitalization, enhancement and improved connectedness of the Ōtāhuhu Town Centre is both a priority of the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board Plan and the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Area Plan.

2. The purpose of the draft Design Framework for the Ōtāhuhu Linkages is to provide guidance for future streetscape or public realm upgrades of the Ōtāhuhu Town Centre. Specifically the draft Design Framework should ensure that any upgrades result in a high-quality, well connected, safe environment which is attractive for residents, visitors and businesses alike.

3. The Draft Design Framework has been prepared in consultation with key stakeholders and partners, including the Local Board, iwi and the Ōtāhuhu Business Association.

4. Following endorsement by the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board it is proposed that Council staff will undertake public consultation. It is proposed that this consultation include an Open Day and a four week feedback period. The purpose of this consultation will be to inform and seek input from the Otahuhu Community on the draft Design Framework.

5. It is proposed that this consultation would be undertaken in October and November 2014.

6. Council staff will report the outcome of the consultation to the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board in December 2014 and seek formal adoption.

7. There is currently $920,000 allocated to the Ōtāhuhu Town Centre revitalisation projects, referred to as the Ōtāhuhu Linkages project, in the Auckland Council Long-Term Plan (2012-2022) to deliver streetscape improvements that seeks to strengthen connections between the town centre and transport and recreation facilities. The framework will be used to guide the design of these streetscape projects.

Recommendation/s

That the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board:

a) receive the Design Framework for Ōtāhuhu Linkages report.

b) endorse council staff proceeding with public consultation in October and November 2014.

c) note the council staff will update the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board on the outcome of the key stakeholder consultation in December 2014 with the intention to also seek formal adoption of the Design Framework document.

Comments

Background

8. The revitalisation, enhancement and improved connectedness of the Ōtāhuhu Town Centre is both a priority of the draft Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board Plan and the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Area Plan.

9. The Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Area Plan was adopted in 2013 and shows how the area could change over the next 30 years and contribute to making Auckland the world’s most liveable city. The Area Plan identifies six big opportunities (key moves) to transform Māngere-Ōtāhuhu into an area that attracts visitors and where people want to live, work and play. Three theme sections then provide local place-based outcomes and actions to support the achievement of the six key moves.

10. In terms of Ōtāhuhu Town Centre the following key moves and themes from the Area Plan are relevant:

Key Move

Theme Based

Actions

Revitalise and enhance Māngere-Ōtāhuhu centres, including Ōtāhuhu Town Centre.

Each centre offers opportunities to grow and regenerate in a way that includes and reflects its unique communities and attributes, and supports future residential and business growth.

Economic and Community Development

Will have commercially attractive, competitive, safe, well-connected town and local centres.

Establish a safe, legible and high-quality public realm

that includes shared spaces, open spaces and a focal

point for the town centre.

Improve walking and cycling links between Ōtāhuhu Town

Centre and a train station into Sturges Park, and from

Ōtāhuhu Town Centre along Princes Street, improving

the intersection over the motorway. Consider a verandah control for Station Road to ensure pedestrian protection between the town centre and the train station.

Natural Environment, heritage & character

Māngere-Ōtāhuhu’s built environment

is known and valued for its green spaces,

connected neighbourhoods, sustainable

buildings and vibrant centres.

Protect, enhance and celebrate the heritage values of the Great South Road

11. The Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Draft Local Board Plan articulates the Boards’ vision that “our town centres are well-connected and foster business and innovation”. The relevant outcome is the delivery of ‘a well-connected area’. Completing the Ōtāhuhu Linkages Project will make it safer and easier to move between the Ōtāhuhu recreation centre, town centre and new bus-rail interchange.

12. There is currently $920,000 allocated to the Ōtāhuhu Town Centre revitalisation projects, referred to as the Ōtāhuhu Linkages project, in the Auckland Council Long-Term Plan (2012-2022) to deliver streetscape improvements that seeks to strengthen connections between the town centre and transport and recreation facilities.

Project Deliverables

13. A draft Design Framework has been prepared for Ōtāhuhu Town Centre, entitled the ‘Design Framework for Otahuhu Linkages’ (refer to attachment one).

14. The draft Design Framework has been prepared in consultation with key stakeholders and partners, and following public consultation is to be adopted by the Local Board (refer attachment two for a summary of the engagement process).

15. The purpose of the draft Design Framework is to ensure that any streetscape or public upgrades:

• Result in a high quality, robust, coordinated visual approach

• Enhance the sense of arrival and local identity

• Establish safe, legible, accessible and user friendly connections particularly between the Town Centre, community destinations and public transport

• Enhance the retail experience and strengthen economic viability and attractiveness

• Compliment other Council initiatives e.g. Recreation Precinct and Ōtāhuhu Bus Rail Interchange and new Bus Stops on the Avenue and Mason Ave

16. The draft Design Framework will assist in achieving this by providing:

a) Design Guidelines for:

• Materials palette – paving, street furniture, lighting

• Planting palette

• Treatment of key pedestrian and cycling routes

• Way-finding strategy

• Opportunities for public space, public art and toilets

b) A Staging Strategy – identifying potential future projects and priorities

17. The Design Framework will guide the Ōtāhuhu Linkages Project funded in 2014/15 & future streetscape proposals as funding becomes available.

Public consultation

18. Following endorsement by the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board, it is proposed that Council staff will undertake public consultation throughout October and November 2014. This will include an Open Day and a four week feedback period. The purpose of these meetings will be to inform and seek input from the Otahuhu Community on the draft Design Framework.

19. In November Council staff will report the outcome of public consultation to the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board and recommend any additions or amendments to the Draft Design Framework.

20. Council staff will also seek formal adoption of the Design Framework in December.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

21. There have been two Local Board workshops on the 13^th of August 2014 and the 3^rd of September 2014 as part of the engagement on the draft Design Framework, that have informed the development of the draft framework.

Māori impact statement

22. It is noted that in developing the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu area plan, the council met with Mana Whenua to identify their issues, values and aspirations for the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu area. In addition Auckland Transport has been, and is currently, engaging with iwi in relation to the proposed Ōtāhuhu Bus Rail Interchange (OBRI). This included dialogue on connections with the wider area and the town centre and this has been fed into the development of the draft Design Framework. However, it was agreed through these hui on the OBRI that separate engagement would be undertaken in relation to the draft Design Framework.

23. Therefore, through the development of the Draft Design Framework two specific Hui have been held that have informed the development of the draft framework. There will be further opportunity for wider iwi engagement as part of the public consultation process.

Implementation

24. This Design Framework, once adopted, will provide guidance for future streetscape and public realm projects.

25. It should be noted that the Design Framework does not ensure the allocation of any budget through the Long Term Plan process. The only budget currently allocated for streetscape works in the LTP is the ‘Ōtāhuhu Linkages’ budget of $920,000 in financial year 2014/15.

26. There is also an important relationship between this framework and the Auckland Transport public transport projects underway in Ōtāhuhu. By October 2015 Auckland Transport are to deliver a new Bus Rail Interchange at Ōtāhuhu Station, new on road bus stops on Mason Avenue (outside the new Recreation Precinct) and new on street bus stops on the Avenue (to replace the current off street stops). The quality of these facilities and the connections between these is crucial and recognised. The Design Framework will guide the design of connections between these new facilities and the spaces around them.

27. The Design Framework does not apply to privately owned sites or off-street Council open spaces, community facilities or public transport sites. However, the framework will provide guidance on the connection between key destinations, whether private or publicly owned.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Summary of engagement process	15
b View	Otahuhu Linkages Design Framework	17

Signatories

Authors

Jeremy Pellow - BID District Advisor

Authorisers

Janet Schofield - Business Area Planning Manager

Carol McKenzie-Rex - Relationship Manager

Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

15 October 2014

Mangere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board Community Group Funding - Applications for Round One 2014/2015

File No.: CP2014/20967

Purpose

1. This report presents applications received under round one of the Mangere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board 2014/2015 Community Funding programme. The Mangere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board is requested to fund, part fund or decline these applications.

Executive summary

2. The Mangere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board has a total budget of $148,711 for the 2014/2015 financial year for the community grants programme.

3. The board approved a total of $10,958 for school holiday programmes running between 29 September 2014 and 17 July 2015, which leaves a balance remaining of $137,753 for the year.

4. The applications to be considered at this time are for round one which is the first of two rounds for this financial year.

5. The Mangere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board considered these applications at a workshop on 3 September 2014.

6. Twenty-six applications have been received for this round, requesting a total of $227,702.

Recommendation/s

That the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board:

a) considers the applications listed below and agrees to fund, part fund or decline each application in this round:

Fund Type	Applicant	Funds required for	Amount requested
Community Crime Prevention Fund	Mangere/Papatoetoe Pacific Community Safety Patrol Trust	Towards vehicle maintenance and running costs, salary for an office worker and the purchase of desktop computer, printer and software	$10,000
Marae Facilities Fund	Auckland Mataatua Society Incorporated	Towards the purchase of 60 waterproof mattresses, 200 wipeable chairs, installation of carpet, provision and erection of a storage cabinet and an upgrade of the men’s ablution block	$45,000
Social Investment Fund	Auckland Regional Migrant Services Charitable Trust	Towards 0.5 FTE salary for an activities co‑ordinator for Pacific Island newcomers to Mangere, Manurewa and Otara	$12,334
Social Investment Fund	Auckland Single Parent’s Trust and Te Kaitiakitanga Tamaki Makaurau o te Matua Kotahitanga	Towards the cost to provide workshops and one-on-one coaching for single parents	$3,120
Social Investment Fund	Christians Against Poverty NZ	Towards the annual cost of a client freephone line used by the 60 families in Mangere and Otahuhu who use the service	$1,800
Social Investment Fund	LifeKidz Trust	Towards the salaries for youth workers to provide a 30-day school holiday programme care for 45 children with disabilities and special needs between 22 December 2014 and 5 February 2015 at The Depot, Lloyd Elsmore Park, Pakuranga (20% of attendees are from Mangere-Otahuhu)	$5,000
Social Investment Fund	Roman Catholic Diocese of Auckland Ecclesiastical Goods Trust (t/a Catholic Social Services)	Towards wages and the cost of supervision of counsellors working with families in Mangere and Otahuhu	$10,000
Social Investment Fund	The Parenting Place - Attitude Youth Division	Towards the delivery of the Attitude presentation to approximately 4,300 students at six high schools in Mangere-Otahuhu (Auckland Seventh-Day Adventist, McAuley High, Southern Cross Campus, Kings, Mangere and Otahuhu colleges) between November 2014 and October 2015	$6,760
Local Board Discretionary Community Fund	Auckland Regional Migrant Services Charitable Trust	Towards the facilitation of six information workshops for Pacific Island newcomers and service providers at Mangere Central Library (or similar) between November 2014 and October 2015	$1,680
Local Board Discretionary Community Fund	Alofa Tunoa Pentecostal Church	Towards the purchase of a public address system, electronic drum kit, hand-held and head-set microphones and an acoustic electric guitar	$13,413
Local Board Discretionary Community Fund	Auckland Kids Achievement Trust (t/a FYD Auckland)	Towards the salaries of four Kiwi Can leaders to provide a weekly, year-long life skills and values programme for 5-12 year olds, delivered to Koru and Sutton Park schools	$5,000
Local Board Discretionary Community Fund	Chinese New Settlers Services Trust	Towards the purchase of two laptops, two mobile whiteboards, venue hire, promotion and tutors for the Connecting Kids - Connecting Families education programme	$6,245
Local Board Discretionary Community Fund	Enuamanu Atiu Nui Maruarua Society Inc	Towards the purchase of 500 chairs, 50 tables and a table trolley	$28,131
Local Board Discretionary Community Fund	Father and Child Trust	Towards salaries for the provision of the fathers' support service	$5,000
Local Board Discretionary Community Fund	Grandparents Raising Grandchildren Trust NZ	Towards the salary of the Auckland outreach worker and a contribution to the production of the free monthly members' newsletter	$1,434
Local Board Discretionary Community Fund	KidsCan Charitable Trust	Towards the purchase of nit treatment kits for distribution to Mangere and Otahuhu schools	$5,000
Local Board Discretionary Community Fund	Mangere Central Indoor Bowling Club	Towards venue hire for the Mangere Central Hall, Kirkbride Road, Mangere between 5 March and 5 November 2015	$2,293
Local Board Discretionary Community Fund	Mobility Assistance Dogs Trust	Towards the annual salaries of the canine manager and the senior canine co‑ordinator for the Puppies in Prison programme	$4,000
Local Board Discretionary Community Fund	New Zealand Blue Light Ventures Inc	Towards the cost of 1304 "Kidsmart" handbooks for distribution to Year 9 students in the Mangere and Otahuhu area	$4,564
Local Board Discretionary Community Fund	New Zealand Sikh Women's Association Inc	Towards annual rental for the premises at 214 Great South Road, Otahuhu	$12,707
Local Board Discretionary Community Fund	Roberson Road Playgroup	Towards the salary of the 0.5 FTE playgroup co‑ordinator	$12,000
Local Board Discretionary Community Fund	South Auckland Christian Foodbank	Towards transport and staff wages for the FoodSave initiative to increase food supplies for the South Auckland Christian	$18,000
Local Board Discretionary Community Fund	Stepping Stones Recovery Trust	Towards the purchase of a television and wall-mount bracket, barbeque, kettle, cutlery, serving bowls, pots and pans	$3,079
Local Board Discretionary Community Fund	The Parenting Place - Toolbox Division	Towards participant subsidies, handbook printing and volunteer expenses for seven Toolbox parenting group programmes throughout Mangere and Otahuhu benefiting approximately 63 parents and their families	$1,780
Local Board Discretionary Community Fund	Waterlea Indoor Bowling Club	Towards the yearly venue hire cost of the Mangere War Memorial Hall, Domain Road, Mangere Bridge	$2,356
Local Board Discretionary Community Fund	WaterSafe Auckland Inc	Towards the cost to deliver the free, five-day Whānau Nui programme teaching swimming and water safety skills to 120 children and whanau at the Otahuhu and Moana Nui A Kiwa pools during summer 2014/2015	$7,006
Total Amount Requested			$227,702

Comments

7. The 6 March 2014 Regional Strategy and Policy Committee agreed to the continuation of the interim community funding approach for the 2014/2015 financial year:

“That the Regional Strategy and Policy Committee endorse existing funding arrangements and grants schemes being rolled over for the 2014 /2015 financial year.” (REG/2014/36)

8. The funds for the legacy community funding and local board discretionary community funding schemes within the southern local board areas cover the following funds:

· Local Board Discretionary Community Fund

· Social Investment

· School Holiday Programme Fund

· School Swimming Pool Fund

· Rates Assistance to Community Groups Owning Land In Manukau

· Community Crime Prevention Fund

· Immediate Response Crime/Safety Fund

· Marae Facilities Fund

9. Twenty-six applications were received in this round to be considered under the following funds:

· Community Crime Prevention Fund

· Marae Facilities Fund

· Social Investment Funds

· Local Board Discretionary Community Grants Fund

10. When considering the applications to the Local Board Discretionary Community Grants Fund, the Mangere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board should be guided by their Local Board Plan priorities. These are not eligibility criteria; rather they are guidelines to support the local board when considering the merits of each application.

11. The Mangere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board held a workshop on 3 September 2014, to consider each application and how each project aligned with the Mangere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board Plan priorities and the south “Community Funding Policy for Grants, Donations and Sponsorships” that currently apply.

12. Financial Summary – Summary of Mangere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board’s available balance for the 2014/2015 financial year:

2014/15 Annual Budget		Type of Fund	Grants paid	Balance
$15,544		Community Crime Prevention Fund		$15,544
$37,689		Marae Facilities Fund		$37,689
$8,237		Rates Assistance to Community Groups Owning Land in Manukau Fund		$8,237
$8,211		School Holiday Programme Fund	$10,958	-$2,747
$3,134		School Pool Fund		$3,134
$40,868		Social Investment Fund		$40,868
$35,028		Local Board Discretionary Community Fund		$35,028
$148,711	TOTAL		$10,958	$137,753

Consideration

Local board views and implications

13. A copy of the current legacy community funding and local board discretionary community funding schemes and funding guidelines within the southern local board areas current were circulated to all board members for the workshop held on 3 September 2014.

14. Local board feedback on these applications was sought at a workshop with the Mangere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board on 3 September 2014.

15. The allocation of grants to community groups is within the adopted annual plan and budgets.

16. The decisions sought by this report do not trigger the Auckland Council Significance Policy.

Māori impact statement

17. Community funding is a general programme of interest and accessible to a wide range of groups, including Maori. Maori are therefore likely to benefit alongside other groups in the community. The Marae Facilities Fund aims to support marae facilities in recognition that they provide a valuable community resource for Maori communities.

Implementation

18. Once a decision has been made staff will confirm, in writing, the decisions of the board.

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Signatories

Authors

Jenny Young - Community Funding Advisor

Authorisers

Kevin Marriott – Acting Manager Community Development Arts and Culture

Carol McKenzie-Rex - Relationship Manager

Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

15 October 2014

Council's Role in Early Childhood Education

File No.: CP2014/22309

Purpose

1. This report responds to the Mangere - Otahuhu Local Board’s concern about the demand on existing parks and open space to provide for early childhood education facilities and proposes some principles to guide staff when responding to future requests.

Executive summary

2. Research shows that children who are involved in quality early childhood education (ECE) benefit in many ways, and that these benefits extend to their family/whānau and the wider community. Taking part in ECE builds a strong foundation for children’s ongoing education, learning and development.

3. Auckland Council has signaled its support for ECE services through the Auckland Plan and the Southern Initiative. A target has been identified in the Auckland Plan for all 3 to 4 year olds to participate in, and have access to quality, culturally appropriate ECE services by 2020.

4. Council’s main involvement in supporting ECE services to date ranges from being a direct provider to providing community leases for council facilities (land and buildings), programme support, grant funding and use of temporary bookable spaces. The council has no statutory responsibilities or role in the establishment, management or funding of ECE services.

5. There is growing tension between the use of parks and open space for non-exclusive recreation purposes, and the demand to lease council land for community based ECE provision. With no policies or guidelines currently in place that provide detailed guidance for decision-makers around ECE services applications are assessed on a case by case basis.

6. The Proposed Auckland Unitary Plan permits ECE services up to 100m2 in an existing building in various public open space zones. Stand-alone ECE facilities are a non-complying activity.

7. Staff held a number of workshops with southern local boards between May and August 2014 to discuss options for the council’s role in supporting ECE services. The feedback from the workshops have provided the basis for the development of key guiding principles that will help the board determine how it approaches requests for a lease to occupy parks and open space for the purpose of ECEs in the future.

Recommendation/s

That the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board:

a) Adopt the following principles to guide decisions on requests for lease of public open space for early childhood education provision;

i) that central government has the main responsibility for the establishment of early childhood education services

ii) that the establishment of new early childhood education services on council’s parks and open space will not be supported, unless there is a direct benefit to the open space and its users

iii) that existing early childhood education centres seeking expansion will be supported where the impact on the parks and open space provision and its users have been assessed as minimal.

Comments

8. At local board meetings in August and September 2013, the Otara - Papatoetoe and Mangere - Otahuhu Local Boards requested:

a) an analysis of ECE [Early Childhood Education] demand in the Local Board and The Southern Initiative area

b) that the governing body develop a strategic approach to the provision of ECEs as a matter of urgency and include this on their work programme.

c) the identification of those open spaces which are suitably zoned and classified to support the establishment of ECEs.

d) the identification of those open spaces which are suitably classified and will be appropriately zoned in the Unitary Plan to support the establishment of ECEs.

9. The resolutions were forwarded to other local boards for their information, and the Manurewa and Papakura local boards also expressed an interest in being involved in these discussions.

10. There are three main ways the council currently supports the provision of ECE services:

a) direct provider – the council manages a number of ECE services located in council owned facilities (e.g. Kauri Kids.

b) leasing council facilities – the main focus has been land but includes buildings to generally community based ECE providers

c) indirect provider - through programme support, use of non-exclusive bookable spaces in council facilities and grants.

11. Some southern local boards have raised concerns around the tension between park and open space provision for recreation and the demand for use of these spaces by ECE providers. Much of the land that is appropriately zoned under the District Plan and classified under the Reserves Act in the southern sector is at capacity and applications are being received from ECE providers to use reserve land whose purpose and use is for recreation (informal and active/sports). This is raising concerns around the appropriateness of that land for ECE services and the cumulative loss of public open space.

12. Although council has specified support for ECE services and various directives have been set through the Auckland Plan and the Southern Initiative, there are no policies or guidelines in place that provide detailed guidance for decision-makers around ECE services. This means that applications are being dealt with on a case by case basis.

13. The proposed Auckland Unitary Plan permits ECE services up to 100m2 in an existing building in the informal recreation, spot and active recreation and community open space zones. They are a discretionary activity in the civic spaces zone and non-complying in the conservation zone. Stand-alone ECE facilities on any open space zone would be a non-complying activity. Through the current submission hearing process changes to this aspect of the plan may result.

14. Prior to the workshops with the southern local boards, a discussion paper was prepared on council’s role in supporting ECE services in the future. The options paper is provided in Attachment A.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

15. A cluster workshop was held with representatives from the Manurewa, Otara - Papatoetoe, Mangere - Otahuhu and Papakura Local Boards on 22 May 2014, where local board members discussed council’s current and potential future role(s) in supporting early learning, with a particular focus on the use of parks and open space land. Attendees requested additional information and that individual workshops be held with their boards to ensure members were cognisant of the issues and to inform decision making.

16. Individual workshops were held with the Manurewa, Otara-Papatoetoe, Mangere-Otahuhu and Papakura local boards over August and September 2014. Howick and Franklin Local Boards did not request a workshop but were included in the distribution of discussion documents and briefed on the workshop outcomes.

17. The following themes evolved from these workshops and have been used to inform the recommendations contained in this report:

· New ECEs on parks and open space are generally not supported unless a direct benefit to the open space and its users can be shown (e.g. where the ECE will activate the space and provide for community use outside operating hours)

· Consideration will be given to the expansion of existing ECE facilities, where the impacts on the public open space and its users are assessed to be no more than minor

· Advocate that ECE facilities on parks and open space expand their purpose outside operating hours to accommodate other community opportunities (e.g. adult education)

· Support, in general, the council being a direct provider as part of the provision of a range of holistic activities in council owned facilities. It was suggested that consideration could be given to existing services being contracted out or sold

· The establishment of ECE services is essentially a central government responsibility and as such should be funded by the Ministry of Education

· Advocate for land to secured in new developments for ECE services to be established, where a need is identified through for example, working with the Housing Project Office and Special Housing Area developers, the Ministry of Education and ECE providers

· Generally not supportive of selling parks and open space for ECE development.

It is recommended that the board adopts these as guiding principles to assist decision making on applications for ECEs on parks and open space in the future.

Māori impact statement

18. Specific consultation has not been undertaken with Māori. The Auckland Plan and the Southern Initiative objectives and targets around early learning address all children.

19. The national participation rate in early childhood learning prior to primary school for Māori children has increased to 93.0% for the year ending March 2014, up 1.2 percentage points on the March 2013 rate. However, in some Auckland communities, the Māori participation is significantly lower. The Ministry of Education is implementing the Engaging Priority Families initiative which seeks to provide intensive early learning support to families and whānau of three and four year olds in target communities. The priority for this initiative is Māori, Pasifika and low socio-economic status families.

20. It is expected that any impacts on Maori will not differ greatly to other parties seeking land for the establishment of early childhood education centres.

Implementation

21. Further work will undertaken by council staff to gain further clarity on the preliminary options discussed at the local board workshops, subject to the outcome of the Long Term Plan process and resource availability

22. Whatever recommendations are adopted, the main stakeholders (e.g. the Ministry of Education) will be advised of the viewpoint for the local board area

23. Applications from ECE providers for use of public open space that are currently being processed will be progressed on a case by case basis.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Council’s Future Role in Supporting ECE Services – Preliminary Options July 2014 (material from workshop)	69

Signatories

Authors

Sophie Bell - Principal Policy Analyst

Authorisers

Penny Pirrit - Regional & Local Planning Manager

Ian Maxwell - Manager Parks, Sports & Recreation

Carol McKenzie-Rex - Relationship Manager

Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

15 October 2014

July 2014

COUNCIL’S ROLE IN SUPPORTING ECE SERVICES

- PRELIMINARY OPTIONS

It is well documented that early childhood education (ECE) services contribute to society by providing educational, social, and cultural benefits. Participation in quality ECE services is an important predictor of future education outcomes. It lays the foundation for children’s ongoing learning, helping equip them with social skills and contributing to a child’s development. Quality early childhood programmes can help narrow achievement gaps between children from disadvantaged families and those from other families. In addition, the availability of ECE services is often essential to working parents.

Auckland Council signals its support for ECE services through the Auckland Plan. It seeks to increase the ECE participation rate in Auckland - Tamaki Makaurau, and more particularly within the Southern Initiative area. A target has been identified for all 3 to 4 year olds to participate in, and have access to quality, culturally appropriate ECE services by 2020. Delivery on this aspect of the Auckland Plan is a shared responsibility of central and local government as well as community organisations and the private sector.

The council’s main involvement in supporting ECE services to date ranges from being a direct provider, to leasing council facilities (land and buildings) to community based providers, programme support, use of non-exclusive bookable spaces and grants. The council has no statutory responsibilities or role in the actual establishment, management or funding of ECE services. This falls to the applicant and the Ministry of Education.

Although the council has specified support for ECE services and various directives have been set, there are no policies or guidelines in place that provide detailed guidance for decision-making around ECE services. There are a variety of responses the council could consider in supporting the provision of ECE services. These are listed below with the benefits and considerations outlined for each. Many of these roles are not stand-alone and can be combined.

The options provided are not comprehensive, rather they have been presented to stimulate discussion.

Direct Provider

Council is currently a direct provider of ten ECE services in various council facilities offering a total of 345 licensed places. The council also contracts out three ECE services. The majority of these centres have transferred to Auckland Council from legacy councils and have been operating for more than twenty years. They have evolved from a drop in crèche for the children of those utilising the facilities to more structured licensed centres.

The majority of council led ECE centres have become an inherent function of recreation and leisure centres contributing to the holistic approach of what is offered the community. They contribute to the wider ECE network within the Auckland region.

The Leisure Unit (ECE team) works closely with the MoE and were recently asked to take over two trust run facilities operated out of Council buildings which were facing closure by MoE for failing to comply with regulations.

Benefits Considerations

· Improves connectivity and community networks through hub model of facilities e.g. leisure facilities or libraries with ECE services

· Provides a platform to work with the community and other stakeholders on parenting advice, adult learning etc

· Can assist in increasing participation where rates are low

· Generates income that is offset against operational costs of the centre and wider Leisure Unit

· Provides a service to diverse communities

· Provides community spaces that allow a variety of services and support for communities including better public outcomes

· Supports better community outcomes with quality consistent services

· No mandate as to whether this should be Council’s core business

· No mandate to grow current business

· Can impact on other providers i.e. interfere with market conditions where council prices are lower

· Ensuring they comply with Reserves Act provisions

Leasing of council owned land and buildings

Auckland Council (including the legacy council’s) most frequent response to ECE service needs has been in the provision of leases of council owned land (largely park land) and buildings to community based organisations. ECE services are considered to be a community facility and are most appropriately located on land that is suitably zoned under the District Plan/PAUP and classified under the Reserves Act 1977 (generally as local purpose [community buildings] reserve). Much of this land is now at capacity. Adopted reserve management plans also play a part in determining whether land is suitable for ECE centres.

Benefits Considerations

· Addresses an identified need for land in areas where more ECE services are required to increase participation

· Supports the Auckland Plan, Southern Initiative, Thriving Communities (Community and Social Development Action Plan), and I am Auckland (Auckland-wide Strategic Action Plan for Children and Young People)

· Supports community based organisations through low rent and provision of land

· Can activate the reserve if designed and located appropriately

· Proposed Auckland Unitary Plan, Public Open Space Community zone – provides an opportunity to plan, in conjunction with MoE, the location of these sites, particularly in greenfield developments and Special Housing Areas

· Existing buildings could be run by Auckland Council and provide a return to rate payers

· The ability to provide facilities for a larger number of children is resulting in increasing requests to extend existing ECE facilities

· Can result in exclusive use of the park (examples where 2 or more ECE facilities are co-located) to the detriment of other users. Balancing competing demands and expectations can result in user conflicts

· Can be perceived as alienating land from public use

· Can have adverse effects on the parks values, amenity, use and enjoyment, and infrastructure

· Cumulative loss of land within the parks and open space network. There is no current planning around replacement land being acquired or monetary compensation to offset the loss and to mitigate the loss for the community

· Depending on location and design can render surrounding land un-useable

· The activity can create conflict with /surrounding neighbours e.g. noise, increased traffic

· Can impact on future development opportunities of the park

· Risk – financial/land holding

· Potential for services to fold with council taking on the liability (there is evidence of this)

· Can incur landlord costs e.g. maintenance, building WoFs

· Reserves allocated for community facilities are nearing capacity, resulting in applications being received to use other land e.g. informal recreation spaces.

· Councils primary responsibilities do not include the provision of land to support educational outcomes under the LGA

· ECE facilities are growing in size. Recent applications have been for 50 places which equates to a lease footprint range between 1500 and 2000m2 (not including parking)

Indirect Provider

Council currently supports and runs programmes which incorporate ECE, and enables council facilities to be used on a temporary basis (non-exclusive booking e.g. by play groups). This includes OSCAR programmes (after school care) and holiday programmes (e.g. Wriggle and Rhyme run at libraries). The culture of continuous improvement ensures quality programmes are delivered.

Benefits Considerations

· Supports the Auckland Plan, Southern Imitative, Thriving Communities (Community and Social Development Action Plan), and I am Auckland (Auckland-wide Strategic Action Plan for Children and Young People)

· Low operating cost (benefits lower socio-economic communities)

· Contributes to multi-use of facilities

· Flexible to address changing community needs

· Complementary to licensed ECE services

· Offers a range of opportunities

· Generates income that is offset against operational costs

· Limited hours

· Subject to facility availability

· Set up/take down requirements and storage

· Is not recognised as a contributor to statistically quantifiable ECE service hours

· Cost of hiring the facility can be prohibitive

· Regular bookings to provide certainty for ECE (playgroups) can limit ability to accommodate casual users

Advocate

The current council advocacy role can be strengthened and expanded in the following ways;

· Continue to advocate addressing barriers to ECE participation e.g. transport, cost, illness and lack of confidence

· Advocate to central government for funding of land, ECE services establishment on education land and other government owned land in high need areas, and for partnerships with other land providers e.g. Ministry of Health, Ministry of Social Development, Housing NZ

· Advocate to developers that land be set aside for ECE service providers (private and community based) in new subdivisions e.g. Special Housing Areas, greenfield developments. Provide connections and support.

· Incorporate positive parenting messages into “Our Auckland” and other council publications

· Support and educate community groups around the requirements and process for establishing ECE services

· Encourage large employers to assess the benefits of providing onsite ECE services

· Support establishment of playgroups within council facilities and mobile play trucks.

Benefits Considerations

· ECE and young families are promoted

· Low risk to the council

· To solely advocate would provide limited outcomes to solving current issues

· May raise funding expectations

Partnering/Funding

Partnering and funding can be addressed in the following ways;

· Partner with developers to identify suitable residential land within new developments for ECE

· Partner with MoE to find land in identified low participation areas and to ensure there is a shared overview/policy and clarity around roles and responsibilities with MoE

· Incentivise developers and ECE service providers to establish facilities (particularly in new developments/areas of need). Options that could be investigated might include rates relief or providing a monetary contribution towards the land component (e.g. through a contestable fund). It should be noted that a Facility Partnerships Funding Policy is currently underway and ECE services are outside the scope of this work. If included there would be implications around budget.

· Grants to private providers via economic development programmes could be considered

· Low cost loans for ECE service providers.

Benefits Considerations

· Recognises a shift in delivery (in response to the changing climate e.g. reduced land availability, increasing costs, market competition)

· Reduces council risk

· Reduces the council’s direct involvement

· Plays to providers specialist strengths

· Encourages provision of ECE services where populations of young families are increasing

· Reduces cost of establishing ECE centres

· May adversely affect not-for profit ECE service providers

· Cost/funding implications

· Any revenue goes to the provider and not to the council

· Develop a policy and parameters around partnerships and funding to increase transparency

· Ensure there is a shared overview/policy and clarity around roles and responsibilities with MoE

Land purchase/land allocation for community facilities

If land is purchased for community facilities there is no requirement that it be held as reserve under the Reserves Act. While providers may wish for reserve land for ECE provision, this is not necessarily in areas of low participation or areas of high need.

Benefits Considerations

· Addresses an identified need and supports the Auckland Plan, Southern Initiative, Thriving Communities (Community and Social Development Action Plan), and I am Auckland (Auckland-wide Strategic Action Plan for Children and Young People)

· Enables the council to facilitate planning for ECE services

· Ease of processing applications – improved customer experience

· Provider and public expectations established

· If allocating land within large parks can help to activate the space and enhance the creation of a community hub

· Development contributions do not currently provide for land purchase for community facilities. If the council wished to support the provision of early learning services in SHAs or other areas they would have to be funded from rates. Council can only charge development contributions for infrastructure it provides in response to growth. ECE services are not envisaged by the Local Government Act as something for which contributions can be charged.

· If allocating existing park land, need to ensure it is suitable, and be aware of the impact on the reserve values and its users, and the cumulative impact on the open space network

· Budget implications

· Will be difficult to use this method to address existing deficiencies in existing urban areas

· Balancing demand from competing community facilities – land could be dominated by ECE service facilities

Sell council owned land

There is the potential to assess park land no longer required for that purpose and council owned land held in other portfolios (i.e. not held for parks or open space purposes) as to whether they could be suitable to sell to private ECE service providers or be retained and leased to community based ECE providers. This could also include working with crown agencies to undertake land swaps or collaborations for mixed ownership in communities where ECE provision and participation is low.

Benefits Considerations

· Encourages provision of ECE services

· Financial benefit to the council

· Lowers total maintenance cost

· Unsuitable land removed from open space network

· Reduces ECE pressure on remaining open space

· Repatriation process is complex

· Reserves Act process is complex and requires public consultation

· Affordability for community based groups

· May not be a great deal of suitable land available for disposal

Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

15 October 2014

Clarification of decision making for Mangere Mountain

File No.: CP2014/21588

Purpose

1. To seek the Local Board’s views on the decision-making allocation for parks services, particularly in relation to land contiguous with Te Pane o Mataoho/Te Ara Puera (Mangere Mountain), and council’s built assets including the Mangere Mountain Education Centre and Kiingi Tawhiao Cottage.

Executive summary

2. The Local Board is responsible for making non-regulatory decisions on “local parks” and the Governing Body is responsible for making non-regulatory decisions on “regional parks”.

3. In August 2013, the Governing Body adopted an amended schedule of parks as part of the definition of “regional parks”. This schedule included nine parcels of land contiguous with Te Pane o Mataoho/Te Ara Puera (Mangere Mountain). One of those parcels has two council owned buildings located on it, namely Mangere Mountain Education Centre and Kiingi Tawhiao Cottage.

4. The local board has advised staff of its view that Mangere Mountain Education Centre and Kiingi Tawhiao Cottage are local facilities, and that the local board is the most appropriate decision maker for these assets. In addition, the board believes that a number of parcels of land classified as “regional park” should be more appropriately classified as “local park”. The board has requested staff to review the current classification/allocation.

5. Staff support the local board’s view that decision making for the Mangere Mountain Education Centre, Kiingi Tawhiao Cottage and five parcels of land currently the responsibility of the governing body (as a “regional park”) should be re-classified as a “local park” and allocated to the local board.

6. Note that at some point in the future, council is likely to consider the vesting of administrative responsibility for the contiguous land (which may include council’s buildings located on that land) to the Tupuna Maunga o Tamaki Makarau Authority (the Maunga Authority). Such vesting would enable the contiguous land to be included in an integrated Reserve Management Plan for the maunga. The local board’s views with regard to possible vesting of administrative responsibility for the contiguous land in the Maunga Authority will be sought prior to any decision being made.

Recommendation/s

That the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board:

a) Recommend to the Governing Body that the decision making allocation for land contiguous with Te Pane o Mataoho/Te Ara Puera (Mangere Mountain) be amended so that all parcels of council owned or administered contiguous land be removed from the definition of “regional park” and become “local park”, specifically the following parcels:

i) Pt Allotment 202 PSH OF Manurewa

ii) Allotment 379 PSH OF Manurewa

iii) Allotment 262 PSH OF Manurewa

iv) Paper Road (Pt Mangere Mountain Education Centre grounds)

v) LOT 24 DP 10685

vi) Paper Road (Access to Ridgemount Road)

vii) Lot 1 DP 44558

viii) Lot 29 DP 57347

ix) Lot 1 P29452

b) Note that the possible vesting of administrative responsibility for these parcels of land to the Tupuna Maunga o Tamaki Makarau Authority will be considered by council in the future.

Comments

Background to decision making allocation for parks services

7. The Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009 requires the governing body to allocate decision-making responsibility for non-regulatory activities to either the governing body or local boards. Councils Long Term Plan 2012 – 2022 (LTP) provides the current decision-making allocation (Volume Three, Chapter 1.2, Table 1.2.1). The allocation table identifies “regional parks listed in schedule 1” as the responsibility of the governing body, while “local parks” are allocated to local boards.

8. At its meeting of 22 August 2013, the Auckland Council Governing Body adopted a schedule of parks for which decision making responsibility is allocated to the governing body (i.e. the Schedule 1 referred to in the LTP). All other parks are the responsibility of the relevant local board.

9. The schedule of parks allocated to the governing body is set out in full in Attachment A. In broad terms, the schedule includes the following:

· Parks subject to Treaty of Waitangi settlement, including:

· Parks subject to the Treaty of Waitangi settlement with Ngā Mana Whenua o Tāmaki Makaurau (the Tāmaki Collective). It is important to note that this allocation was an interim arrangement until the formation of the Maunga Authority. The Authority has now been formed and decision making responsibility for land subject the Tamaki Collective settlement now lies with the Maunga Authority.

· Land contiguous with parks subject to Treaty of Waitangi settlement with the Tāmaki Collective

· Parks delivering Auckland-wide benefits, including:

· Regional Parks i.e. parks formerly owned/managed by the former Auckland Regional Council

· Land contiguous with Regional Parks

· Other parks delivering Auckland-wide benefits, including Auckland Domain and Motukorea (Browns Island)

Decision making allocation in relation to Mangere Otahuhu Local Board

10. The following park areas within the Mangere Otahuhu Local Board are allocated to the governing body as “regional park”:

· Te Pane o Mataoho/Te Ara Puera (Mangere Mountain), being a park subject to Treaty of Waitangi settlement with the Tāmaki Collective (now the responsibility of the Maunga Authority)

· Nine additional parcels of land that are contiguous with Te Pane o Mataoho/Te Ara Puera (Mangere Mountain)

· Ambury Regional Park, being part of Auckland’s Regional Park network formerly owned/managed by Auckland Regional Council

11. The Mangere Otahuhu Local Board originally provided its views on the decision making for parcels of land contiguous with Mangere Mountain in a memo to staff in August 2013, in which the board expressed its view that five of the parcels of land proposed to be classified as “regional park” should more appropriately be classified as “local park” (refer Attachment B). Due to the timing of receipt of the memo and the reporting approvals, the memo was not able to be included in the 22 August report, and the full views of the board were not considered by the Governing Body when making its decision.

12. The Local Board has requested a review of the classification of land contiguous to Mangere Mountain, specifically in relation to decision making allocation for five parcels of land, and two council owned built assets, which are the Mangere Mountain Education Centre and Kiingi Tawhiao Cottage.

13. The Local Board believe that it should be responsible for decision making for these parcels and the buildings on them because:

· Mangere Mountain Education Centre and Kiingi Tawhiao Cottage are both important assets for the local community and it is appropriate for the local board to have decision making responsibility for local facilities

· The local board previously provided funding for both the operational contracts for the education centre and the refurbishment of the cottage, and seek to ensure that the past investment and the benefits derived from that investment are maintained

· The local board can readily ensure integration of decision making for the parkland with the decisions of the Maunga Authority, and that there is no advantage in having the governing body involved in decision making over local parkland

Basis for allocation of decision making for land contiguous with Treaty Settlement land

14. The inclusion of land contiguous with parks subject to Treaty of Waitangi settlement was in response to a situation that occurred on a number of maunga subject to the Tamaki Collective settlement, where the specific parcels of land included in the settlement did not include the full extent of land that effectively formed the park “on the ground”.

15. For the most part, these areas of contiguous land are relatively small that had for various historical reasons been added to the principal park areas to provide a range of improvement (e.g. improved access and boundary alignments, expand the park area). In a few instances, the areas of contiguous land are reasonably substantial in their own right.

16. The rationale for allocation of decision making for these contiguous areas was a desire to create clear, easily understood decision making responsibility for all land within the boundaries of what park users and management/operational activities would treat as a single park.

17. In assessing how such land should be treated as ‘regional park”, staff made two principle assessments of whether the land in question is either:

· used or perceived by users to be part of the wider park, or, is used or perceived as a separate, but adjacent park,

· managed by council as an integrated whole, or, is managed as a separate, but adjacent park.

18. It is anticipated that at some point in the future, council will give consideration to the vesting of administration responsibility for the contiguous land to the Maunga Authority. The settlement legislation requires the Maunga Authority to prepare an integrated Reserve Management Plan. The vesting of administrative responsibility these parcels to the Maunga Authority would allow that land to be incorporated into the management plan.

19. Note that four of the land parcels in question are crown owned, although not subject to the Tāmaki Collective settlement. This means that council continues to manage the land at this time, although it is possible that the area may be subject to future treaty settlement legislation. The two buildings are council owned assets, and council would retain ownership of them in the event of any future settlement.

Decision making allocation options

20. Table 1 below sets out three options for the allocation of decision making with regard to the contiguous land and the buildings on that land.

21. Table 1 – Options for decision making allocation

Option 1: Retain the current decision making allocation (i.e. contiguous land and buildings are “regional parks” and allocated to the governing body)
Advantages	Disadvantages
Decision making with regard to both buildings and parkland management and operations could be readily integrated by staff into the wider Mangere Mountain parkland management and Maunga facility network, without reference to two separate decision making bodies (this assumes the governing body does not take an active decision making role in the facilities or land)	Local Board no longer has responsibility for decision making over local facilities or areas of contiguous parkland.
Option 2: Retain the current decision making allocation in relation to the park land but confirm that the buildings (i.e. Mangere Mountain Education Centre and Kiingi Tawhaio Cottage) are “local community facilities” and hence the responsibility of the Mangere Otahuhu Local Board
Advantages	Disadvantages
Decision making for the local community facilities undertaken by local board Parkland management and operational decisions can be readily integrated by staff into the wider Mangere Mountain parkland management without reference to two separate decision making bodies (this assumes the governing body does not take an active decision making role in the facilities or land)	Splits decision making for buildings from decision making for surrounding park land
Option 3: Classify contiguous land and buildings as “local park” and therefore the decision making responsibility of the Mangere Otahuhu Local Board
Advantages	Disadvantages
Decision making for the buildings and contiguous parkland would be undertaken by Local Board	Parkland management and operational decisions less easy to integrate, and coordination on management/operations would require agreement from both Maunga Authority and Local Board (this assumes that the local board will take an active decision making role in the parkland management).

22. Staff recommend Option 3 above. Refer Attachment C for map of Mangere Mountain illustrating the proposed classification and decision making allocation recommended in this report.

23. The proposed classification of the contiguous land as “local park” does not indicate that from a user or park management/operational perspective that these parcels of land do not form part of the wider Mangere Mountain. Staff anticipate that these land parcels will be included in the future consideration by council of land that might be vested in the Maunga Authority.

24. The Local Board has acknowledged through workshops that council is likely to consider the vesting of the land to the Manga Authority at some point in the future. The Board’s view is that until such time as that decision is made, then it is most appropriate that it is responsible for decision-making.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

25. The Mangere Otahuhu Local Board has requested this review of the decision making responsibility in relation to Mangere Mountain.

26. The Local Board has previously expressed its views in relation to the August 2013 Governing Body report through a memo to staff. Due to the timing of report approvals, that previous memo was not able to be included in the report to the Governing Body, and consequently was not considered in detail by the Governing Body when that decision was made.

27. This report provides an opportunity for the Local Board to restate its views for consideration by the Governing Body.

Maori impact statement

28. Ngā Mana Whenua o Tāmaki Makaurau Collective Redress Act 2014 requires the Maunga Authority to prepare an integrated Reserve Management Plan. Prior to that process commencing, council will give consideration to the vesting of administrative responsibility for the contiguous land (including the land and buildings considered in this report) to the Maunga Authority, which would enable that land to be incorporated into the management plan.

29. Consultation will be undertaken with the Maunga Authority and individual iwi and hapu with regard to the potential vesting of this land prior to any decision being made.

30. This report proposes an amendment to decision making responsibility within council’s governance structure. This is effectively an interim decision prior to the principle decision regarding the long term allocation of decision making being undertaken. Consultation with Maori with respect to this interim approach has not been undertaken, in anticipation of a more comprehensive engagement on decision making issues being progressed in due course.

Implementation

31. There are no significant implementation issues arising from the proposed change in the classification of contiguous land from “regional park” to “local park”.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Schedule 1 - Regional parks	81
b View	Mangere Otahuhu Local Board Memo - 8 August 2013	85
c View	Map of proposed decision making	89

Signatories

Authors

Rob Cairns - Manager Regionwide

Authorisers

Penny Pirrit - Regional & Local Planning Manager

Carol McKenzie-Rex - Relationship Manager

Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

15 October 2014

Integrated bylaws review and implementation programme (IBRI) update – September 2014

File No.: CP2014/22898

Purpose

1. This report provides an update on the Integrated Bylaw Review and Implementation programme, noting its progress towards delivering a set of bylaws that are appropriate for Auckland by October 2015.

Executive Summary

2. The Integrated Bylaw Review and Implementation (IBRI) programme is reviewing the set of legacy bylaws and supporting the adoption and implementation of new bylaws that are appropriate for Auckland, by October 2015.

3. An investment proposal for funding for the 2014/2015 year was endorsed by the Budget Committee in May 2014. This ensures that the programme has adequate funding for its activities this year, including delivering several bylaws that are planned to come into force alongside the July 2015 start of the next long-term plan period.

4. Progress has been made on the review and implementation stages for several topics. The final Navigation Safety Bylaw and Cemeteries and Crematoria Bylaw have now been adopted by the governing body and will come into force in the next few months. The Auckland Transport Board has also adopted changes to their Election Signs Bylaw that are now in force.

5. Seven bylaw proposals were, or are, open for formal public consultation from August to October. These are the Trading and Events in Public Places Bylaw, the Alcohol Control Bylaw, the Animal Management Bylaw (covering animals other than dogs), an amendment to the Health and Hygiene Bylaw, the Signage Bylaw, the Stormwater Bylaw and the Outdoor Fire Safety Bylaw. Consultation around these topics will ensure that a coherent view is presented to the public across these topics and in the context of other work.

6. The Alcohol Control Bylaw proposal includes recommended delegations to local boards to allow a timely review of the current alcohol bans in each local board area.

7. The 2014 programme for review of local dog access rules is well underway with the local boards that are proposing changes this year. Reports on the submissions have been prepared to support final decisions by summer.

8. The new Public Safety and Nuisance Bylaws and the Health and Hygiene Bylaw have now come into force and the changes that allow the council to operate these new bylaws have been successfully delivered. Media coverage for these has generally been positive. In particular the prohibition on use of sunbeds by those under 18 years old has received positive coverage (reflecting the council’s leadership on this issue).

9. Detailed planning to support the coming in to force of the Navigation Safety Bylaw and the Cemeteries and Crematoria Bylaw, and other upcoming bylaws, is underway.

10. No formal requests for local board bylaws have been received over the period covered by this report.

Recommendation/s

That the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board:

a) note the progress of the Integrated Bylaw Review and Implementation programme towards its completion of the delivery of new bylaws by October 2015.

Comments

Background to the Integrated bylaw review and implementation programme

11. Auckland Council inherited a set of legacy bylaws from the former councils, covering approximately 30 topics. These bylaws expire at the end of October 2015.

12. The Integrated Bylaw Review and Implementation programme has been established to review these bylaws and prepare a new bylaw for each topic where appropriate, and to make and communicate the necessary changes so that the council can operate the new bylaws and achieve the outcomes sought from each bylaw. The programme will also work with affected parties where a legacy bylaw is not replaced by a new bylaw.

13. Both local boards and the Regulatory and Bylaws Committee receive regular updates on the programme. The previous update was provided to local boards in April 2014. This report provides an update on the various topics included in the programme, and attachment A provides an overview of the timeline through to October 2015.

Funding for bylaw review and implementation

14. A funding proposal for the IBRI programme was approved by the Budget Committee at its meeting of 8 May 2014 (refer resolution BUD/2014/24). This means that the programme will have sufficient resources to deliver its objectives over the 2014/2015 year. The majority of the bylaw topics included within the programme will be completed by the end of this financial year, with several bylaws expected to come into force alongside the start of the new financial year on 1 July 2015. It is expected that there will also be some programme activities through the first part of the 2015/2016 year.

Update on review stage for bylaw topics

15. Table one and table two below show the current status of the review topics and provide further comments for particular topics.

16. This includes bylaws that may be folded into or managed under other topics (Arkles Bay set netting, Orakei Basin), the ongoing local boards’ review of dog access rules, regional film fees, and the review that must take place within five years of any bylaw’s adoption.

17. Local boards have recently provided input to the bylaw reviews for construction and transport for Auckland Council land (such as parks). Further engagement is underway or being planned for the next topics in the review including alcohol controls review, environmental protection and regional film fees.

Table 1: Summary of status and next steps for review of bylaw topics

Topic	Status and Progress – 7 stages								Comments
	Status	1-Preparation	2-Pre-consultation	3-Options	4-Write Bylaw	5-Adopt draft	6-Spec Cons Proc	7-Adopt final
*Reviews completed*
Dog management	G								Completed
Election Signs	G								Completed
Food safety	G								Completed
General administration	G								Completed
Hazardous substances	G								Completed
Health & hygiene	G								Completed
Offensive trades	G								Completed
Public safety and nuisance	G								Completed
Solid waste (Waste m/ment)	G								Completed
Trade waste	G								Completed
Transport (Auckland Transport)	G								Completed
Navigation safety (including lifejackets)	G								See below
Cemeteries and crematoria	G								See below
Election signs (amendment)	G								See below


Work programme
Outdoor / rural fire safety	G
Trading and events in public places	G								See below
Stormwater management	G
Signage	G								See below
Alcohol licensing fees	A
Alcohol control	G								See below
Animal management	G								See below
Health & hygiene amendment									See below
Air quality	G
Boarding houses and hostels	G
Commercial sex industry	A								Issues covered in unitary plan and other bylaws
Construction and development	G
Onsite wastewater	G
Orakei Basin	G
Recreational and cultural facilities	G
Transport (Parks / AC controlled land)	G
Water supply and wastewater (reticulation)	G
Wharfs & marinas	G
Environmental protection	G

Other work
Review - local dog access rules	G								See below
Freedom camping	G
Arkles Bay set netting	G
Regional film fees	G								See below
Five year reviews	B

Status summary codes

G	Green - Work is progressing as planned, due date will be met or any revised date will not have wider impacts
A	Amber – Original due date at risk of being missed and this may have wider impacts; or an issue has arisen.
R	Red - Due date has or will be missed and this will have wider impacts; or an issue has arisen that will have wider or significant impacts.
B	Blue - Not yet scheduled. However, background work is underway.

Table 2: Additional comments for particular topics in the bylaw review programme

Navigation safety (including lifejackets)

On track

Public submissions closed on 17 March and public hearings and deliberations were completed. The Hearings Panel report on the final form of the bylaw was considered and adopted by the governing body at its meeting on 31 July 2014.

The panel requested that a campaign be developed to communicate the changes introduced in the new bylaw and to support the bylaw’s objectives around safety on the water, particularly in relation to smaller boats and the wearing of lifejackets. Planning for this campaign is now underway to support the commencement of the new bylaw.

Cemeteries and crematoria	On track	G
Public submissions closed in June and the public hearings and deliberations were completed. The Hearings Panel report on the final form of the bylaw was considered and adopted by the governing body at its meeting on 31 July 2014. The final bylaw and code of practice included a number of changes arising from public consultation, including clarifying procedures around burial and plots and for scattering of ashes.

Election signs (amendment)

On track

The Auckland Transport board proposed a series of amendment to the Election Signs Bylaw to reflect issues that arose in the 2013 local body elections. These changes included limits on the times when signs can be displayed on private sites, allowing candidates to appear on both individual and team signs on a single site, and requiring contact information on signs to be readable. Submissions closed on 3 June.

Final changes were adopted by the board at its meeting of 24 June, and came into force on 18 July (just before the two month period that runs up to the general election on 20 September).

Trading and events in public place

On track

Both Auckland Council and Auckland Transport have endorsed their proposed Trading and Events in Public Places bylaws. These apply to streets and footpaths and other public places. Public submissions were open from 4 August to 4 September, with hearings and deliberations to follow. It is expected any new bylaws could come into force for July 2015. This would allow any fee changes to also be put in place with the new long-term plan that will start then.

The bylaws cover a range of issues including street performances, mobile shops, outdoor dining and displays, markets and stalls and charity collections.

Signage

On track

A proposed Signage Bylaw was reported to the August meetings of the Regulatory and Bylaws Committee, the governing body and the Auckland Transport board. Public consultation is open from 3 September to 3 October 2014.

The bylaw covers a range of types of signs including portable, free standing, wall-mounted, veranda and window signage. It also addresses requirements for posters and for certain types of signs including signs in public open spaces, signage advertising commercial sexual services, real estate signage and event signage.

Any new bylaw could be in place for July 2015 and will work alongside Unitary Plan requirements that apply to specific types of signs.

Alcohol control

On track

The Alcohol Control Bylaw will allow the council to put alcohol bans (previously call liquor bans) in place. These bans prohibit the consumption or possession of alcohol in specified public places, at particular times. Alcohol bans can work alongside other regulatory and non-regulatory tools to help minimise the harm that can be associated with alcohol.

A proposed bylaw was adopted by the governing body on 31 July and was open for public consultation from 15 August to 15 September. The proposal includes delegations allowing local boards to review, make, amend and revoke alcohol bans for local public places. The governing body would make these decisions for public places that are of regional significance.

The bylaw includes criteria to help evaluate any request for an alcohol ban, based on the requirements of the enabling legislation. It has also been designed to support a range of approaches to help communities manage problems associated with alcohol use.

The current proposal does not include a review of the existing alcohol bans or the making of new alcohol bans. Decisions on the existing alcohol bans will need to be made by local boards and the governing body after the new bylaw is adopted and before October 2015. Local boards are now receiving further information on how they can carry out their role for this review.

Animal management

On track

A proposed Animal Management Bylaw was adopted by the governing body on 31 July and was open for public consultation from 15 August to 15 September. The bylaw provides Aucklanders with the opportunity to own different types of animals for companionship, while minimising possible impact on their neighbours. Under the proposed bylaw, people that keep animals need to ensure the animals do not cause a nuisance, risk to public health and safety, or damage council land.

Specific provisions are included for urban properties relating to the keeping of bees and chickens or other stock (such as a rooster, goat, pig or sheep). There are also specific provisions related to horse riding in public places.

Issues relating to animal welfare, wildlife predation and dog management are addressed through national legislation and do not form part of this proposal.

Health & hygiene amendment

On track

The Health and Hygiene Bylaw 2013 was adopted by the council in 2013 and came into force on 1 July 2014. The bylaw and code, as adopted, requires pharmacists to obtain a licence under the bylaw if they offer commercial ear-piercing services.

The council has now received further information from industry representatives that shows public health is adequately protected through existing central government regulation and industry-based standards. Accordingly, the council is proposing an amendment to the bylaw that will exempt pharmacists from the requirement to obtain this licence under the bylaw when they provide commercial ear-piercing services. Public consultation was open from 15 August to 15 September.

Local dog access review

On track

The 2014 local board dog access review includes some areas within the following local boards: Kaipatiki, Orakei, Maungakiekie-Tamaki, Puketapapa, and Hibiscus and Bays.

This is the first year of the new approach to reviewing dog access rules and means the council can consider requests for changes to dog access rules on an annual basis. This approach is more responsive to residents and the environment and enables robust consideration on specific public places to provide for public safety and comfort, the needs of dogs and their owners, and to ensure the practicality of dog access rules.

The council is required to advise registered dog owners about these proposed changes and this has been achieved by including relevant material within the annual dog registration package. This is the first year that this approach has been possible and it has reduced costs and ensured that dog owners receive a single combined communication from the council. This targeted advice has been supported by other communication including public notices, local newspaper advertising and initiatives planned by these local boards.

Submissions on the proposed changes closed on 23 July 2014. Panels established by the relevant local boards considered the submissions, held hearings and reported to their respective local boards who have adopted the recommendations and finalised the review process.

Further access review changes are planned for the next two years. Work is now underway for local boards that are involved in the 2015 review programme. The local boards that are receiving a report in September to confirm commencement of the review and define its scope are Rodney, Upper Harbour, Devonport-Takapuna, Waitakere Ranges, Waiheke Island, Albert-Eden, Puketapapa, and Waitemata.

Regional film fees

On track

There are around 500 permit applications for filming activity each year, including many on local parks. The Auckland Film Protocol expresses the council’s intention to welcome filming, support this activity and maximise the financial and other benefits it brings to Auckland. The protocol also includes measures to ensure filming’s impacts on communities are well managed.

When the Film Protocol was adopted in 2013 several local boards asked that further work be carried out to understand how local communities can get more benefit from filming. The regional film fees project responds to part of that request. It will review how fees for filming can be set and managed, and how council’s direct revenue associated with filming permits can be used to meet the costs of facilitating filming and to improve the public spaces (including parks and streetscapes) that are used by film-makers.

Further information is being provided to local boards through September and October.

Update on implementation stage for new bylaws

18. Table three and table four below show the current status of implementation projects and further comments for particular implementation projects.

Table 3: Summary of status and next steps for implementation projects

Implementation project name	Status and Progress					Link to bylaw topics / Other comments
	Status	1-Preparation	2-Planning	3-Implementation	4-Closure
*Underway*
Alcohol licensing readiness	G					Completed
Alcohol licensing fees	A					See below
Animals (Stage 1)	G					Completed
Dog access review 2014	G
Electoral Signs 2013	G					Completed
Electoral Signs 2014	G
Environmental	G
Facilities	G
Food safety	G					Completed
Health protection	G					Health & hygiene bylaw and code of practice; See below
Marine	G					Navigation safety – see below
Public safety & nuisance	G
Revoked and lapsing bylaws	G					General admin; Offensive trades; Others
Signage	G
Stormwater	G
Street trading	G
Waste management	G					Solid waste bylaw
Animals (stage 2)	G
Alcohol controls	G
Air quality	G

*Proposed future*
Construction	B
Transport (AC land)	B

Table 4: Additional comments for particular implementation projects

Alcohol licensing fees

On hold

As part of reforming laws relating to the sale and supply of alcohol, central government updated licensing fees and also allowed each council to set its own fees for the licensing services it must provide. Auckland Council considered a report on the costs involved in this in August 2013, and endorsed adopting a bylaw to set its own alcohol licensing fee amounts, to take affect from 1 July 2014 (refer governing body meeting of 22 August 2013, item 13, GB/2013/83).

A further report has now been considered by the Regional Strategy and Policy Committee (7 August, item 11). The report provided an update on this matter, noting that revenue collected to date effectively covers relevant operating costs. The committee endorsed the council continuing to use the default licensing fees set by central government and that a further update should be provided early in 2015 (refer REG/2014/101).

Health protection	On track	G
The new Health and Hygiene Bylaw and code of practice are in force from 1 July 2014 and this project has now completed its closure phase after managing commencement successfully. The council’s leadership on prohibiting the use of sun-beds for people under 18 years of age was highlighted positively in the media.

Marine (including Navigation safety)	On Track	G
The new Navigation Safety Bylaw will come into force for the 2014/2015 summer. The bylaw includes key changes around the wearing of lifejackets on vessels under six metres in length. An education and information campaign is currently being prepared to support this and other changes that the bylaw introduces. This will include updating the signs at key boat ramps across Auckland and working with other water safety organisations to deliver these safety messages to the community.

Consideration

Local Board views and implications

19. Local boards are involved in the review of each bylaw topic (consistent with the review’s principles). This report provides an update on the programme, but does not raise any issues specific to local boards apart from those already noted above.

20. No proposals for local bylaws have been received through the above period.

Maori impact statement

21. This report does not raise any specific issues relating to Māori. The review of each topic includes considering whether that topic includes any elements of special interest to Māori, and if so the appropriate way to seek a greater level of engagement. Where appropriate, consultation with Māori (on a particular topic) may be linked to consultation on other related topics through the Unitary Plan or other initiatives.

General

22. The recommendations in this report do not trigger the council’s policy on significance.

Implementation

23. The programme includes implementation and delivery for each bylaw, as noted above. This includes working with internal and external stakeholders as relevant to each topic.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Bylaw programme timeline 2014/2015	103

Signatories

Authors

Helgard Wagener, Manager Policies & Bylaws

Authorisers

Warren Maclennan, Manager Planning – North/West

Carol McKenzie-Rex - Relationship Manager

Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

15 October 2014

Auckland Council Property Limited Local Board Six-Monthly Update 1 January to 30 June 2014

File No.: CP2014/22182

Purpose

1. To give the Mangere-Otahuhu Local Board an overview Auckland Council Property Limited’s (ACPL) activities for the six months 1 January to 30 June 2014.

Executive summary

2. ACPL’s vision is to be a ‘centre of excellence’ that provides commercial expertise and value for money to the council in managing its property portfolio, acquisition and disposal activities, and the delivery of projects that implement council development initiatives.

3. This report sets out a summary of ACPL activities for the past six-months that contribute to our seven key outcomes as outlined in our Statement of Intent 2014 to 2017 and noted below. Activity detail is broken down by business unit or work-stream, with a focus on local board specific activities where applicable.

4. ACPL’s seven key outcomes:

§ Properties managed for the council and Auckland Transport (AT) are maintained to be fit for purpose and achieve optimum net returns.

§ Place-shaping projects involving other sector partners are efficiently planned and managed to help achieve a quality compact Auckland.

§ ACPL contributes exemplar housing developments to increase the supply of housing in Auckland, particularly in the more affordable spectrum of the market, working with partners.

§ Council business interests are managed to protect long term value and achieve budgeted net income.

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

§ Properties are disposed of for the council in a commercially robust manner once declared surplus.

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

5. Local board specific supporting detail is included in Attachments A, B, and C.

Recommendation/s

That the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board:

a) Receives the Auckland Council Property Limited Local Board six-monthly update 1 January to 30 June 2014.

Comments

Workshops and Meetings

6. A schedule of Mangere-Otahuhu Local Board workshops and meetings attended by ACPL representatives from January to June 2014 is included as Attachment A. The list includes property specific meetings and workshops relating to general property management and the ongoing portfolio Rationalisation Process.

Property Portfolio Management

7. ACPL manages all Auckland Council or AT owned non-service properties. These are properties that are not immediately required for service delivery or infrastructure development.

8. The property portfolio continued to grow during the last six-months and now totals 1185 properties, an increase of 90 since our February 2014 update. The current property portfolio includes industrial sites and buildings, retail tenancies, cafés, restaurants, offices and a substantial portfolio of residential properties.

9. ACPL’s specialist property knowledge and understanding enables us to optimise revenue streams and identify future opportunities. ACPL’s return on the property portfolio for the quarter ending 30 June 2014 provides the shareholder a net surplus of $1.9 ahead of budget, with an actual surplus of $25.4m against budget of $23.5m. During the quarter the average monthly collectable arrears rate and vacancies rate were respectively 2.1% and 2.4%. Well under the SOI targets of 5% and 3%.

10. A Properties Managed schedule is included as Attachment B of this report. The schedule details:

§ Current ACPL managed commercial and residential property within the Mangere-Otahuhu Local Board

§ Each property’s classification or reason for retention

§ The nature of the property, such as a café within a library, or a residential property with a tenancy in place

§ The budget under which operating expenditure and lease revenue for the property is reported, e.g. regional or local board.

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

Portfolio Review and Rationalisation

Overview

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.

Performance

13. January to June 2014 Targets

UNIT	TARGET	ACHIEVED	COMMENTS
Portfolio Review	$12.3m disposal recommendations	$14.8m	These recommendations include $5.6m of sites that are identified for development projects

14. In setting future disposal targets ACPL is working closely with the council and AT to identify potentially surplus properties.

15. 2014/2015 Targets

UNIT	TARGET	COMMENTS
Portfolio Review	$30m disposal recommendations	These targets will include disposal recommendations and sales for sites that are identified for place-shaping and housing development projects
Development & Disposals	$30 net sales

Process

16. 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 ward Councillor and the Independent Maori Statutory Board and finally a governing body decision.

Under review

17. Properties currently under review for future use opportunities via the Rationalisation Process in the Mangere-Otahuhu 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 B.

PROPERTY	DETAILS
68 Henwood Road, Mangere East	1201sqm vacant section. Released by Parks as not required for service purposes. Processed through Rationalisation Process in 2014. Disposal endorsed by Mangere-Otahuhu 23 May 2014. Presented to the Governing Body in June 2014 and approved for sale. ACPL now preparing for sale.
237R James Fletcher Drive, Otahuhu	Transferred from ACPD as non-service in August 14. Plantation Reserve subject to encroachment by neighbouring owner. ACPL progressing through Rationalisation Process to evaluate future use options. Internal Expression of Interest phase commenced June 14. ACPL to book workshop with Mangere-Otahuhu Local Board in near future to seek their views. Any potential sale, development or exchange of the Land is constrained by the requirements of the Reserves Act 1977 until all statutory processes for the revocation of the reserve have been completed.

Place Shaping and Housing Initiatives

Overview

18. ACPL is contributing commercial input into around 48 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 $400k to in excess of $100million. ACPL works closely with the local boards on ACPL lead developments to ensure we give effect to the local boards’ place-shaping role.

19. ACPL is also actively contributing to the Housing Action Plan Group, which is a council initiative focusing on non-regulatory efforts to encourage and increase affordable residential development. We have an SOI target to undertake five housing development projects with an affordable housing component over three years which would encompass Community Housing Organisation involvement. We are currently actively working on 13 such projects.

Local Activities

20. Property Optimisation: An increasing focus for ACPL is property optimisation. In this we are keen to work with local boards on development opportunities that facilitate upgrades within the service portfolio. For example a community facility upgrade or build may be funded by incorporating the facility into a mixed-use development that makes better use of the overall site. We welcome the opportunity to review any such opportunities that may be identified by the Mangere-Otahuhu Local Board.

Acquisitions

Overview

21. 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.

22. By the end of the financial year 2013 to 2014 two hundred and seven property purchases were completed for the council and AT to the value of $132.4m. All of the property acquisitions met independent valuation thresholds agreed with AT, the council and Public Works Act 1981 requirements.

Council Acquisitions

23. Over the past six months 14 properties were acquired to meet council open space and storm water requirements and to contribute to City Transformation projects. These included the following acquisitions in or neighbouring the Mangere-Otahuhu Local Board area.

PROPERTY	STAKEHOLDER	PURPOSE	LOCAL BOARD
52 Waitangi Road, Onehunga	Community Policy & Planning	Open Space	Maungakiekie-Tamaki

Auckland Transport Acquisitions

24. 72 properties were also acquired over the past six-months on behalf of AT. The focus was on acquisitions to support major transport projects such as AMETI (30 acquisitions) Dominion Road (7 acquisitions) Te Atatu Road (9 acquisitions) and City Rail Link (16 acquisitions). Full details of relevant AT projects and associated acquisitions will come to the local board directly from AT.

Business Interests

25. ACPL manages eight business interests region wide on council’s behalf. This comprises two forestry enterprises, two landfills and four quarries. There are currently no ACPL managed business interests in the Mangere-Otahuhu Local Board area.

Consideration

Local Board Views and Implications

26. This report is for the Mangere-Otahuhu Local Board’s information.

Maori Impact Statement

27. The importance of effective communication and engagement with Maori on the subject of land is understood. ACPL has accordingly developed robust engagement with the 19 listed Tamaki region mana whenua groups for our core business activities.

28. Key engagement activities include: identifying cultural significance concerns regarding disposal properties, flagging commercial interests, development partnering discussions and issues relating to property management such as protection of waahi tapu or joint management relating to Treaty Settlements. ACPL also engages with relevant mana whenua in respect of development outcomes for ACPL lead projects where appropriate. ACPL will advise the Mangere-Otahuhu Local Board as appropriate of any discussions that arise in the local board’s area.

29. ACPL has additionally undertaken to be part of council’s Maori Responsiveness Plan (MRP) pilot programme. The project’s key output is an operational document outlining ACPL’s contribution to council’s strategic and operational commitments to Maori. The Improvement Planning Phase of this project is nearly complete. We anticipate finalising our MRP in September/October 2014.

Implementation

30. There are no implementation issues.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Schedule of meetings and workshops	111
b View	Properties Managed by ACPL in Local Board area	113
c View	Property movement in the Local Board area	115

Signatories

Authors

Caitlin Borgfeldt Local Board Liaison

Authorisers

David Rankin Chief Executive

Carol McKenzie-Rex - Relationship Manager

Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

15 October 2014

Significance and Engagement Policy

File No.: CP2014/22994

Purpose

1. The purpose of this memo is to provide background information on the draft Significance and Engagement Policy to support local boards in providing formal feedback.

Executive summary

2. There have been changes to the Local Government Act 2002 (LGA2002). Council is now required to adopt a Significance and Engagement policy by 1 December 2014. Council already has a Significance Policy but the council must expand it to include engagement.

3. A draft Significance and Engagement Policy was adopted by the Regional Strategy and Policy Committee on 4 September for public consultation from 22 September to 19 October 2014.

4. The legislation requires the policy to consider community preferences about engagement on decisions relating to specific issues. Auckland Council carries out hundreds of consultations each year from small neighbourhood issues up to large regional issues. A core function of local boards is to understand, engage with and represent their local communities. The development of the Significance and Engagement Policy is not intended to constrain or restrict the role of local boards in this regard.

5. An overview of the kinds of methods that could be used depending on the significance of the issue has been compiled to provide guidance.

6. The policy will be supported by updated guidelines, case studies and templates providing more detail on engagement principles and good practice.

Recommendation/s

That the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board:

a) Provide feedback on the draft Auckland Council Significance and Engagement Policy.

Background

7. As part of the LTP 2012-2022 process, Auckland Council adopted a Significance Policy to provide a mechanism for establishing which decisions are significant with reference to thresholds and general criteria. This was a requirement under the LGA2002 and the policy requires all council reports to state the degree of significance. A significant decision triggers an automatic requirement to consult.

8. The Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Act 2014 amended the LGA 2002, so that all councils are now required to adopt a Significance and Engagement Policy by 1 December 2014.

9. The legislative change requires the council to expand the current Significance Policy to include engagement. The current Significance Policy has been used to provide the basis of the new Significance and Engagement Policy.

10. The draft Significance and Engagement Policy was adopted by the Regional Strategy and Policy Committee on 4 September for public consultation from 22 September to 19 October.

11. Since the committee meeting, there have been some minor changes to clarify what constitutes a significant decision. The order of the significance section has changed as a result of this, while the criteria that related to engagement are now in section 6.1 under engagement methods.

Consultation on the draft policy

12. Consultation on the draft policy will not follow a Special Consultative Procedure. Consultation will be targeted at interest groups and will seek out feedback from communities who are often not involved in council’s consultation processes.

13. Consultation will largely be focused online through ShapeAuckland. A sign language submissions service has also been set up through Deaf Radio.

14. A variety of stakeholder organisations have been contacted to help organise community workshops on the draft policy. This includes youth groups, ethnic groups, grey power, age concern, community organisations and networks.

15. In addition, the council will use Our Auckland, the People’s Panel and social media as a way of further encouraging feedback on the draft policy. Local boards are encouraged to help encourage participation through their stakeholder newsletters and social media.

Role of local boards

16. A core function of local boards is to understand, engage with and represent their local communities. They do this through a number of formal and informal mechanisms in relation to their local board plans and local board agreements and also to inform local board input into regional plans and policies. The development of the Significance and Engagement Policy is not intended to constrain or restrict this role.

17. While adoption of the Significance and Engagement Policy is a Governing Body decision, local boards have a role providing input to its development. The purpose of this report is to seek local board input on the attached draft policy.

Policy approach to engagement

18. The LGA2002 sets out principles for consultation that all councils must follow.

19. Feedback received from the community and stakeholders on Auckland Council consultation and engagement processes has highlighted a number of other important principles to consider when engaging with the community. These have been incorporated into the policy as a way of recognising the needs of Auckland’s diverse communities and the value that is placed on their involvement in decision-making processes.

20. The legislation requires the policy to set out how the council will respond to community preferences about engagement on decisions relating to specific issues, assets and other matters. Auckland Council carries out hundreds of consultations each year from small neighbourhood issues up to large regional issues. A list of how the council will engage on each issue would be extensive and would not allow flexibility depending on the timing, community affected and likely level of interest on the issue. It would also limit the council’s ability to consider and refine approaches for engagement in response to community feedback.

21. An overview of the kinds of methods that could be used depending on the significance of the issue has been compiled to provide guidance. These have been categorised as small and simple, medium or large and complex. The level of significance will be determined using the criteria in section 3 of the policy. The criteria used to assess whether a decision is significant are also useful when considering which engagement methods should be used for a particular decision (if any). (For the avoidance of doubt, the use of the criteria to assess the level of engagement does not replace the council’s assessment of whether or not a decision is “significant”).

Significance

22. A decision is significant if:

a. The thresholds related to an activity or group of activities are exceeded; or

b. The decision relates to strategic assets

23. A decision will also be significant where the council, having applied the criteria, decides that it is significant. Where a decision is determined to be significant, it will automatically trigger a requirement to consult.

Strategic Assets

24. Strategic assets are defined as assets or group of assets required for the local authority to maintain its capacity to achieve or promote any outcome that council determines is important for the present or future wellbeing of the community. The council considers its strategic assets as whole single assets because it is the asset class as a whole that delivers the service. The list of strategic assets should cover only those assets that are significant for an entity the size of the Auckland Council. The strategic assets are listed in the Significance and Engagement Policy which includes land or buildings owned by the council that are required to maintain the local authority’s capacity to provide affordable housing and equity securities held by council in a port company or airport company.

25. The definition of networks included in the list of strategic assets has been updated by including the North Harbour Stadium, Bruce Mason Theatre and Q Theatre which Auckland Council acquired since the adoption of the Significance Policy in 2012. In addition, substantive shares in Watercare have been combined with shares in substantive CCOs as Watercare became a substantive CCO in 2012.

26. The legislation provides that a decision to transfer the ownership or control of a strategic asset to or from the local authority may only be made if they are explicitly provided for in the council’s LTP and, from 2015, also included in the consultation document used to consult on the LTP.

27. Decisions on assets not included in the list are subject to the normal provisions of the Local Government Act 2002 regarding decision making and consultation. This ensures that interested or affected parties will have their views considered appropriately in decision making. The council would retain discretion to consult (including using the special consultative procedure) for these decisions if it wished.

28. Strategic assets, as defined by this policy that are owned and or managed by a substantive CCO are identified in the CCO Accountability Policy.

Thresholds

29. As a general guide, the creation of a new group of activity, the cessation of a group of activity, or a 33 per cent increase or 20 per cent decrease in the nature of a group of activity, would be considered significant.

General Criteria

30. The council has also identified a list of criteria to consider when deciding whether or not a matter is significant.

Timeline

31. The high level timeline for the development of the policy is as follows:

Milestone	Description / steps	Timing
Developing the draft policy	Drafting the policy Testing the policy internally, with key stakeholders and advisory panels Gaining feedback on draft policy with local board members, local board chairs, IMSB Regional Strategy & Policy for adoption prior to consultation	July – August 5 September
Consulting on the draft policy	Communications and engagement on the draft Local board workshops Local board reports / formal feedback process Advisory panel workshops Stakeholder discussions Public engagement	September-October
Revising the draft policy	Analysing and reviewing feedback Updating draft policy	October onwards
Adopting the policy	Budget Committee Regional Strategy and Policy Governing body for adoption	5 November 6 November 27 November

32. This policy is expected to be adopted by 1 December 2014 and must be incorporated into the Long-term Plan (in summary form). The policy can be amended at any time.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

33. This report is seeking the views of local boards on the draft policy.

34. Local boards’ statutory role of identifying and communicating the views of the community on regional strategies, policies, plans and bylaws of the council has been taken into account during the development of the draft policy.

35. Engagement with local boards to date has included:

· an initial discussion at the Local Board Chairs Forum meeting on 28 April 2014;

· a workshop for all local board members to discuss aspects of the draft policy on 22 August;

· workshops are being held with individual boards during September and October where requested.

Māori impact statement

36. Auckland Council recognize that Māori are a critical / important audience that need to be engaged in a meaningful way. The Treaty of Waitangi Audit 2012 and the Auckland Council Guide on Engaging with Māori were reviewed during the development of the draft policy. The draft policy has been presented for discussion to the Independent Māori Statutory Board. The results of a recent research study on Māori engagement with Auckland Council will be considered prior to finalizing the draft policy and to identify improvements with the engagement guidelines.

37. Discussions on the draft policy and guidelines will also take place at a Mana Whenua forum during the consultation period.

General

38. This report does not involve decisions that will trigger the council’s current Significance Policy.

Implementation

39. Auckland Council does not currently have an adopted engagement policy. It does however have:

· a consultation and engagement guidebook

· a guide on Engagement with Māori

· a staff training programme in community engagement through the International Association of Public Participation (IAP2)

· an internal network which is used to share case studies

· an annual awards event to celebrate good practice.

40. Further work is taking place to improve the guidance that is available, in particular with respect to engaging with Auckland’s culturally and demographically diverse communities.

41. It is expected that updated guidance, case studies and templates will be prepared alongside the development of the draft policy so that these are available for the purposes of engagement on the draft Long-term Plan and other processes as soon as practicable. This will include legal advice on the consultation document and other changes to requirements as a result of the LGA 2002 amendments.

42. Local boards will be encouraged to input into the development of the updated guidance, case studies and templates through the engagement advisors.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Draft Significance and Engagement Policy	123

Signatories

Authors

Carol Hayward - Team Leader Consultation and Engagement

Authorisers

Karl Ferguson - Communication & Engagement Director

Carol McKenzie-Rex - Relationship Manager

1 Context

1.1 Introduction

For Auckland Council, engagement is a genuine dialogue between decision-makers, communities and stakeholders for the purpose of making better decisions, policies or programmes of action.

Public input into decisions, policies or programmes of action is an essential part of ensuring they reflect the aspirations of residents, iwi, community groups and businesses - everyone who is invested in Auckland's future being one of prosperity, equality and wellbeing.

This policy aims to enable a flexible approach to engagement that recognises and supports the needs of Auckland’s diverse communities to get involved in council and civic life, and demonstrates a commitment to building ongoing relationships and greater understanding of community views and preferences.

1.2 Policy purpose and overview

The purpose of this policy is to enable Auckland Council and its communities to identify the degree of significance attached to particular issues, proposals, assets, decisions, and activities; and

· to provide clarity about how and when communities can expect to be engaged in decisions about different issues, assets, or other matters; and

· to inform the council from the beginning of a decision-making process about—

o the extent of any public engagement that is expected before a particular decision is made; and

o the form or type of engagement required.

2 Decision making

One of the key roles of local government is to enable democratic local decision-making and action by, and on behalf of, communities. At Auckland Council, decision-making for regional decisions is undertaken by the Governing Body and for local decisions by local boards. Local Boards also have a key role in identifying and communicating the views of local communities on regional strategies, policies, plans and bylaws.

While community and stakeholder engagement improves decision-making, it is not the sole input into a decision. As shown in the diagram below, there are a wide range of information sources and perspectives that will inform a council decision. The information sources and perspectives are harnessed and collated which helps make the decision ‘sustainable’ (i.e. unlikely to require re-visiting due to it being well-informed and well-considered). Decisions are based on a wide range of information sources and perspectives and it may differ from the prevailing public opinion.

2.1 The Mayor and Governing Body

The Mayor has a responsibility for ensuring there is effective engagement between Auckland Council and the people of Auckland, including those too young to vote. The Mayor has established a number of advisory panels to: provide strategic advice to council on issues of importance to their communities (youth, ethnic people, pacific people, seniors, disability, rural); and to advise on effective engagement by council with those communities.

The Governing Body, comprising the Mayor and councillors, focuses on region-wide strategic decisions and must ensure that consultation and engagement requirements are met when making those decisions.

2.2 Local boards

Local boards make decisions on local matters, provide local leadership and support strong local communities.

With regard to community engagement and consultation, local boards are responsible for:

· making decisions about non-regulatory local matters, including negotiating the standards of services delivered locally;

· making decisions about regulatory local matters delegated to it by the governing body;

· identifying and communicating the views of local people on regional strategies, policies, plans and bylaws to the governing body;

· providing local leadership and developing relationships with the community, community organisations and special interest groups in the local area.

2.3 Independent Māori Statutory Board

The Independent Māori Statutory Board has appointed mana whenua and matāwaka (Māori communities with no tribal affiliation in Auckland) representatives.

The board assists Auckland Council to make decisions, perform functions, and exercise powers by:

· promoting cultural, economic, environmental, and social issues of significance for mana whenua groups; and matāwaka of Tamaki Makaurau; and

· ensuring that the council acts in accordance with statutory provisions referring to the Treaty of Waitangi.

3 Significance

A decision is significant if:

a. the thresholds related to an activity or groups of activities stated below are exceeded; or

b. the decision relates to the strategic assets listed below.

A decision will also be significant where the council, having applied the criteria listed below, decides that it is significant. Where a decision is determined to be significant it will automatically trigger a requirement to consult.

3.1 Thresholds

As a general guide, the creation of a new group of activity, the cessation of a group of activity, or a 33 per cent increase or 20 per cent decrease in the nature of a group of activity, would be considered significant.

3.2 Strategic assets

The council’s strategic assets are those vital for the delivery of its services to the community. The council considers its strategic assets as whole single assets (a network) because it is the asset class as a whole that delivers the service. A network is deemed to include those components which are integral to the functioning of the network as a whole. There are also a few iconic assets which have strategic significance for the Auckland region. In addition the LGA 2002 provides that shares in a port company and an airport company and assets required to provide affordable housing are strategic assets.

The council’s strategic assets are set out below.

1. Public transport network, including Britomart

2. Roading network

3. Stormwater network

4. Water and wastewater network

5. Parks network

6. Network of swimming pools

7. Network of community centres and halls

8. Community library network

9. Cemeteries, heritage scheduled buildings and structures

10. Freehold interest in waterfront land held by the Ports of Auckland and the Auckland Waterfront Development Agency

11. Shares in substantive CCOs

12. Auckland Central Library and the historical library collection

13. Civic Theatre, Aotea Centre, Zoo, Viaduct Events Centre, North Harbour Stadium, Bruce Mason Theatre, Q Theatre, Auckland Art Gallery (including the art collection owned by Regional Facilities Auckland), Mt Smart Stadium and the council's contractual rights and interests in Auckland City Arena (known as Vector Arena)

14. Social housing network including housing for the elderly

15. Shares in Auckland International Airport Limited (AIAL)

16. Shares in Ports of Auckland.

Strategic assets, as defined by this policy, that are owned and or managed by a substantive CCO, are identified in the CCO accountability policy. CCOs must comply with the CCO accountability policy when making decisions in relation to strategic assets under their control.

3.3 General Criteria

The following general criteria will be applied to determine the degree of significance of a decision.

1. The number of residents and ratepayers affected and the degree to which they are affected by the decision or proposal

2. The likely impact/consequences of the decision or proposal from the perspective of those parties

3. Whether this type of decision has a history of generating wide public interest within the local board area (for a local board decision) or the Auckland region or New Zealand generally (for a governing body decision)

4. The impact of the decision on the governing body’s or local boards’ ability to deliver on the current and future social, economic, environmental or cultural well-being of the local board area or Auckland region and any statutory responsibility

5. The impact of the decision on intended service levels for a group of council activities, including a decision to commence or cease any such group of activity

6. The degree to which the decision or proposal is reversible.

4 Approach to engagement

The extent to which the council will engage with communities and stakeholders about an issue or decision to be made will match how significant the issue or decision is. Engagement may be required at various stages of the decision-making process and may take different forms depending on the stage. Both significance and the form of engagement will be assessed on a case-by-case basis, relative to the criteria listed above. A guide to engagement methods is attached for further information.

4.1 Engagement principles

The following provides an overview of how council will meet the Local Government Act (LGA) principles.

Conduct its business in an open, transparent, and democratically accountable manner; and give effect to its identified priorities and outcomes in an efficient and effective manner

To meet this principle, the council will:

· conduct community and stakeholder engagement in a genuine effort to listen to, and consider with an open mind, community and stakeholder input;

· when presenting options for community and stakeholder feedback, ensure the options are realistic and deliverable;

· ensure that questions are objective (ie: not leading), allowing people to express their views freely;

· allow enough time and provide adequate resources to ensure participants have been provided fair opportunity to understand the matter and contribute their views

· allow time to allow for issues that might arise during an engagement process;

· value contributions made and time given;

· give timely feedback on the results of the public’s input and decisions made;

· value, respect and give weight to local knowledge.

A local authority should make itself aware of, and should have regard to, the views of all of its communities

To meet this principle, the council will:

· build ongoing relationships with communities through a range of approaches such as through advisory panels, the People’s Panel and other reference groups and fora;

· provide community members and stakeholders with a reasonable opportunity to present their views, and to participate in a way that suits them;

· provide ways for the community to raise issues directly with the council so that it is a two-way relationship;

· identify opportunities to work in partnership with community organisations and leaders to encourage greater community ownership and participation;

· ensure good information sharing of community views and preferences within council.

When making a decision, a local authority should take account of the diversity of the community, and the community's interests; and the interests of future as well as current communities; and the likely impact of any decision on them.

To meet this principle, the council will:

· identify ways of reaching out to affected communities and stakeholders, including those who are typically heard from least often;

· provide more than one way for people to participate;

· when required, invest in community capacity building to enable participation;

· use plain language and avoid jargon and acronyms.

A local authority should provide opportunities for Māori to contribute to its decision-making processes

To meet this principle the Council will actively consider through engagement:

· the recognition and protection of Māori rights and interests within Tamaki Makaurau;

· how to address and contribute to the needs and aspirations of Māori.

Supporting Māori community infrastructure that enables:

· early engagement with Māori in the development of appropriate plans and policies;

· Māori to guide how they want to engage with Auckland Council.

Support Māori to fully engage with the council, for example through but not limited to capability and capacity building.

5 Applying the policy

5.1 Supporting information

· Consultation and Engagement Guidebook - this provides more detailed guidance on engagement principles and good practice.

· Guide on Engaging with Māori.

· Quality Policy Advice guidelines

· Templates and other related guidance such as the Accessible Communications and Information Guide.

5.2 Managing conflicts of interest

Auckland Council has processes in place for both elected representatives and staff on how to manage conflicts of interest, including within the community engagement and decision-making process.

5.3 Policy exclusions

This policy will not apply and engagement will not be required where:

· in the opinion of the council, failure to make a decision urgently would result in unreasonable or significant damage to property, or risk to people’s health and safety, or the loss of a substantial opportunity to achieve the council’s strategic objectives. Other policy and legislative requirements will still apply.

· Any physical alterations to strategic assets that are required to:

o prevent an immediate hazardous situation arising

o repair an asset to ensure public health and safety due to damage from an emergency or unforeseen situation

5.4 Other legislation

The Resource Management Act 1991 sets out processes for public involvement in certain decisions, for example for resource consents and when preparing and changing district plans. Not all of these decisions are required to be publicly notified but when they are, the council will follow the principles outlined above in determining the level and type of consultation required.

There are a number of other policies or bylaws that are also required under other legislation (e.g. Gambling Act) or enabled (e.g. Sale and Supply of Alcohol Act, Psychoactive Substances Act, Health Act). Some of these are specific about the requirements and processes for engagement, but others refer back to the principles outlined above.

5.5 Policy development, term and review

This policy is expected to be adopted by 1 December 2014 and will be incorporated into the Long-term Plan (in summary form). The policy will be reviewed every three years as part of the Long-term Plan process but can be amended at any time.

6 Schedule 1: Methods of engagement

Auckland Council uses a wide range of tools and techniques to engage with the community and stakeholders. The council uses the International Association of Public Participation spectrum as a framework for engagement which identifies the following levels:

· Inform - to provide the public with balanced and objective information to assist them in understanding the problem, alternatives, opportunities and/or solutions.

· Consult - to obtain public feedback on analysis, alternatives and/or decisions.

· Involve - to work directly with the public throughout the process to ensure that public concerns and aspirations are consistently understood and considered.

· Collaborate - to partner with the public in each aspect of the decision including the development of alternatives and the identification of the preferred solution.

· Empower - to place final decision making in the hands of the public.

During the development of a plan or policy, there might be a number of different stages of engagement with the community using a different level of participation at the different stages. This will vary depending on the decision but for complex issues, a targeted group of community and stakeholders might be ‘involved’ to aid the development of a draft document followed by wider ‘consultation’ on the draft document.

Joint Management Agreements, Memorandum of Understanding or other similar high level agreements will be considered when engaging ‘collaboratively’ with Māori.

6.1 Engagement methods

The following provides a guide to the different approaches to engagement that might be used. Other approaches may also be considered depending on the topic and population affected.

Where the decision or proposal is in relation to air, land or water, the council will take into account the relationship of Māori and their culture and traditions with those places.

The council will refer to the general criteria in section 3.3 to determine the level of engagement required. In addition, the council will consider who is affected by the decision, for example, the level of diversity in terms of geographic, cultural or other key demographics.

Prior to determining an appropriate approach, the council will consider how much is already known about the community views and preferences on the issue.

Significance	Description	Example approach
Small and simple Eg redevelopment of libraries or community halls, park improvements	The audience is very localised or relatively small in number or very targeted. They are easy to access and the issue or decision is relatively straight forward and is not of high general public interest. For example, redevelopment of libraries or community halls, park improvements.	Localised promotion, for example through display boards and local media. Targeted engagement with the relevant audience where appropriate. Promotion through e-newsletters and social media. Information online and through local libraries and service centres. Surveys and open days may also be appropriate.
Medium Eg action plans, local area plans	The audience is fairly broad or diverse: some segments are not easy to access. The issue is not straightforward and there may be mixed views from the community. For example, action plans and local area plans.	Targeted engagement with the relevant audience, online engagement which may include a survey and social media. Information available through libraries and service centres. Promotion through e-newsletters, the local media or through the council’s newsletter, Our Auckland.
Large or complex Eg Auckland Plan, Long-term Plan	The audience is large and diverse and the issue is of wide importance to the region or complex. Significant financial investment will be required. This is high profile, over-arching, touches every part of council / community. For example, Auckland Plan, Long-term Plan.	Large scale publicity and promotion. There could be an informal engagement / discussion phase plus a formal phase of consultation. There is likely to need to be consideration of different cultural styles and needs for engagement. Likely to include a range of events and a focus on online activities. Promotion through the council’s newsletter, Our Auckland and through e-newsletters.

6.2 Special consultative procedure (SCP)

Part 6 of the Local Government Act 2002 specifies the use of the SCP for some plans and processes including:

· Long-term Plan

· Local Board Plans

· Annual Plan

· Bylaws of significant interest

The SCP can also be used where the governing body (for a regional decision) or local board (for a local board decision) deems the issue to be significant. Under the SCP, Auckland Council is required to:

· develop a statement of proposal and make this publicly available (and make the summary of full proposal as widely available as reasonably practicable);

· describe how people can have their say;

· ensure people are given an opportunity to present their views to the council; and

· given access to a record of the decisions.

The engagement methods listed above under ‘Large or complex’ will be considered when preparing for a SCP but large or complex issues will not automatically follow a SCP.

6.3 Consultation (Section 82)

Auckland Council is required to carry out consultation in accordance with or giving effect to Section 82 of the Local Government Act 2002 on certain matters (regardless of whether they are considered significant as part of this policy).

For all other issues requiring a decision, the council will determine the appropriate level of engagement on a case by case basis.

6.4 Informal engagement

Auckland Council may seek to develop ongoing relationships with the community on general matters, rather than purely on issues that require a decision. This will also allow the community to raise matters that are not currently under consultation. This could include having a presence at markets, events and in public spaces for the purposes of hearing community views and preferences.

Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

15 October 2014

Local board feedback on the draft Arts and Culture Strategic Action Plan (ACSAP)

File No.: CP2014/22741

Purpose

1. To endorse the Arts and Culture Strategic Action Plan’s proposed goals and action areas.

Executive summary

2. The Arts and Culture Strategic Action Plan (ACSAP) is a core strategy to deliver on the Auckland Plan vision to be the world’s most liveable city. It sets out a strategic direction for the next 10 years that will guide the planning and delivery of arts and culture activities in Auckland to meet the aspiration in the Auckland Plan to “integrate arts and culture in our everyday lives”.

3. Public consultation on the draft ACSAP was held 23 June to 24 July 2014.

4. A total of 440 submissions were received from key (external) stakeholders and the general public – 50 from arts and culture organisations, 109 from children and young people and the remainder from the general public.

5. Feedback from local boards was generally positive. The draft ACSAP aligned well with the arts and culture aspirations in many of the local board plans.

6. There was strong endorsement from key stakeholders and the general public of the draft ACSAP’s goals and action areas.

7. However, feedback from local boards and key stakeholders indicated that considerable further work is required on the implementation section of the plan.

8. As a result of this feedback, the ACSAP has been split into two parts:

· The ‘strategic section’ of the plan, which outlines the goals and action areas; and

· An ‘implementation section’, which will provide detail on the specific actions to be delivered and by whom, timeframes and measures.

9. The strategic section (goals and action areas) will be reported to the Arts, Culture and Events Committee for adoption in October 2014.

10. The implementation section requires further work and engagement with local boards and key stakeholders. This will be reported to the Arts, Culture and Events Committee for adoption in March 2015.

Recommendation/s

That the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board:

a) endorse the Arts and Culture Strategic Action Plan’s proposed goals and actions and recommend that the Arts, Culture and Events Committee adopt them.

b) note that further work on the implementation section will be undertaken with local boards from November 2014 to February 2015.

General feedback

c) note the engagement with local boards on the draft Arts and Culture Strategic Action Plan through individual workshops and portfolio holder briefings,

d) recommend clarification for the rationale of council involvement, and explanation of council’s role versus the role of other implementation agencies before the draft Arts and Culture Strategic Action Plan is adopted.

e) request that local boards be involved in the development of the implementation plan.

f) request that the implementation plan details the role of local boards, where appropriate and outline when they will be engaged.

Feedback on proposed goals and action areas

g) endorse the proposed goals and action areas of the draft Arts and Culture Strategic Acton Plan, noting that this is a high-level document with no detail of tangible actions, aligned funding and no clear indication of how outcomes will be realised.

h) recommend greater recognition of the role of local boards and the activities being undertaken by local boards. This includes:

i) Auckland Council’s role in arts and culture (page 9): to outline the role of local boards in producing arts and culture outcomes though local facilities, initiatives and programming.

ii) Strategic Framework section (pages 10-13): stronger alignment and recognition of the local board plans.

iii) throughout all six goals: to highlight where local boards have undertaken arts and culture-related activities in the ‘what we are already doing’ sections

iv) Goal 1 (pages 27-29): to highlight the opportunities local boards can provide so that all Aucklander’s can access and participate in arts and culture.

v) Goal 2 (pages 32-33): to highlight how local boards can invest in arts and culture through events and programming, as well as advocating for new facility builds.

vi) Goal 3 (pages 36-38): to reflect and recognise the opportunities local boards can provide arts and culture groups through community leases, venue hire, partnering and programming.

vii) Goal 4 (pages 41-43): to recognise the role of local boards in place-making.

viii) Goal 5 (pages 46-48): to recognise the role of local boards in celebrating cultural identity by undertaking a range of local events.

ix) Goal 6 (pages 51-53): to highlight how local boards can contribute to a creative economy through local economic development and arts and culture facilities, initiatives and programming.

i) recommend that since local board feedback has not been sought in time to influence the final draft Arts and Culture Strategic Acton Plan that will be presented to the October meeting of the Arts, Culture and Events Committee, that the Chair and Community and Cultural Strategy Manager be delegated authority to make final changes based on local board feedback.

Comments

Local board feedback

11. To date, engagement with local boards has included portfolio holder briefings, workshops and meetings with local board members. Written and verbal feedback has been received (see attachment A).

12. Local boards are generally positive about the draft ACSAP, its alignment with draft local board plans and its ability to support local board’s diverse arts and culture aspirations.

13. Key themes emerged from local board feedback:

· Community feedback on the draft plan needs to be reflected in the final ACSAP

· Greater recognition of the importance of arts and culture in placemaking and urban design

· Greater clarity on council’s role and what council will specifically deliver and support

· Improve the affordability of hiring creative spaces

· Improve Aucklanders’ access to and participation in arts and culture

· More public art outside the city centre

· Regional institutions to deliver arts and culture in rural areas

· Greater use of digital tools, such as an arts and culture calendar, on-line tools to connect artists with funders, on-line access to and apps about the history of significant sites etc.

· Recognise the importance of ‘local’ i.e. arts and culture by local communities, for local communities, in local communities.

14. The areas of strong alignment between local board, key stakeholder and general public feedback include: the importance of arts and culture in placemaking; celebrating multiculturalism; and addressing affordability and accessibility issues for audiences and participants.

Public feedback

15. Public consultation on the draft ACSAP took place from 23 June to 24 July. It was publicised through various channels. Local boards also promoted the consultation to their communities.

16. A total of 440 submissions were received. Of these: 50 were from arts and culture organisations; 109 were received from children and young people; and the remainder were from the general public. (See attachment B for the feedback summary and submission numbers by local board area)

17. A specific consultation with children and young people was undertaken during the school holidays, accounting for the high number of responses from these groups. Staff worked with Uxbridge Creative Centre, The Auckland Performing Arts Centre, Auckland Central Library, Auckland Art Gallery and schools to run visioning and imagining exercises and collect feedback via a specifically designed worksheet.

18. Key themes from the public consultation were:

· The importance of public art and arts and culture in placemaking

· Sustainable funding of arts and culture

· Affordability and accessibility to arts and culture for audiences and participants

· Honouring Māori culture and recognising the contribution of multiculturalism to Auckland’s identity

· A strong desire from many individuals and organisations to partner with council to implement the ACSAP.

19. Submitters strongly endorsed the six goals and 16 action areas in the draft ACSAP.

Adopting the ACSAP through a two-stage process

20. Whilst there was general support for the goals and action areas, there was also strong feedback on how the detailed actions of the ACSAP will be implemented. Additionally, external stakeholders expressed a desire to be involved in delivery.

21. The mayor’s proposal for the Long-term Plan 2015-25 requires refinement to the detailed actions and look closely at implementation.

22. As a result of these issues, the ACSAP has been split into two parts:

· The ‘strategic’ part of the plan, outlining the goals and actions areas. Staff seek local board endorsement of the proposed goals and action areas (below), and local board recommendation that the Arts, Culture and Events Committee adopt the goals and action areas at the October committee meeting. Prior to further consultation on implementation, it is important that the ACSAP goals and action areas are adopted to guide this discussion.

· The ‘implementation’ part of the plan, with details on specific actions, lead organisations, timeframes and measures. This requires further work and engagement and will be reported to the Arts, Culture and Events Committee in March 2015. Feedback from the consultation will be used to refine and inform this work.

ACSAP strategic section: proposed goals and action areas

23. Early information and feedback from local boards and key stakeholders was used to develop the goals and action areas in the draft ACSAP. They have been confirmed through the consultation process, which also identified priority goals and action areas (see bold points in the table below).

24. The proposed, final ACSAP goals and action areas are:

Goals	Action areas
All Aucklanders can access and participate in arts and culture	Place Aucklanders at the centre of arts and culture planning and delivery
	Better communicate what’s on offer
	Remove barriers to access and participants
Auckland values and invests in arts and culture	Grow and deliver strategic investment in arts and culture
Auckland values and invests in arts and culture	Evaluate and promote the economic, social, cultural and environmental value of investment in Auckland’s art and culture
A network of vibrant arts and culture organisations and facilities meets Auckland’s diverse needs	Foster arts and culture organisations and facilities that build and promote Auckland’s unique identity
	Support arts and culture organisations and facilities to engage with Auckland’s diverse population in innovative and inclusive ways
	Arts and culture organisations work together as a complementary regional system
	Provide a regional spread of vibrant diverse and affordable creative spaces
Arts and culture are intrinsic to Auckland’s place making	Tell our stories by encouraging unique and distinctive public art that reflects and responds to our place
	Make it easier to plan, create and deliver innovative art and design in public places
	Engage more artists and Aucklanders in art in public places
Auckland celebrates a unique cultural identity	Celebrate Māori and their culture as a point of difference
Auckland celebrates a unique cultural identity	Champion Auckland’s unique arts and culture
Auckland has a robust and flourishing creative economy	Foster a robust network of creative industries
Auckland has a robust and flourishing creative economy	Champion innovation to attract talent

Next steps

25. Further engagement with local boards, key stakeholders, mana whenua and mataawaka on implementation will take place between October 2014 and February 2015. The implementation section will be reported to the Arts, Culture and Events Committee in March 2015 for adoption, and the ACSAP in its entirety will be finalised.

Consideration

Māori impact statement

26. The Independent Māori Statutory Board (IMSB) is represented on the ACSAP steering group to provide guidance on content and process. The IMSB’s Māori Plan for Tāmaki Makaurau was a guiding document underpinning the development of the draft ACSAP.

27. Māori aspirations and outcomes were clearly identified and addressed in the draft ACSAP with Māori actions woven through all the action areas; this will not change. The ACSAP acknowledges and celebrates Māori culture as Auckland’s point of difference, and mana whenua as Treaty partners in a multicultural Auckland.

28. One of the key arts and culture actions in the Māori Plan for Tāmaki Makaurau was that council support a signature Māori event – this is included in the ACSAP. The mayor’s proposal on the Long-term Plan 2015-25 states his expectation that Auckland Tourism Events and Economic Development (ATEED) will deliver a significant Māori event (and ATEED refocus its current resources to achieve this).

29. Further engagement with mana whenua and mataawaka is planned as part of developing the implementation section of the ACSAP.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Local Board Feedback	213
b View	Consultation Summary	217
c View	Draft Arts and Culture Action Plan (Under Separate Cover)

Signatories

Authors

Rebecca Kruse – Strategy Analyst

Maree Mills - Principal Strategy Analyst

Authorisers

Grant Barnes - Manager - Auckland Strategy and Research

Carol McKenzie-Rex - Relationship Manager

Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

15 October 2014

ARTS & CULTURE STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN 2014

Submissions Report

The draft ACSAP was publicised via various channels including:

· Targeted stakeholders (e.g. advisory panels, IMSB, CCOs, key arts and culture organisations)

· Through 146 venues (e.g. CDAC facilities, RFA, marae, community centres, libraries, local board offices, service centres, commercial galleries, performing arts venues, tertiary institutions, art schools, private museums and philanthropic organisations) and at events (e.g. Kapa Haka Super 12s, Art Educators Conference AUT and Net Hui).

· Presentations to Creative Coalition, Lunchtime Learning, Artist Alliance, Pacific Arts Cluster and Digital Live

· Published through various media channels (e.g. Our Auckland, digital banners, NZ Herald advert, press release to media commentators, council website and Facebook and Twitter accounts)

Submission Type

Submitter Group

The graph below shows the format the submissions were received in.

182 submissions have been received via the online form, 108 via the hard copy form, 109 from the Youth worksheet, and a further 39 via email non form submissions.

The graph below outlines what ‘group’ submitters belong to.

275 submissions have been from individuals, 51 from some form of group or organisation, and 109 from the Youth worksheet.

Feedback regarding the ACSAP Vision

Submitters were asked to rank how important the vision is to them. The graph shows the importance of the visions to submitters.

Feedback regarding the Goals

The graph outlines what importance submitters placed on each goal. The table below outlines the labels used in the graph below.

Graph label	Goal
Access and participation	All Aucklanders can access and participate in Arts and Culture
Value and invest	Auckland values and invests in Arts and Culture
Organisations and facilities	A network of vibrant Arts and Culture organisations and facilities meets Auckland’s diverse needs
Design and development	Arts and Culture are intrinsic to how we design and develop Auckland
Cultural identity	Auckland celebrates a unique cultural identity
Creative economy	Auckland has a robust and flourishing creative economy

Feedback regarding the Actions

The graphs below show the priority given by submitters to action areas.

All Aucklanders can access and participate in Arts and Culture

Auckland values and invests in Arts and Culture

A network of vibrant Arts and Culture organisations and facilities meets Auckland’s diverse needs

Arts and Culture are intrinsic to how we design and develop Auckland

Auckland celebrates a unique cultural identity

Auckland has a robust and flourishing creative economy

Submission by Local Board Area

The table below indicates the total numbers of submissions received by the local board area.

Local Board	Individual submissions	Children and young people worksheet	Organisation submissions	Total submissions
Albert-Eden Local Board	45	4	4	53
Devonport-Takapuna Local Board	14	0	5	19
Franklin Local Board	4	0	0	4
Great Barrier Local Board	0	0	0	0
Henderson-Massey Local Board	9	15	1	25
Hibiscus and Bays Local Board	6	2	3	11
Howick Local Board	12	34	2	48
Kaipatiki Local Board	16	5	2	23
Mangere-Otahuhu Local Board	5	0	0	5
Manurewa Local Board	4	1	1	6
Maungakiekie-Tamaki Local Board	15	4	0	19
Orakei Local Board	17	0	1	18
Otara-Papatoetoe Local Board	7	0	0	7
Papakura Local Board	9	0	0	9
Puketapapa Local Board	8	0	0	8
Rodney Local Board	7	1	1	9
Upper Harbour Local Board	3	1	0	4
Waiheke Local Board	1	2	2	5
Waitakere Ranges Local Board	10	0	0	10
Waitemata Local Board	43	19	18	80
Whau Local Board	16	3	0	19
Regional	1	0	3	4
Not Supplied	2	0	1	3
Outside Auckland	21	19	11	51

Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

15 October 2014

Resolution Number	Summary of Item	Resolution	Position or Department Responsible	Target Date/update
MO/2013/424 & MO201493/94	Mangere Town Centre Canopy Project	d) Requests that officers initiate a dialogue with shop owners and the Mangere Town Centre BID regarding the roof repairs and drainage in association with and simultaneously with this project. Updated 21 May 2014 b) Note the options for addressing the flooding issues associated with private roofs, guttering, spouting and down pipes of the buildings surrounding the public square is limited to voluntary remediation and in some cases regulatory action which would be unlikely to mean works were completed simultaneously with the canopy project. c) Receive the detailed design and indicative costs for the canopy prepared by Qdesignz. d) Note that at least an additional $750,000 (indicative cost) as well as consequential operational budget (yet to be costed) is required to fund the canopy element of the project as per the Board’s preferred design option. e) Review the scope and design of the canopy in close consultation with the Māngere Town Centre Business Association and continue to commit existing Māngere-Ōtāhuhu budget to this project and ask officers to consider phasing, compiling an investment proposal as part of the long term plan and exploring other funding options and partners to complete the project. f) Endorse the provision of the additional public toilets within the proposed Māngere Town Centre Bus Interchange project to be funded and delivered by Auckland Transport in June 2015, and reallocate existing budget for the public toilets to the canopy.	Maureen Shelton, Nicola Mochrie, Dean Williams	Reported to the Board 21 May 2014. A further report will come back to the board at a later date.
MO/2013/437	Community Art Space in Otahuhu Scoping Study Report	b) Notes that staff from Community Policy and Planning will report on a proposed programme of planning and the indicative budget required to investigate the needs and feasibility of an arts facility and events for Otahuhu.	Rhoda Fowler	TBA
MO/2013/459	Niu Fiafiamau Group	b) Refers the accommodation requests of the Niue Fiafiamau Group to council’s Community Facilities and Community Development Facilitators to review and report-back to the Local board.	David Mose, Tipi Arthur, Ayr Jones	Waiting for a Memo from David Mose.
Workshop	Nga Tapuwae Community Centre	The Board discussed the Buckland Road Preferred Options. The board supports looking at efficient traffic flows in the area. This proposal is in the early stages and further scoping information will be coming to the board early next year.	Brya Taylor	This project is being considered by Auckland Transport
MO/2013/530	Mangere Bridge Art Group	b) Requests a prompt report-back from officers on the hire increases for the Mangere Bridge Art Group and the maintenance and condition of the Mangere Bridge War Memorial Hall.	Kat Teirney, Brya Taylor, Peter Matvos	Fees and Charges were workshopped 26 February and reported to the board. Awaiting information on the condition of the Mangere Bridge War Memorial Hall
MO/2013/558 + MO/2014/92	Mangere Town Centre Library Temporary Mural Project	b) Requests officers report back to the Mangere-Otahuhu Local Board on options and alternatives on the future use and placement of the temporary mural after three months following the installation. Updated 21 May 2014 - That the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board requests that officers investigate retaining the mural and how it can be protected and report the options back to the local board.	Leilani Unasa, James Pinker, Amiri Pula-Taylor	Reported in May 2014. A further report will be coming to the board TBA
MO/2014/3 + MO/2014/91	Mangere Arts Centre - Public Programming	b) Refer public forum concerns about the Mangere Arts Centre to the Manager of Arts, for consideration and report-back to the Board. Updated 21 May 2014 - a) Approve a Māngere Arts Centre - Ngā Tohu o Uenuku strategic workshop for Māngere’s arts and culture key stakeholders. b) Approve the scoping of an annual commission for temporary artwork for the Māngere Arts Centre - Ngā Tohu o Uenuku. c) Delegate authority to the relevant Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board portfolio holders to work with staff to progress a strategic workshop as well as the scoping of an annual commission. d) Agree that the relevant portfolio holders will be provided with progress updates on a monthly basis and more frequently when needed and regular report backs to the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board.	Leilani Unasa,	Portfolio Holders will be updated on a regular basis
MO/2014/17	Submission Draft Local Board Plan 2014/2017	c) That the Mangere-Otahuhu Local Board requests suspends the presentation from Roger Fowler or his submission on the proposed one year trial of free public transport for all routes in the Mangere-Otahuhu area until further information has been received	Ben Stallworthy	TBA
MO/2014/21	MOana-Nui-A-Kiwa Outdoor Pool Upgrade Developed Design	c) Notes that the proposed development of stage 3, which included the future new plant room, associated filtration services and its relative priority, will be considered as part of the citywide Community Facilities Network Plan, the progress of which will be reported to the board later in 2014.	Phillipa Knox	Late in 2014
MO/2014/40	Makaurau Marae Placement with Auckland Council	That the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board congratulates Makaurau Marae and Council Officers for their innovation on this project and invites Community Development, Arts and Culture and Environmental Services Unit to present the Haere Whakamua project.	Emma Joyce, Tessa Chilala, Shane Ta'ata	A report will be presented to the board when the project is complete.
MO/2014/60	House at 161 Robertson Road Mangere	That the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board: a) Request that the local board’s preference for the future of the house at 161 Robertson Road, Mangere, be given due regard when the issue is considered by the Finance and Performance Committee for decision regarding this non-service asset. b) Requests that officers from Community Policy and Planning, Financial Planning and the Environmental Strategy and Policy (Heritage) prepare a preliminary business case for the historic homestead, including consideration of locating a suitable business and providing a lease of sufficient duration that would allow for restoration by the lessee and a commercially sustainable venture.	Manoj Ragupathy, Ross Tucker, Bryan Pooley, Leitita McColl, Marian Webb, Richard Bland (Heritage)	Memo attached to the September Report. A report will be coming to the November Business meeting.
MO/2014/65 MO/2014/176	Auckland Transport Monthly Report	b) Requests that Auckland Transport investigate calming traffic in Mangere East Town Centre to improve pedestrian access across Massey Road and report back on the potential cost and whether or not the project is technically feasible. e) Requests that Auckland Transport report Windrush-Waddon project options to the May 2014 meeting for local board decision. f) Requests that Auckland Transport sorts out the Bader Drive/Idlewild intersection which has not been improved in terms of making it safer or enabling better traffic flow. c) Requests that the removal of the fencing in the Mangere Town Centre car park, near the Citizen’s Advice Bureau is resolved.	Ben Stallworthy	Windrush-Waddon option was reported in the 21 May meeting.
MO/2014/67	Financial Planning for Extreme Weather Events	c) Note that expenditure against the local unallocated operational and capital storm damage budgets will be reported to all local boards annually.	Jane Aickin, Martin Van Jaarsveld, Malcolm Page, Grant Jennings	Apr-15
MO/2014/71	Local Board Decisions for 2014/2015 Annual Plan - Mangere Canopy	i) Agrees a balanced budget for 2014/2015 and outer years for the Annual Plan 2014/2015 that reflect the allocation of decision-making, with the proviso that the local board receives expert financial and implementation advice on the Mangere Town Centre Canopy project to deliver it’s desired outcomes in a lateral, innovative and cost-effective way.	Lydia Sosene, Kennth Tuai, Rina Tagore	Pending
MO/2014/81	Otahuhu JP Service Desk/Office Space	b) That the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board refers the future location and space concerns of the Ōtāhuhu JP Service to the relevant council officers to consider and report back with proposed solutions.	David Mose, Ayr Jones	The CAB has been allocated space in the Otahuhu Recreation Precinct.
MO/2014/89	Waddon Road and Windrush Close	c) Requests a separate report for final decision-making on Waddon Road and Windrush Close.	Ben Stallworthy	TBA
MO/2014/130	Community Facilities Provision in Mangere	c) Notes that the results of the needs analysis will be reported to the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board, which will determine whether or not a feasibility study is required.	Sally McComb	Report due February 2015
MO/2014/132	MOLB Community Development, Arts nd Culture Work Programme 2014/2015	h) requests officers to report back on the effectiveness of the Community Development, Arts and Culture work programme, in delivering on the local board plan, with a particular focus on grants and contestable funding outcomes.	Lisa Traill, Leora Hirsh	TBA
MO/2014/171	Quarterly Performance Report	b) Requests further analysis and reporting on annual swimming pool patronage and promotion of free entry for all at Moana Nui A Kiwa pool.	Rob McGee	TBA
MO/2014/189	Pacific Arts Association International Symposium March 2016	b) That the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board refer the partnership proposal for the Auckland War Memorial Museum Pacific Arts Association International Symposium March 2016 to the Arts, Culture and Events Committee and arts and culture policy officers, for further scoping and costing, with a report-back to the Local Board.	Naomi Singer, Olivia Taouna	TBA

Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

15 October 2014

Mangere-Otahuhu Local Board members portfolio update

File No.: CP2014/22752

Purpose

1. This report provides an opportunity at the business meeting for portfolio holders to update the full Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board on any significant activities over the last month.

Executive Summary

2. The portfolio leads and alternates for Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board are as follows:

Portfolio	Lead	Alternate
Local planning, policy and governance: regulatory, bylaws and compliance	Lydia Sosene	Carrol Elliott
Arts, Culture and Events	Leau Peter Skelton	Tafafuna'i Tasi Lauese
Community Services	Walter Togiamua	Tafafuna'i Tasi Lauese
Libraries	Christine O'Brien	Nick Bakulich
Youth Development	Christine O'Brien	Nick Bakulich
Recreation Services	Walter Togiamua	Nick Bakulich
Parks and Reserves	Tafafuna'i Tasi Lauese	Nick Bakulich
Natural Environment	Carrol Elliott	Walter Togiamua
Built Environment, Heritage and Housing	Carrol Elliott	Lydia Sosene
Economic Development, Street Environment and Town Centres	Christine O'Brien	Leau Peter Skelton
Transport and Infrastructure	Lydia Sosene	Carrol Elliott
Civil Defence and Emergency Management	Nick Bakulich	Lydia Sosene

3. At the commencement of this electoral term, the reasons for having local board portfolio-holders was workshopped with the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board and it was generally agreed that the objectives of local board portfolio holders are to:

· Provide clear steering of the relevant work programme

· Lift detailed discussion out of local board meetings and workshops

· Ensure key decisions go before the full local board

· Reduce or avoid delays in project delivery

· Enable local board members to apply their time and energy with enthusiasm and interest

· Ensure clear communications within the local board and between the local board and officers

· Maintain strong, connected relationships between the local board and its communities

· Maintain mutual trust

4. The Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board also workshopped what the role or job description of a portfolio holder might be, and some examples of how local board members might perform their role as a portfolio holder are outlined below:

Portfolio role	Examples of actions by portfolio holder
Undertaking roles specified in officer delegation protocols	· Landowner consents; and proposed asset renewal works: The portfolio-holder can either decide the issue or ask officers to refer it to the full local board for a decision · Providing feedback on resource consent applications
Sharing the workload between local board members	· Speaking at external meetings on local board matters e.g. at sports clubs – to gather their views, and represent the views of the local board · Supporting the Chair and other local board members in speaking to governing body committees or at public meetings on portfolio topics · Keeping alternate portfolio-holders informed, so they can assist the portfolio-holder where needed
Gathering knowledge	· Receiving officer progress updates on projects already agreed by the local board, noting that work programmes are approved by the full local board · Engaging and maintaining relationships with stakeholders · Reading background reports relevant to the portfolio
Acting as a sounding-board and advising officers	· Meeting with officers to give the local board view of issues · Where there is no known local board view, the portfolio-holder gathers the views of all local board members and formulates the local board position. (Contentious issues are best referred to a local board workshop) · Helping to shape details of departmental annual work programmes before presentation to the local board, to secure local board plan outcomes · Commenting on proposed design details and other issues arising from local board projects · Enabling officers to test possible local board interest in a proposal · Helping officers to define preferred options or approaches before reporting to the local board · Encouraging officers, especially through difficult decisions
Monitoring action against the Local Board Plan	· Asking officers for progress updates · Advising officers and local board when projects need response or attention
Leading local board projects as a convenor of the relevant steering group or working party	Various, but currently include: · Aorere Park Joint Steering Group · Manukau Harbour Forum · Youth Connections project
Providing regular updates on portfolio activity to the local board	· At board business meetings: portfolio-holders can report back at this agenda item · Portfolio-holders lead board discussion on officer reports relevant to their portfolio · Emails to all local board members, when information needs to be timely

Recommendation/s

That the verbal or written reports from the portfolio members be received.

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Signatories

Authors	Janette McKain - Local Board Democracy Advisor
Authorisers

No.	Title	Page
a View	Workshop Notes 3 September	253
b View	Workshop Notes 10 September	255
c View	Workshop Notes 17 September	257
d View	Workshop Notes 24 September	259

1.00 - 1.30pm	SLIPs	Banita Wallabh	The Board discussed the SLIPs projects received and will be reported to the October business meeting. Officers to check with the commemorations committee (Kaye Oliver) regarding funding for the Otāhuhu Cemetery to coincide with the WW1 celebrations.
1.30 - 2.30pm	Community Funding Round 1	Jan Perkins, Jenny Young	The Board discussed the Community Funding Round 1 funding applications. Another workshop to be set up to discuss the remaining applications that were not discussed at this workshop.
2,39 – 3.00pm	Mangere East CCTV	Mark Evans	The Board discussed expectations around the capex that has been set aside for the Mangere East CCTV. The Board would like to see the crime statistics and CEPTED assets needed. A report regarding public consultation will be reported at the 15 October Business Meeting. A further workshop will be held on 1 October (incorporated with the Area Plan).
3.00 - 3.30pm	Otahuhu Linkages and Public Realm Initiative	Jez Pellow, Nicola Mochrie, Joseph Beeson	To Board had a power point presentation on the Otahuhu Linkages and Public Realm initiative.
3.30 - 4.00pm	Long Term Plan	Rina Tagore	Formal Feedback on the Mayor's proposal to be endorses at the September meeting.

Timeslot	Topic	Presenter	Notes
12.00 - 12.30pm	Ambury Farm Day Event	Wayne Carlson	Council’s Regional Parks officers updated the Local Board on key local impact aspects on the Ambury Farm Day event, including how traffic will be managed and how the event will be promoted locally.
12.30 - 1.00pm	Community Funding Round 1	Jenny Young	To Board discussed the community funding applications. A report will be on the October agenda.
1.00 - 4.00pm	Deliberations Local Board Plan Hearings	Kenneth Tuai, Rina Tagore	The Board considered the submissions feedback from the special consultative procedure on the Local Board Plan. The Board were also provided with feedback from officers to the questions requested post hearings. The Board considered any changes to the draft local board plan and guidance on the local board plan before being finalised at the October meeting.

Chairperson	Lydia Sosene
Deputy Chairperson	Carrol Elliott, JP
Members	Nick Bakulich
	Tafafuna'i Tasi Lauese, JP
	Christine O'Brien
	Leau Peter Skelton
	Walter Togiamua

Authors	Rina Tagore - Senior Local Board Advisor
Authorisers	Carol McKenzie-Rex - Relationship Manager

Authors	Kenneth Tuai - Local Board Advisor
Authorisers	Carol McKenzie-Rex - Relationship Manager