I hereby give notice that an ordinary meeting of the Budget Committee will be held on:

Date:                       Time: Meeting Room: Venue:	Tuesday, 18 November 2014 1.30 pm Reception Lounge Auckland Town Hall 301-305 Queen Street Auckland
Budget Committee OPEN AGENDA

MEMBERSHIP

Chairperson	Mayor Len Brown, JP
Deputy Chairperson	Cr Penny Webster
Members	Cr Anae Arthur Anae	Cr Calum Penrose
	Cr Cameron Brewer	Cr Dick Quax
	Cr Dr Cathy Casey	Cr Sharon Stewart, QSM
	Cr Bill Cashmore	Member David Taipari
	Cr Ross Clow	Member John Tamihere
	Cr Linda Cooper, JP	Cr Sir John Walker, KNZM, CBE
	Cr Chris Darby	Cr Wayne Walker
	Cr Alf Filipaina	Cr John Watson
	Cr Hon Christine Fletcher, QSO	Cr George Wood, CNZM
	Deputy Mayor Penny Hulse
	Cr Denise Krum
	Cr Mike Lee

(Quorum 11 members)

Mike Giddey

Democracy Advisor

12 November 2014

Contact Telephone: (09) 307 7565

Email: mike.giddey@aucklandcouncil.govt.nz

Website: www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz

TERMS OF REFERENCE

Responsibilities

Development of the Long Term Plan and Annual Plans under the chairmanship of the Mayor who leads these processes including:

• Local Board agreements
• Local Board Funding Policy
• Financial Policy related to LTP and AP (recommendation to the Governing Body)
• Setting of rates (recommendation to the Governing Body)
• Draft LTP and Annual Plan prior to community consultation
• Development contributions policy

Powers

(i)         All powers necessary to perform the committee’s responsibilities.

Except:

            (a)        powers that the Governing Body cannot delegate or has retained to itself (see                                Governing Body responsibilities)

            (b)        where the committee’s responsibility is explicitly limited to making a recommendation                   only

(ii)        Approval of a submission to an external body

(iii)       Powers belonging to another committee, where it is necessary to make a decision prior to            the next meeting of that other committee.

(iv)       Power to establish subcommittees.

(v)        Power to establish panels for the purpose of hearing submissions.

Budget Committee 18 November 2014

ITEM   TABLE OF CONTENTS                                                                                        PAGE

1          Apologies                                                                                                                        5

2          Declaration of Interest                                                                                                   5

3          Confirmation of Minutes                                                                                               5

4          Petitions                                                                                                                          5

5          Public Input                                                                                                                    5

6          Local Board Input                                                                                                          5

7          Extraordinary Business                                                                                                5

8          Notices of Motion                                                                                                          6

9          Solid Waste targeted rates and fees 2015/2016 and Waste Management and Minimisation funding through transition                                                                                           7

10        Solid Waste: Inorganic Collection Service methodology and funding: Long Term Plan 2015-2025.                                                                                                                     15

11        Rates transition management option

This report will be provided in an addendum agenda.

12        Rates Remission and Postponements

This report will be provided in an addendum agenda.

13        Performance measures and targets                                                                          21

14        Significance and Engagement Policy                                                                        91

15        Consideration of Extraordinary Items 

1          Apologies

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

2          Declaration of Interest

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

3          Confirmation of Minutes

That the Budget Committee:

confirm the ordinary minutes of its meeting, held on Wednesday, 5 November and Thursday, 6 November 2014 as a true and correct record.

4 Petitions

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

5 Public Input

            Standing Order 3.21 provides for Public Input.  Applications to speak must be made to the            Committee Secretary, in writing, no later than two (2) working days prior to the meeting          and must include the subject matter.  The meeting Chairperson has the discretion to        decline any application that does not meet the requirements of Standing Orders.  A maximum of thirty (30) minutes is allocated to the period for public input with five (5)            minutes speaking time for each speaker.

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

6 Local Board Input

            Standing Order 3.22 provides for Local Board Input.  The Chairperson (or nominee of that             Chairperson) is entitled to speak for up to five (5) minutes during this time.  The     Chairperson of the Local Board (or nominee of that Chairperson) shall wherever practical,    give two (2) days notice of their wish to speak.  The meeting Chairperson has the      discretion to decline any application that does not meet the requirements of Standing          Orders.

            This right is in addition to the right under Standing Order 3.9.14 to speak to matters on the             agenda.

            At the close of the agenda no requests for local board input had been received.

7 Extraordinary Business

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

8 Notices of Motion

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

Budget Committee 18 November 2014

Solid Waste targeted rates and fees 2015/2016 and Waste Management and Minimisation funding through transition

File No.: CP2014/25357

Purpose

1.    This report recommends changes to targeted rates and users charges for solid waste services for 2015/2016 to:

·          reflect changes in costs

·          achieve harmonisation where the service offering is similar.

Mayoral Summary and Recommendations

2.       The Waste Management and Minimisation Plan is one of our major environmental  initiatives. The proposals in that plan went through an extensive consultation process a couple of years ago. The implementation of the WMMP will take place in the term of this LTP.

3.       Staff have recently revised the implementation plan and have proposed a more phased approach. This seems sensible and has been through the Regional Strategy and Policy Committee.

4.       Alongside this phased implementation, a phased approach to the introduction of changes to the fees and charges is also proposed. In 2015/16 this involves updating the targeted rate to incorporate the new contract costs and, where relevant, harmonising these  In 2016/17 the former Auckland City and Manukau City areas will start a user pays approach to refuse collection and full “pay as you throw” will be implemented from 2019/20.

5.       The staff report also proposes removing the subsidy from the solid waste services provided on Waiheke and Great Barrier Islands. Currently these services are subsidised by the ratepayers of the former Auckland City area. The level of subsidy is identified as approximately $525 per property.  It is proposed to transition to full cost recovery over 3 years.

6.       While I agree generally with the principle that these costs should be recovered from the area that benefits from the service, some concerns have been raised by the relevant Local Boards about the accuracy of the cost allocation and staff have indicated that they will be further reviewing these costs during consultation and therefore I have a slightly different set of recommendations :

Recommendations

7.       That for the purposes of developing the draft LTP 2015-25 for consultation, the Budget Committee adopt the proposed changes to solid waste services funding set out below.

a)    The indicative targeted rates for waste services, including the pre-booked, on-property inorganic collection as recommended in the report in the previous item on this agenda, in the former council areas for the 2015/2016 year as set out below:

i.                    Auckland and Manukau $242^[1] (adjusted as appropriate in Auckland to provide for the rates where a ratepayer has opted out of either or both of refuse and recycling services)

ii.                   North Shore and Waitakere $80

iii.                  Rodney $90

iv.                  Franklin and Papakura $100 (adjusted as appropriate in rural Franklin where a ratepayer does not receive a recycling service).

b)         A targeted rate for the provision of solid waste services, including the pre-booked, on-property inorganic collection as recommended in the report in the previous item on this agenda, for the Hauraki Gulf Islands of $418 for 2015/2016.

c)         The introduction of user charges, billed to the property owner, for refuse for the former Auckland and Manukau City areas be gradually introduced from 2016/2017 financial year.

8.       That staff carry out further work on the costs of the refuse collection on the Hauraki Gulf Islands and consult with the community on phasing out the subsidy over three years.

Executive summary

9.    It is proposed to introduce changes to funding to:

·               reflect changes in service costs

·               reflect phasing in of new services

·               allow sufficient transition to ensure these services are affordable to residents and ratepayers.

10.  The Waste Management and Minimisation Plan is being implemented in stages with new services and funding methods to be introduced gradually from 2015/2016 until full implementation by 2019/2020.

Solid waste targeted rates and fees for 2015/2016

11.  It is recommended that the current mix of user pays and targeted rates is maintained for funding solid waste services for 2015/2016 based on the differing services provided in each of the former council areas.  The charges in each area will change to reflect movement in costs including, in particular, an increase in contract costs in the former Waitakere City and North Shore City areas for 2015/2016.

12.  It is also intended to stage a harmonisation of targeted rates in former council areas receiving similar service delivery and/or where similar contracts for service exist. To that extent it is proposed that harmonised targeted rates are established for legacy Manukau and Auckland City ratepayers; North Shore and Waitakere ratepayers; and Papakura and Franklin ratepayers.

Targeted rates for 2015/2016 will be affected by the introduction of the regionalised on-property, pre-booked inorganic collection service. The effect of this service stream is addressed through a separate report to this committee dealing with both the methodology and funding impacts of a 1 July 2015 service implementation.

Hauraki Gulf Island subsidy

13.  It is recommended that council remove the subsidy for the provision of solid waste services for the Hauraki Gulf Islands with this phased over a three year period.  The subsidy is approximately $525.00 per property.  Hauraki Gulf Island ratepayers are charged the legacy Auckland City targeted rate.  The additional costs of providing solid waste services to the Hauraki Gulf Islands is subsidised across the former Auckland City properties at $20 each. The targeted rate for Hauraki Gulf Islands residents will increase from a 2014/2015 rate of $242.40 to approximately $770.00 per annum when the subsidy is fully removed. Staff will conduct further work during the consultation period on the costs of providing services to the Hauraki Gulf Islands.

14.  The recommendation ensures that the users of services are meeting the cost of those services and are not subsidised by other ratepayers. With the average Gulf Island Rates expected to fall in 2015/2016 by approximately $160 for Waiheke Island and $270 for Great Barrier Island, see rating policy report attached to the Mayor’s report also on this agenda, it is considered that the removal of subsidy should not present material affordability issues for those ratepayers. The remaining net change is between $5 and $7 per week.

15.  Council could consider partial removal of this subsidy where the balance of any subsidy would be funded from the general rate and not just the former Auckland City area.

Future funding for Waste Management and Minimisation Plan

16.  It is recommended that the introduction of user charges for refuse be gradually introduced for the former Manukau and Auckland City Council areas from the 2016/2017 financial year. Full user-pays via Pay as you Throw for refuse is expected to operate in these areas from 2019/2020.  Targeted rates will continue to cover the costs of recycling and inorganic collection services and for the introduction of organic collections and processing where they become available.

17.  This transition will enable both ratepayers and tenants in the former Manukau and Auckland City Council areas to become familiar with the new services, to maximise their diversion of waste to landfill and therefore manage any affordability issues arising from the change.

18.  The cost of the new services for average residential household will be approximately $260 per year, an increase of $25 per year, or $0.50 per week.  The largest impact of the move to the new services on ratepayers will be approximately $78 per annum, or $1.50 per week, for a large property in the Manukau area.  For tenants, the largest impact will be approximately $187 per annum, or $3.60 per week, for a large property in the Manukau area.  Tenants in the former North Shore and Waitakere City Council areas are already paying on average $2.25 per week for refuse as user charges via the current prepaid bag service.

Recommendation/s

That for the purposes of developing the draft LTP 2015-25 for consultation, the Budget Committee adopt the proposed changes to solid waste services funding set out below.

a)         The indicative targeted rates for waste services, including the pre-booked, on-            property inorganic collection as recommended in the report in the previous item on             this agenda, in the former council areas for the 2015/2016 year as set out below:

            i.          Auckland and Manukau $242^[2] (adjusted as appropriate in Auckland to                               provide for the rates where a ratepayer has opted out of either or both of                            refuse and recycling services)

            ii.          North Shore and Waitakere $80

            iii.         Rodney $90

            iv.        Franklin and Papakura $100 (adjusted as appropriate in rural Franklin                                 where a ratepayer does not receive a recycling service).

b)         To phase out the subsidy for solid waste services for Hauraki Gulf Island in equal             steps over three years.

c)         A targeted rate for the provision of solid waste services, including the pre-booked,             on-property inorganic collection as recommended in the report in the previous item             on this agenda, for the Hauraki Gulf Islands of $418 for 2015/2016.

d)         The introduction of user charges, billed to the property owner, for refuse for the             former Auckland and Manukau City areas be gradually introduced from 2016/2017             financial year.

Background

19.  The Waste Management and Minimisation Plan is being implemented in stages with new services and funding methods to be introduced gradually from 2015/2016 until full implementation by 2019/2020.  The phasing for service introduction is

·               2015/2016 new on-property pre-booked inorganic collection service

·               2015/2016 commencement of Resource Recovery Network implementation including development of Community Recycling Centres

·               2016/2017 enhanced recycling service commencing with the introduction of 240-litre bins in the former North Shore, Waitakere, rural Franklin, and Rodney areas at current collection contract term end

·               2017 user charge refuse and urban organic service in the former Auckland and Manukau City areas

·               2017/18 onwards roll-out of urban organics service in remaining areas over twelve to eighteen months

·               2019/2020 Pay as you Throw refuse fully implemented across the region, supported by full regional organics collection service and enhanced recycling

·               2019/2022 Resource Recovery Network well established.

20.  This phasing allows time for:

·               residents to adjust to new services and payment methods, notably those Auckland and Manukau residents where refuse is still rates-funded

·               contractors to plan for investment in services and infrastructure

·               procurement and service contracts to be established with service providers, or extended where appropriate with current service providers

·               refinement of costs through the relevant procurement process, and therefore targeted rates and fees to be finalised.

21.  The following principles have been adopted in developing recommendations:

·               users of services should pay for the services received

·               users of services should be able to directly influence the impacts and benefits received

·               options, such as recycling and organic collection services, for waste minimisation must be available to support the diversion of waste to landfill targets

·               charging to the source of refuse should encourage waste minimisation through behavioural change

·               affordability considerations including the impacts of change in those areas which are currently fully rates-funded for waste services.

Comments

Solid Waste targeted rates and fees for 2015/2016

Refuse and recycling service funding

22.  The recommended, indicative, targeted rates for solid waste services are set out in the table below.  These are based on the services offered in each area and the current mix of funding methods, user charges for bags and targeted rates.  The rates will vary in the former Auckland City Council area where ratepayers opt out of services and in the Franklin area where recycling services aren’t provided.

	Former council area
	MCC	ACC	WCC	NSCC	PDC	FDC	RDC
Services	Refuse, Recycling, Inorganics^[3]
2015/2016 Targeted rate for services	$242	$242	$80	$80	$100	$100	$90
2014/2015 Targeted rate for service	$220.68	$242.40	$23.36	$64.05	$111.19	$129.58	$86.93

23.  The change per household shown above reflects:

·               general cost of inflation and growth

·               proposed introduction of new regional, bookable, on property inorganic collections as recommended in a separate report.

·               impact of contract increases for services in the former Waitakere City and North Shore City Council areas

·               change in treatment of Waitakere Transfer Station returns now applied to general rates

·               harmonisation of targeted rates to reflect service standardisation where contracts or service delivery are consistent

·               standardisation of refuse bag pricing across the region.

24.  The returns from the Waitakere Refuse Transfer Station are no longer deducted from the cost of services provided across the region.  They are credited to the general rates in line with dividends from other council investments including:

·               Waste Disposal Services joint venture which operates the Whitford landfill servicing the Manukau area

·               Auckland International Airport Limited dividends.

25.  Some of the changes also reflect an intention to stage a harmonisation of targeted rates in former council areas receiving similar service delivery and/or where similar contracts for service exist. To that extent it is proposed that harmonised targeted rates are established for legacy Manukau and Auckland City ratepayers; North Shore and Waitakere ratepayers; and Papakura and Franklin ratepayers.

Inorganic

26.  The funding recommendation and options on the inorganic pre-booked, on-property collection service is covered by a separate report.

Waiheke and Great Barrier Island subsidy

27.     It is recommended that council remove the subsidy for the provision of solid waste services for the Hauraki Gulf Islands and phase this over a three year period.  Hauraki Gulf Island ratepayers are charged the legacy Auckland City targeted rate.  The subsidy is approximately $525.00 per property.  The additional costs of providing solid waste services to the Hauraki Gulf Islands is subsidised across the former Auckland City properties. The targeted rate for these residents will increase from a 2014/2015 rate of $242.40 to approximately $770.00 per annum when the subsidy is fully removed.

28.     The recommendation ensures that the users of services are meeting the cost of those services and are not subsidised by other ratepayers.

29.     Council could consider partial removal of this subsidy where the balance of any subsidy would be funded from the general rate and not just the former Auckland City area.

30.     This will recover the cost of the services provided on the islands and remove the need for former Auckland City Council ratepayers to fund the additional $3 million cost of the service.  At present ratepayers in the former Auckland City Council area pay an additional $17.45 each per year to subsidise the service on the Hauraki Gulf Islands.  Staff will conduct further work during the consultation period on the costs of providing services to the Hauraki Gulf Islands.

31.     It is considered that this should not present material affordability issues for ratepayers as it is expected that the average rates will fall by on $160 on Waiheke and $270 on Great Barrier.  The average net change is $5 per week on Great Barrier and $7 per week on Waiheke.

32.     It is noted that locally driven initiative funding per head on Waiheke is $80 and on Great Barrier $587 whereas the regional average is $18.

Future funding for Waste Management and Minimisation Plan

Waste Management and Minimisation Plan Funding

33.  It is recommended that the funding for the implementation of the Waste Management and Minimisation Plan is as set out in the table below.  Officers will advise in detail on the charges for services in the plan prior to the year of introduction.  This will allow more accurate advice.

Former TLA Area	2015/2016	2016/2017	2019/2020
Auckland/ Manukau	Service Delivery Status quo  plus new inorganics	User pays or T/R Refuse Bin and T/R Organics	PAYT Refuse  & T/R Organics/ Recycling/ Inorganics
North Shore/ Waitakere	Service Delivery Status quo plus new inorganics	Status quo (Prepaid Refuse Bag) 240 litre Recycling introduced	PAYT Refuse  & T/R Organics/ Recycling/ Inorganics
Papakura/ Franklin	Service Delivery Status quo plus new inorganics	Status quo (Prepaid Refuse Bag) Recycling in rural Franklin	PAYT Refuse  & T/R Organics/ Recycling/ Inorganics
Rodney	Service Delivery Status quo  plus new inorganics	Introduce prepaid Refuse Bag 240 litre Recycling introduced	PAYT Refuse  & T/R Organics/ Recycling/ Inorganics

34.  At present multi-unit dwellings may opt out of council provided services in the area of the former Auckland City Council.  Officers will report by June 2015 on whether or not to:

·               discontinue the current opt-out provision for waste services within the former Auckland City Council area only

·               continue the current provision for opt-out within the former Auckland City Council area only

·               extend the opt-out provision to the rest of the region not currently eligible.

35.  Staff will fully assess the impact of the additional cost of service provision to rural areas and report back for the 2016/2017 annual plan on whether the cost difference justifies a separate charge. This will also include the viability and costs of enhanced recycling and other proposed new services.

Impact of WMMP funding

36.  The addition of an organic service and harmonisation of other services:

·               Improves environmental outcomes by diverting 47,000 tonnes of organic material from landfill;

·               Makes a substantial contribution to the achievement of recycling, reuse and waste minimisation and outcomes;

·               Increases the total cost of service provision by approximately $24 million per annum;

·               Provides residents with opportunities to manage and minimise the cost of their waste stream.

37.  Based on current modelling the indicative impact of the overall cost increase on residents once it is fully implemented is set out in the table below.

Household size	Additional charge per annum	Additional charge per week	Additional charge if don’t use organics or reduce waste volumes
Average household	$25	$0.50	$50
Average large household	$46 (ACC $76, MCC $71)	$0.88 (for ACC $1.50)	$80
Average small household	$12 (High of $60 in Waitakere)	$0.23	$29

38.  Even for a large household the changes in the area of the city most impacted once the full package of new services area introduced are modest.  The level of change is higher for tenants in those parts of the city which presently have no user pays for refuse.  The following section recommends an approach to transition to address these changes.

Transition

39.  Staff recommend a quarterly charge to ratepayers, not a rate, be introduced in the former Auckland City Council and Manukau City Council areas in 2017 to fund refuse services.  Prior to its introduction staff will test this against other user pays options to ensure the one that best meets councils objectives for waste minimisation and economic efficiency is implemented.  This charge would cover the provision of:

·               prepaid bins in the former Auckland City Council area utilising the existing bin allocation

·               prepaid bags or bins in the former Manukau City Council area.

40.  The new organic service would be funded from the targeted rate and introduced at the same time as the change to direct billing in former Auckland and Manukau.

41.  Those ratepayers who were landlords may, if they wished, pass these charges onto tenants.  The introduction of these charges would allow residents and ratepayers to acclimatise to the new services. User charges for refuse are already in place in all other legacy areas.  Once the full package of services and Pay as you Throw funding for refuse was introduced they will be better able to manage their waste volumes and associated charges.

42.  This aligns with the overall phasing in of new services as set out in the table in section 29 above.

43.  At present Watercare Services Ltd charges property owners for its water and wastewater services in a manner similar to that proposed in paragraph 34, above.  Council is advised that Housing New Zealand (HNZ) may not pass these costs onto its tenants, choosing to absorb them as a landlord. Irrespective of HNZ’s cost recovery methods, council will engage with Housing New Zealand to determine an appropriate approach to billing with this major landlord.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

44.     The fees discussed in this report are regional fees and accordingly the decisions proposed herein are regional.

45.     Local boards receive regular reports on council’s progress towards implementing the WMMP through the Infrastructure and Environmental Services update reports to the local boards. Solid Waste staff also present to local boards at relevant workshops and meetings.

46.     There were staff supported workshops in October 2014 with local board representatives where the matters addressed in this report were discussed. It was not until the workshop held 20 October that local boards could consider the proposed fees for 2015/2016.

Māori impact statement

47.     Staff do not hold information on the ethnicity of residents and ratepayers. The impact on Maori will be similar to the impact on other residents and ratepayers.

48.     As noted in the WMMP, the tangata whenua world view reflects the WMMP’s emphasis on an integrated life cycle approach to the management of natural resources and the concepts of Zero Waste, waste recovery and waste minimisation

49.     The work to date with Mana Whenua and Maori is the beginning of a journey towards building collaboration and capacity that create a mind-set and behaviour change to seeing waste as a resource and minimising waste to landfill. Tailored engagement and development approaches to working with Mana Whenua and Maori have been developed

50.     The Independent Māori Statutory Board has two members on the Budget Committee who will consider the Mayor’s Proposal on financial/rating policies including options for setting the social housing rents.

Significance

51.     The recommendations in this report are significant as they could generate wide public interest. Rates must be included in the Funding Impact Statement and will be consulted on as part of the LTP process.

Implementation

52.     Implementation issues are discussed in the report.

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.     

Signatories

Authors	Andrew Duncan - Manager Financial Policy Ian Stupple – Manager Solid Waste
Authorisers	John Dragicevich - Manager Infrastructure and Environmental Services Matthew Walker - Manager Financial Plan Policy and Budgeting Kevin Ramsay - Chief Financial Officer

Budget Committee 18 November 2014

Solid Waste: Inorganic Collection Service methodology and funding: Long Term Plan 2015-2025.

File No.: CP2014/25358

Purpose

1.    The purpose of this report is to recommend a new methodology and funding for the inorganic collections and processing for 2015/2025 to support the implementation of the Waste Management and Minimisation Plan (WMMP) during the period of the Long Term Plan 2015-2025.

Mayoral summary and recommendations

2.    The inorganic collection has been the subject of much debate over the years by the various legacy councils. There are currently a variety of levels of service and approaches to funding this service.

3.    The staff proposal is for a uniform level of service and approach to funding. The level of service proposed is an annual on-property, pre-booked pick-up of inorganic material. The funding approach proposed is a $24 targeted rate for each property in the serviced area.

4.    On the basis of the benefits outlined in the report i.e.

·          diversion of as many materials away from landfill as possible

·          reduction in the amount of illegal dumping anticipated

·          cleaner and safer streets creating health and safety benefits for residents and contractors

·          community involvement and a focus on sustainability

·          linkages between inorganic collections and the establishment of Community Recycling Centres.

5.    I support the approach outlined and recommend as follows:

Recommendations

That for the purposes of developing the draft LTP 2015-25 for consultation, the Budget Committee adopt the proposed changes to the inorganic collection service methodology and funding as set out below.

a)         The introduction of a standard pre-booked, on property inorganic collection service.

b)         The proposed targeted rates for Solid Waste services include the cost of a regional, pre-booked, on-property inorganic collection commencing 1 July 2015.

Executive summary

6.    The methodology recommended for the collection of the Inorganics Collection service is an annual service, pre-booked via an on-line booking schedule booked with the material to be collected from within the property boundary, not from the kerbside. This is in line with the Waste Management and Minimisation Plan (WMMP).  The improved service will cost $8.4 million per year.  The current services cost $7.2 million.

7.    The service change is designed to feed re-usable and recyclable materials to the Resource Recovery Network to ensure as many materials as possible are diverted from landfill, while also creating opportunities for local businesses and social enterprises through repair, refurbishment, dismantling, and sale of items collected.  The WMMP intends that once the Resource Recovery Network becomes fully operational the requirement to offer an inorganic collection will be eliminated.

8.    Staff recommend that the new inorganic service be funded from a targeted rate on all properties for whom the service is available with this targeted rate estimated to be approximately $24 per rateable property. 

9.    The proposed funding method supports inorganic volumes collected and processed, until the Resource Recovery Network is developed. This recognises the residents and wider community support for the new service as developed during the WMMP consultation and reconfirmed during recent surveys.

10.  Current Inorganics collection contracts conclude on the 30 June 2015 and a procurement process is underway to commence the new service, based on the recommendation of a fully rates funded, on-property, pre-booked collection. The extension of current contracts is not a viable option in terms of service continuity.  The cost of providing the service in 2014/2015 based on the legacy council service levels ranging from nil, every two years to annual kerbside, is approximately $7.2million compared with the consistent regional service of approximately $8.4million.

Recommendation/s

That for the purposes of developing the draft LTP 2015-25 for consultation, the Budget Committee adopt the proposed changes to the inorganic collection service methodology and funding as set out below.

a)           The introduction of a standard pre-booked on property inorganic collection                service.

b)           The proposed targeted rates for Solid Waste services include the cost of a                regional, pre-booked, on-property inorganic collection commencing 1 July 2015.

Background

11.  The current inorganic collection services and funding methods vary across the region. This is summarised in the table below:

Former TLA areas	Funding  Method	Frequency
Auckland City	Rates Funded	Biennial
Manukau City	Rates Funded	Annual
North Shore City	Rates Funded	Annual
Papakura District	Rates Funded	Annual
Waitakere City	Partial User Pays ($25)	Annual
Franklin District	Partial User Pays ($25 of which $10 to charity)	n/a
Rodney District	No service	n/a

12.     Only the former Waitakere City offered an on-property collection.  In Franklin there are organised drop off days at pre-arranged sites.

13.     The WMMP proposed a consistent inorganic collection service to be introduced across Auckland from July 2015 funded from a targeted rate.  Submissions on the WMMP demonstrated a strong level of support for a consistent rates-funded inorganic collection, with 72% of all 2035 submitters agreeing with either an annual (55% support) or biennial service (17% support). The level of support from the different local board areas ranged from between 70-88%.

14.     As part of the draft Long Term Plan 2015-2025 process, further investigation on variations on, or alternatives to, the proposed annual, pre-booked, on property service have been undertaken. A survey of over 900 Aucklanders was conducted in early October 2014 to test the support for these variations and options. This was broadly representative of the Auckland adult population by age, gender, ethnicity, and geographic area. The approximate margin of error was 3.3%.

15.     Respondents were provided context around 4 different options, including the total cost of each option and the comparison with the total cost of the current disparate service which is $7.2m in 2014/2015.  Results to the question: “which of the four different options do you most prefer?” were as follows, indicating a strong preference from around 70% of respondents in support of an annual or biennial rates funded service:

Options Considered	Response rate	Cost
Option 1: Annual booked service	43%	$8.4m
Option 2: Booked service every two years	27%	$5.4m
Option 3: Annual booked service with user charge	20%	$4.5m
Option 4: No service	4%	$1.0m
I don’t know	6%

16.     To inform the design of this service and to shape procurement activities to support this service, trials of the proposed methodology were conducted in Pakuranga and Howick during October and November 2013 with the following results:

·          over 200 households agreed to participate in the trial

·          an average of 110kg was collected per household

·          a large proportion of materials which were put out could be recycled or reused and therefore diverted from landfill. At least 54% of material collected could be recycled or reused. If waste timber, which currently has a cost to process into industrial fuel is included, 75% of the materials collected were considered recoverable when processed through a Community Recycling Centre

·          feedback from residents was largely positive, especially after the comparative social/ environmental benefits and costs of the two methodologies were explained to them.

17.     In addition the trials supported the benefits anticipated from the proposed new service including:

·          diversion of as many materials away from landfill as possible

·          reduction in the amount of illegal dumping anticipated

·          cleaner and safer streets creating health and safety benefits for residents and contractors

·          community involvement and a focus on sustainability

·          linkages between inorganic collections and the establishment of Community Recycling Centres.

Comments

Standard regional inorganic collection service

18.     Staff recommend the provision of a pre-booked on property inorganic collection service.  This will be available to all eligible residential rateable properties with a predetermined collection volume, available on an annual basis.  The WMMP proposed that this would be targeted rates-funded. Householders will pre-book a collection service using an on-line scheduling system and materials will be collected from within the householder’s property boundary, not from the kerbside as at present.

19.     The new service generates re-usable and recyclable materials for the Resource Recovery Network currently under development.  This will ensure as many materials as possible are diverted from landfill while also creating opportunities for local businesses and social enterprises through repair, refurbishment, dismantling, and sale of items.

20.     Consideration was also given to continuing the status quo. However, the current system results in:

·          untidy streets where the service is kerb-side

·          destruction of useable items

·          an estimated 25,000 tonnes of material collected unnecessarily and sent to landfill

·          incidences of illegal dumping

·          health and safety issues for both the public and collection staff and contractors.

Funding

21.  Staff recommend that the inorganic service, delivered from 1 July 2015, be funded from the solid waste targeted rate. The cost of the service adds approximately $24 to each eligible rate or service property. If take up of the service is greater than assumed in the budget, the provision of the service will be extended beyond 12 months to ensure the budget is not exceeded in any one year. If the service is very successful, it will effectively have a slightly longer than 12 month collection cycle.

This funding method will:

·               provide one rates funded, on-site, with a set volume per property,  pre-booked inorganic collection per year for every ratepayer, who receives the service from 2015 onwards, as per the WMMP

·               address the negative impacts of the current kerbside inorganic collections which include inconsistency of service levels; untidy streets where the service is kerb-side; destruction of useable items; an estimated 25,000 tonnes of material collected unnecessarily sent to landfill; incidences of illegal dumping; and health and safety issues for both the public and collection staff and contractors

·               provide recyclable and reusable material for community recycling centres as the resource recovery network develops

·               meet the desire expressed in survey responses for the continuation of the new service

·               ensure continuation of procurement for an award of contract in February 2015 and service commencement in July 2015.

22.     The option of charging those who requested the service directly at around $100 per collection was also considered.   This is because only 1 in 6 residents use this service and the others subsidise it. This would allow the targeted rate to be reduced by around $17 for each eligible ratepayer.  This directly links a portion of the cost of the service to those who are benefiting from it.  However, the additional cost would likely reduce use of the service and could impact on the volumes of recyclable material available for the resource recovery network as is demonstrated in the former Waitakere City area.

23.     As council will be providing this service via contracted third parties, if direct user pays was the preferred option then administration costs would effectively be reduced by exiting the service completely.  Residents would make arrangements for the disposal of inorganic waste directly with the private sector provider.

24.     Local implications in terms of changes from the current inorganic service provision in the former Territorial Local Authority (TLA) areas against the options considered is summarized in attachment A.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

25.     The methodology and funding discussed in this report are regional and, accordingly, the decisions proposed herein are regional.

26.     Local boards receive regular reports on council’s progress towards implementing the WMMP through the Infrastructure and Environmental Services update reports to the local boards. Solid Waste staff also present to local boards at relevant workshops and meetings.

27.     There were staff supported workshops in October 2014 with local board representatives where the matters addressed in this report were discussed. However, it was not until the workshop held 20 October that local boards could consider the proposed fees for 2015/2016.

Māori impact statement

28.     Staff do not hold information on the ethnicity of residents and ratepayers.  It is considered that the impact on Maori will be similar to the impact on other residents and ratepayers.

29.     As noted in the WMMP, the tangata whenua world view reflects the WMMP’s emphasis on an integrated life cycle approach to the management of natural resources and the concepts of Zero Waste, waste recovery and waste minimisation.

30.     The work to date with Mana Whenua and Maori is the beginning of a journey towards building collaboration and capacity that create a mind-set and behaviour change to seeing waste as a resource and minimising waste to landfill. Tailored engagement and development approaches to working with Mana Whenua and Maori have been developed.

31.     The Independent Māori Statutory Board has two members on the Budget Committee who will consider the Mayor’s Proposal on financial/rating policies including options for setting the social housing rents.

Significance

32.     The recommendations in this report are significant as they could generate wide public interest.  Rates must be included in the Funding Impact Statement and will be consulted on as part of the LTP process.

Implementation

33.     Implementation issues are discussed in the report.

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.    

Signatories

Authors	Andrew Duncan - Manager Financial Policy Ian Stupple – Manager Solid Waste
Authorisers	John Dragicevich - Manager Infrastructure and Environmental Services Matthew Walker - Manager Financial Plan Policy and Budgeting Kevin Ramsay - Chief Financial Officer

Budget Committee 18 November 2014

Performance measures and targets

File No.: CP2014/24839

Purpose

1.       Agree to the revised set of measures and indicative targets for each group of activity. This will form the set of draft measures to be adopted by the Governing Body.

Executive summary

2.       We have rationalised and improved the measure sets to ensure they will create a meaningful basis for accountability for the levels of service intended to be delivered by council group.

3.       The number of council-parent measures for the LTP has reduced 42% from 179 to 103, and in particular the number of survey measures have reduced 30% from 46 to 32. The reduction in measures and in particular survey measures, aims for more meaningful and cost effective performance management.

4.       We have better alignment with the Auckland Plan where 39 key Auckland Plan targets linkages were identified and aligned to LTP group of activities.

5.       This report has been deferred from the 5 November 2014 Budget Committee meeting. Attachment A and Attachment C have been updated to reflect the following changes:

i.                      Local Planning measures that were initially indicated to be measured for each Local Board will be measured regionally due to statistical sampling issues, and

ii.          Add a measure to Regional parks, sports and recreation which was omitted in error - “Percentage of residents participating at least once per week in sport and recreation”.

Recommendation/s

That the Budget Committee for the purpose of developing the draft Long-term Plan 2015-2025 for consultation:

a)      agree the revised set of levels of service statements and performance measures for           each group of activity.

b)      agree the regional indicative targets for each group of activity. Any amendments to           targets to reflect subsequent budget decisions will be adopted as part of the           supporting material for consultation.

c)      note the local indicative targets, which will be considered by local boards in           November/December and will form part of the supporting material for consultation           adopted by the Governing Body on 18 December 2014.

Comments

6.       As part of the development of the Long-term Plan 2015-2025, the Performance Measure work-stream conducted an in-depth council and CCO wide review of performance measures. The process included sharing the development of the measures through sub-committees, local board workshops and IMSB representatives.

7.       A significant amount of feedback has been taken into account to improve the set of levels of service statements and performance measures being proposed.

8.       This has resulted in a succinct set of community focused performance measures and pragmatic targets for each group of activities, which is aligned to the Auckland Plan. These measures and their targets will create a meaningful basis for accountability for the levels of service intended to be delivered by Council and its CCOs.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

9.       Local boards have provided input on indicative performance measures in August. Advice on targets was provided to local boards in September workshops for consideration. 

10.     Updated advice on targets will be provided to local boards from departments after budget committee decisions from 5 – 6 November 2014.  Local boards will discuss these in the Local Board workshops to be held from 10 to 17 November 2014.

11.     Decisions on local performance targets will be made by local boards in business meetings to be held 1 - 12 December 2014.

Māori impact statement

12.     The process included sharing the development of the measures through Te Waka Angamua and IMSB representatives.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
aView	Council parent measures and targets	23
bView	CCO measures and targets	35
cView	Local Board measures and targets	49

Signatories

Authors	Taryn  Crewe - Financial Planning Manager - Council Parent Robert Irvine - Financial Planning Manager CCOs Tushar Shreyakar – Senior Advisor
Authorisers	Matthew Walker - Manager Financial Plan Policy and Budgeting Kevin Ramsay - Chief Financial Officer

Budget Committee 18 November 2014

Council parent measures and targets

Auckland Development Theme

Regional Planning

Level of service statement	Performance measure	Actual 2013/14	Long Term Plan targets
			2014/15	2015/16	2016/17	2017/18	2018/25
Produce all plans and agreements according to legislative requirements	Percentage of unitary and area plan changes and Notices of Requirement processed within statutory timeframes	100%	100%	100%	100%	100%	100%
	Percentage of adopted core strategies, policies and plans incorporating Māori outcomes or developed with Māori participation	100%	85%	85%	85%	85%	85%
Provide policy and strategic advice, leadership, facilitation and advocacy to support Auckland’s economic development.	Percentage of key performance indicators in  Auckland Economic Development Strategy  that are met or improving	74%	78%	80%	80%	80%	80%
	Number of economic initiatives with Maori	31	16	Establish new baseline	Maintain or improve	Maintain or improve	Maintain or improve
	Number of economic, business, and city building opportunities facilitated through the Auckland Council global engagement programme	60	N/A	50	50	50	50
	Percentage of local economic development action plans developed and reviewed annually	N/A	80%	80%	80%	80%	80%
Develop and champion environmental strategies and policies for the present and future generations of Auckland that are effective, evidence-based and actionable	Proportion of actions from strategies and action plans that are being implemented according to time frames	N/A	N/A	80%	80%	80%	80%
Protect and conserve Tāmaki Makaurau / Auckland’s historic heritage and Māori cultural heritage for the benefit and enjoyment of present and future generations.	Number of historic heritage places and areas formally protected in the unitary plan	2177	N/A	2180	2180	2180	2300
	Number of sites and places of significance to mana whenua formally protected in the unitary plan	61	N/A	61	61	100	550
	Percentage of Aucklanders satisfied with historic heritage management in Tāmaki Makaurau / Auckland	N/A	N/A	75%	75%	75%	80%

Local Planning

NB regional target for this local activity

Level of service statement	Performance measure	Actual 2013/14	Long Term Plan targets
			2014/15	2015/16	2016/17	2017/18	2018/25
Facilitate large transformation projects and Implement strategies for enhancing the city centre	Percentage of transformation and city centre masterplan projects delivered on time and within budget	80%	90%
	Percentage of city transformation projects contributing to Māori outcomes	50%	100%

Environmental Management & Regulation Theme

Regulation

Level of service statement	Performance measure	Actual 2013/14	Long Term Plan targets
			2014/15	2015/16	2016/17	2017/18	2018/25
Facilitate and enable the building of affordable  and enduring neighbourhoods	Number of dwellings and sites consented towards Auckland housing targets	N/A	New measure	16,000	4,250	N/A	N/A
Provide safe access to beaches and coastal areas for recreation	Proportion of time bathing beaches are suitable for contact recreation	92%	92%	92%	92%	92%	92%
Deliver a customer focused building consents and compliance monitoring service that meets statutory requirements	Percentage of customers satisfied with the overall quality of building control service delivery	44%	60%	53%	54%	55%	56%
	Percentage of building consent applications processed within 20 statutory days	99%	100%	100%	100%	100%	100%
Deliver timely, cost effective and customer focused resource consent processing services	Percentage of customers satisfied with the overall quality of resource consents service delivery	44%	50%	65%	65%	65%	65%
	Percentage of non-notified resource consent applications processed within 20 statutory days	95%	100%	100%	100%	100%	100%
	Percentage of notified resource consent applications processed within 70 statutory days	78%	100%	100%	100%	100%	100%
	Percentage of requests by Iwi that are relevant and within their area of interest that are responded to within three statutory days^[4]	95%	100%	100%	100%	100%	100%
Respond fairly and effectively to excessive noise related incidents and complaints	Percentage of noise complaints responded to within 30 minutes for urban areas or 60 minutes for rural areas	82%	80%	80%	80%	80%	80%
	Percentage of complainants satisfied with noise control services	43%	New measure	50%	51%	52%	53%
Protect public health through licensing and compliance of food, health, and hygiene premises to legislative requirements	Percentage of customers satisfied with the food and hygiene licensing service	73%	New measure	70%	70%	70%	75%
	Percentage of registered food premises graded annually	89%	98%	95%	95%	95%	95%
	Percentage of D/E^[5] graded food premises re-inspected within one month	86%	85%	95%	95%	95%	95%
Protect public health through licensing and compliance of alcohol premises to legislative requirements.	Percentage of high risk alcohol premises inspected annually	TBD	90%	100%	100%	100%	100%
	Percentage of customers satisfied with the alcohol licensing services	62%	New measure	66%	67%	68%	69%
Reduce public nuisance through licensing, education, and the enforcement of relevant bylaws.	Percentage of bylaw-related requests for service (e.g. illegal signs, public nuisance, street trading) responded to within three days	66%	New measure	80%	80%	80%	80%
Provide dog, stock, and other animal management services to Aucklanders	Percentage of urgent animal management complaints such as dog attacks responded to within one hour	98%	80%	95%	95%	95%	95%
	Percentage of known dogs that are registered^[6]	98%	New measure	99%	100%	100%	100%

Solid waste & environmental services

Level of service statement	Performance measure	Actual 2013/14	Long Term Plan targets
			2014/15	2015/16	2016/17	2017/18	2018/25
Manage land use and development on Council's closed landfills to safeguard the region's environment, productivity and economic value of soil	Percentage of Council controlled closed landfill discharge consents achieving Category one or two compliance rating	100%	97%	98%	98%	98%	98%
Facilitate action to restore the quality of Auckland’s waterways and harbours	Proportion of catchments where sources of key contaminants are identified and impact mitigation measures are in place	10%	Less than 12.5%	10%	30%	30%	30%
	Proportion of catchments with stable or improving Macroinvertebrate Community Index	8%	New measure	8%	11%	11%	11%
Support Aucklanders to reduce their environmental footprint through effective education, communications, programmes and community driven projects	Proportion of schools participating in sustainability education programmes	58%	New measure	58%	58%	58%	58%
Enhance the Region’s biodiversity by actively managing and improving the extent of indigenous ecosystems and species and by promoting biodiversity best practice	Number of hectares of new forest or wetland habitat established on regional parks	8	8	8	8	8	8
	Percentage of indigenous ecosystems under active management	68%	5%	68%	68%	68%	68%
	Percentage of threatened species under active management	34%	29%	34%	34%	34%	34%
Reduce the impact of pest animals, plants and pathogens on the natural environment	Percentage land area with less than 5% residual trap catch for possums	50%	50%	50%	51%	52%	55%
	Proportion of kauri areas on council land that have active management or exclusion measures in place for kauri dieback disease	N/A	50%	55%	60%	70%	100%
	Number of hectares under community pest control	85,000	62,000	88,000	89,000	90,000	93,000
	Proportion of environmental programmes led or supported, with Māori participation	15%	New measure	15%	15%	15%	15%
Plan and provide reliable household waste management and processing service	Percentage of customers satisfied with overall reliability of waste collection services	N/A	New measure	75%	76%	76%	76%
Plan and enable reliable waste minimisation	Domestic kerbside refuse per capita  per annum	150kg	Less than or equal to 150	160kg	160kg	110kg	110kg
	Total number of Resource Recovery Facilities^[7]	1	1	2	3	4	5

Stormwater management

Level of service statement	Performance measure	Actual 2013/14	Long Term Plan targets
			2014/15	2015/16	2016/17	2017/18	2018/25
Enhance and protect the stormwater receiving environments for the people of Auckland through sustainable management of the stormwater system.	Percentage of customers satisfied with Auckland Councils Stormwater management	50%	50%	50%	50%	50%	50%
	Percentage of mana whenua satisfied with stormwater management	7%	Set baseline	7%	7%	7%	7%
Manage the stormwater network to minimise the risks of flooding to Aucklanders	The number of flooding events that occur and the associated number of habitable floors affected per 1000 properties connected to Auckland Councils stormwater network (DIA)	N/A	New measure	1  per 1000 properties	1  per 1000 properties	1  per 1000 properties	1  per 1000 properties
Manage the stormwater network to minimise the risks of flooding to Aucklanders	The median response time to attend a flooding event, measured from the time that Auckland Council receives notification to the time that service personnel reach the site (DIA)	1.6 hours	New measure	2 hours	2 hours	2 hours	2 hours
Manage the stormwater network to minimise the risks of flooding to Aucklanders	Stormwater manholes that pop open in flood events are made safe within two hours	100%	100%	100%	100%	100%	100%
Manage the stormwater network to minimise the risks of flooding to Aucklanders	The number of complaints received about the performance of the stormwater system per 1000 properties connected to Auckland Councils stormwater system (DIA)	0.91 per 100 properties	New measure	3 per 1000 properties	3 per 1000 properties	3 per 1000 properties	3 per 1000 properties
Enhance and protect the stormwater receiving environments through sustainable management of the stormwater system	Auckland Council Stormwater compliance with resource consents for discharge from its stormwater system, measured by the number of: a)     abatement notices; and b)    infringement notices; and c)     enforcement orders; and d)    successful prosecutions, received in relation those resource consents (DIA)	N/A	New measure	0	0	0	0
	The ratio of length of watercourse consented to be physically improved versus physically degraded in the current year^[8]	N/A	New measure	3	3	3	3

Governance & Support Theme

Governance & democracy

Level of service statement	Performance measure	Actual 2013/14	Long Term Plan targets
			2014/15	2015/16	2016/17	2017/18	2018/25
Ensure communities can easily engage in Council decision making and have access to information	Percentage of residents who feel they can participate in Auckland Council decision-making	N/A	50%	50%	50%	50%	50%
	Percentage of Māori residents who feel they can participate in Auckland council decision-making	N/A	50%	50%	50%	50%	50%
	Number of complaints regarding council democratic processes upheld by the Auditor General or Ombudsman	0	0	0	0	0	0
To support elected members, council and Māori to work together to achieve better outcomes for Tāmaki Makaurau – Auckland and enable Council to effectively contribute to Māori well-being	Percentage of Māori organisations who consider they have an appropriate working relationship with council	27%	75%	80%	85%	85%	90%
	Number of formalised relationship arrangements between the council and Mana Whenua^[9]	10	19	19	19	19	19

Organisational support

Level of service statement	Performance measure	Actual 2013/14	Long Term Plan targets
			2014/15	2015/16	2016/17	2017/18	2018/25
Manage quality and financially prudent city park services	Percentage of city park service requests completed on time	90%	90%	90%	90%	90%	90%
Ensure readiness to respond effectively to emergency civil defence situations and hazards	Overall CDEM capability assessment score^[10]	N/A	80%	80%	85%	85%	85%
Provide education, support, and training to develop a resilient community	Percentage of Aucklanders prepared at home for an emergency	N/A	27%	30%	33%	36%	39%
	Percentage of Aucklanders covered by Community Response Plans	35%	55%	75%	95%	100%	100%
Provide emergency management and rural fire capability to manage fire and emergencies quickly and effectively	Percentage of incidents requesting attendance by New Zealand Fire Service responded to within 12 minutes	N/A	85%	85%	85%	85%	85%

Parks, Community & Lifestyle Theme

Local community services

NB regional target for this local activity as well as the local targets

Level of service statement	Performance measure	Actual 2013/14	Long Term Plan targets
			2014/15	2015/16	2016/17	2017/18	2018/25
Deliver a variety of events, programmes and projects that improve safety, connect Aucklanders and engage them in their city and communities	Percentage of Aucklanders that feel connected to their neighbourhood and local community	74%	New measure	75%	77%	79%	81%-83%

Regional community services

Level of service statement	Performance measure	Actual 2013/14	Long Term Plan targets
			2014/15	2015/16	2016/17	2017/18	2018/25
Provide access to a broad range of information in a variety of formats to support reading, discovery and participation.	Percentage of customers satisfied with the range of collection items available	72%	New measure	70%	71%	72%	73%
	Percentage of Maori satisfied with the range of collection items available	68%	New measure	70%	71%	72%	73%
	Number of library items borrowed (millions)	16.1	New measure	15.0	15.0	15.0	15.0
	Percentage of items borrowed that are e-collections (e.g. eBooks, eAudiobooks)	3%	New measure	5%	10%	15%	25%
	Percentage of customers satisfied with the Auckland Libraries website	79%	New measure	75%	75%	75%	75%
Provide access to a broad range of information in a variety of formats to support reading, discovery and participation.	Number of visits to the Auckland Libraries website (millions)	7.0	New measure	7.1	7.2	7.3	7.4
Enable Aucklanders and communities to express themselves and improve their well-being through customer-centric advice, funding, facilitation and permitting	Percentage of successful funding applications (where the main beneficiary is Maori organisations, individuals or Kaupapa Maori) as a percentage of all successful applications	N/A	New measure	12%	12%	13%	13%
	Total regional and local events taking place across the city	2,533	New measure	2,500	2,500	2,500	2,500
Deliver a variety of events, programmes and projects that improve safety, connect Aucklanders and engage them in their city and communities.	Percentage of all assets that are graffiti free across the city	94%	85%	92%	93%	94%	95%
	Percentage of Aucklanders that feel Auckland is an eventful, fun and exciting city	N/A	New measure	70%	70%	72%	72%-75%
	Percentage of Aucklanders that feel art and culture is part of their everyday life	N/A	New measure	60%	65%	70%	75%
Provide safe, reliable and accessible social infrastructure for Aucklanders that contributes to placemaking and thriving communities	Percentage of tenants satisfied with provision and management of 'housing for older people'	75%	80%	75%	75%	75%	75%

Regional parks sport & recreation

Level of service statement	Performance measure	Actual 2013/14	Long Term Plan targets
			2014/15	2015/16	2016/17	2017/18	2018/25
Provide and maintain cemeteries, memorial areas and facilities for families, friends and visitors	Percentage of visitors satisfied with the presentation of cemeteries	77%	90%	80%	81%	82%	83%
Protect and conserve the values and features of Auckland’s volcanic heritage	Percentage of public satisfied with the quality of care of volcanic features	64%	75%	70%	72%	74%	75%
	Percentage of Mana Whenua organisations satisfied with the quality of care of volcanic features	0%	75%	20%	30%	40%	50%
Manage the Auckland Botanic Gardens as a premier destination for sustaining the biodiversity of the Auckland region through education and research, as well as a place for recreation.	Number of New Zealand native plants grown for re-vegetation programmes in the Botanic Gardens	65,000	60,000	60,000	60,000	60,000	60,000
Manage regional parks as part of the open space network for the use and enjoyment of the community	Percentage of the public who have used a regional park in the last 12 months	76%	80%	76%	76%	76%	76%
	Percentage of park visitors satisfied with the overall quality of their visit	96%	90%	96%	96%	96%	96%
Provide, protect, conserve and enhance the natural and cultural features in regional parks	Number of volunteer hours worked in regional parks each year	79,013	92,000	80,000	80,000	80,000	82,000
	Number of formalised arrangements with Maori that provide for the management of specific cultural sites within regional parks	N/A	New measure	3 per annum	3 per annum	3 per annum	1 per annum
Lead and coordinate implementation of the Auckland Sport and Recreation Strategic Action Plan	Percentage of residents participating at least once per week in sport and recreation	70%	80%	71%	72%	72%	72%

Budget Committee 18 November 2014

CCO measures and targets

Water Supply & Wastewater Theme

Water Supply

Level of service statement	Performance measure	Actual 2013/14	Long Term Plan targets
			2014/15	2015/16	2016/17	2017/18	2018/19- 24/25
Provide uninterrupted access to safe, clean and drinkable water	The extent to which the local authority's drinking water supply complies with part 4 of the drinking-water standards (bacteria compliance criteria)	100.0%	New Measure	100%	100%	100%	100%
	The extent to which the local authority's drinking water supply complies with part 5 of the drinking-water standards (protozoal compliance criteria)	100.0%	New Measure	100%	100%	100%	100%
	Median response time for attendance for urgent call-outs:  from the time that the local authority receives notification to the time that service personnel reach the site.	N/A	New Measure	≤60 mins	≤60 mins	≤60 mins	≤60 mins
	Median response time for resolution of urgent calls-outs: from the time that the local authority receives notification to the time that service personnel confirm resolution of the fault or interruption	N/A	New Measure	≤5 hours	≤5 hours	≤5 hours	≤5 hours
	Median response time for attendance for non-urgent call-outs: from the time that the local authority receives notification to the time that service personnel reach the site	N/A	New Measure	≤2 days	≤2 days	≤2 days	≤2 days
	Median response time for resolution of non-urgent call-outs: from the time that the local authority receives notification to the time that service personnel confirm resolution of the fault or interruption	N/A	New Measure	≤5 days	≤5 days	≤5 days	≤5 days
	The total number of complaints received by the local authority about any of the following: a) drinking water clarity b) drinking water taste c) drinking water pressure or flow d) continuity of supply e) the local authority's response to any of these issues expressed per 1000 connections to the local authority's networked reticulation system	N/A	New Measure	≤10	≤10	≤10	≤10
	The percentage of real water loss from the local authority's networked reticulation system	13.9%	New Measure	13%	13%	13%	13%
	The average consumption of drinking water per day per resident within the territorial authority district	270	New Measure	272 +/- 2.5%	270 +/- 2.5%	268 +/- 2.5%	253 +/- 2.5%

Wastewater

Level of service statement	Performance measure	Actual 2013/14	Long Term Plan targets
			2014/15	2015/16	2016/17	2017/18	2018/19- 24/25
Provide reliable wastewater services and manage discharges to maintain or improve the health of the environment	The number of dry weather overflows from the territorial authority's sewerage system, expressed per 1000 sewerage connections to that sewerage system	N/A	New Measure	≤10	≤10	≤10	≤10
	Compliance with the territorial authority's resource consents for discharge from its sewerage system measured by the number of: a) abatement notices b) infringement notices c) enforcement orders d) convictions received by the territorial authority in relation to those resource consents	a) 0 b) 0 c) 0 d) 0	New Measure	a) ≤2 b) ≤2 c) ≤2 d) 0	a) ≤2 b) ≤2 c) ≤2 d) 0	a) ≤2 b) ≤2 c) ≤2 d) 0	a) ≤2 b) ≤2 c) ≤2 d) 0
	Attendance at sewerage overflows resulting from blockages or other faults:  median response time for attendance - from the time that the territorial authority receives notification to the time that service personnel reach the site	N/A	New Measure	≤60 mins	≤60 mins	≤60 mins	≤60 mins
	Attendance at sewerage overflows resulting from blockages or other faults:  median response time for resolution - from the time that the territorial authority receives notification to the time that service personnel confirm resolution of the blockage or other fault	N/A	New Measure	≤5 hours	≤5 hours	≤5 hours	≤5 hours
	The total number of complaints received by the territorial authority about any of the following: a)  sewerage odour b)  sewerage system faults c)  sewerage system blockages d)  the territorial authority's response to issues with its sewerage system expressed per 1000 connections to the territorial authority's sewerage system	N/A	New Measure	≤50	≤50	≤50	≤50

Economic & Cultural Lifestyle Theme

Economic growth and visitor economy

Level of service statement	Performance measure	Actual 2013/14	Long Term Plan targets
			2014/15	2015/16	2016/17	2017/18	2018/19- 24/25
Promote and develop Auckland as a national and international visitor and business destination, including through the attraction, facilitation, funding and delivery of major events	Total visits to www.aucklandnz.com	New measure	3million	3.4million	3.8million	4million	New measure
	Percentage of Customers satisfied with visitor information centres and services	90%	90%	90%	90%	90%	90%
	RORI^[11] from major events invested in	$47m	$49m	$86m	$49m	$55m to $75m over this time period	$47m
	% customers satisfied with delivered major events	85%	85%	85%	85%	85%	85%
Deliver information, advice, programmes and initiatives to attract and develop investment, businesses and a skilled workforce	Percentage of stakeholders satisfied with provision of business advice, start-up, training and mentoring programmes	85%	85%	85%	85%	85%	85%
	Number of businesses that have been through an ATEED programme or benefitted from an ATEED intervention  (total businesses and Maori businesses)	New measure	Total -  1500        including Maori businesses - 100	Total -  1500        including Maori businesses - 100	Total -  1500        including Maori businesses - 100	Total -  1500        including Maori businesses - 100	New measure
	Facilitation of the establishment, or significant expansion, of multinational and local companies in target sectors	New measure	5	5	5	5	New measure
	Number of live signatories to the Youth Traction Hub Employers Pledge^[12]	New measure	50	50	50	50	New measure

Regional Facilities

Level of service statement	Performance measure	Actual 2013/14	Long Term Plan targets
			2014/15	2015/16	2016/17	2017/18	2018/19- 24/25
We bring people together and help provide identity through memorable stadium events	Number of Commercial Event Days at Stadiums^[13]	519	New measure	779	775	785	785
	Number of Community Event Days at Stadiums^[14]	961	New measure	960	970	980	990
	Visitor Satisfaction with experience at Auckland Stadiums	88%	New measure	88%	88%	88%	88%
We care for our collections for today and for future generations to enjoy and to bring cultural awareness of Art and Wildlife to Auckland and its visitors	Total number of visitors to the Auckland Zoo and Auckland Art Gallery	1,140,711	1,140,000	1,175,000	1,165,000	1,185,000	1,190,000
	Visitor Satisfaction with experience at Auckland Zoo and the Auckland Art Gallery	94%	88%	94%	94%	94%	94%
	Number of Maori projects annually	10.00	New measure	10.00	10.00	10.00	10.00
Provider of Convention events and  live arts and entertainment experiences for Aucklanders and visitors to our city Leader of arts and entertainment in New Zealand	Number of publically available Performing Arts Performances programmed by Auckland Live	825	New measure	820	825	830	835
	Visitor Satisfaction with experience at Auckland Live Events	95%	95%	95%	95%	95%	95%

Auckland Development Theme

Waterfront Development

Level of service statement	Performance measure	Actual 2013/14	Long Term Plan targets
			2014/15	2015/16	2016/17	2017/18	2018/19- 24/25
Deliver initiatives to make the waterfront dynamic, well-connected, culturally-rich, safe and sustainable, for the enjoyment of Aucklanders and visitors	Percentage of visitors surveyed satisfied with their experience of the public spaces on the city centre waterfront	81%	New measure	75%	75%	75%	77%
	Percentage of Aucklanders surveyed who have visited the city centre waterfront in the past year	73%	New measure	73%	73%	73%	74%
	Number of significant Māori initiatives implemented per annum	37	New measure	42	47	52	60
Enhance and manage assets and services in a way that attracts private investment and optimises financial returns, for the benefit of Auckland Council	Return on Equity on commercial assets and services	9.4%	New measure	8.8%	8.4%	8.1%	7.5%
Provide a safe marina environment and world class facilities	Percentage of customers surveyed satisfied overall with marina facilities and services	73%	New measure	73%	74%	75%	78%

Property Development

Level of service statement	Performance measure	Actual 2013/14	Long Term Plan targets
			2014/15	2015/16	2016/17	2017/18	2018/19- 24/25
Properties are managed for Auckland Council and Auckland Transport achieves optimum net returns and are maintained to be fit for purpose	Return on Investment on like for like properties^[15]	2.2%	4%	2%	2%	2%	2.3% to 2.6%
Properties are managed for Auckland Council and Auckland Transport achieves optimum net returns and are maintained to be fit for purpose	Occupancy rate for tenantable properties^[16]	New Measure	New Measure	95%	95%	95%	95%

Governance & Support Theme

Investment

Level of service statement	Performance measure	Actual 2013/14	Long Term Plan targets
			2014/15	2015/16	2016/17	2017/18	2018/19- 24/25
Manage council investments to optimise returns	Return on equity (ROE) for ACIL group	26.5%	12.9%	7.6%	7.6%	13.5%	8%-13.5%
	Rolling 10 year return for diversified financial assets portfolio^[17]	12.9%	Equal or exceed return on reference portfolio	Equal or exceed ROE on reference portfolio	Equal or exceed ROE on reference portfolio	Equal or exceed ROE on reference portfolio	Equal or exceed ROE on reference portfolio

Transport Theme

Roads and Footpaths

Note: Table below will be subject to change following further Auckland Transport Board consideration.

Level of service statement	Performance measure	Actual 2013/14	Long Term Plan targets
			2014/15	2015/16	2016/17	2017/18	2018/19- 24/25
Provide an effective, efficient and safe road, cycling and walking network	Annual number of morning peak (7am-9am) car trips avoided through travel planning initiatives	12,800	16,700	17,500	18,400	20,240	22,264
	Number of walking trips into the city centre in the morning peak (on one given day)	5,400	5,500	5,600	5,700	5,800	6,000
	Annual number of cycling trips in designated areas in Auckland: - During Morning peak - All day	129,300 (morning peak) 871,000 (all day)	142,200 (AM peak) 958,000 (all day)	156,400 (morning peak) 1,054,000 (all day)	172,000 (morning peak) 1,159,400 (all day)	173,720 (morning peak) 1,275,340 (all day)	191,092 (morning peak) 1,402,874 (all day)
	Arterial road network productivity (Percentage of road corridor productivity maintained or improving on key arterial routes)^[18]	51% of the ideal achieved	53% of the ideal achieved	54% of the ideal achieved	55% of the ideal achieved	55% of the ideal achieved	55% of the ideal achieved
	Travel times along key strategic freight routes during the inter-peak (9am-4pm)	85% of trips along following routes travelled in time specified:^[19]	Maintain travel times for 85th percentile on all nominated freight routes	Maintain baseline travel times for the 85th percentile	Maintain baseline travel times for the 85th percentile	Maintain baseline travel times for the 85th percentile	Maintain baseline travel times for the 85th percentile
	The change from the previous financial year in the number of deaths and serious injury crashes on the local road network, expressed as a number.	429	Fewer than 340 (2.66% reduction from previous year)	fewer than 407	fewer than 396	fewer than 385	fewer than 318
	Percentage of residents satisfied with the quality of roads in the Auckland region	71%	70%	70-75%	Not less than 75%	Not less than 75%	Not less than 75%
	Percentage of residents satisfied with the quality of footpaths in the Auckland region	63%	65%	65-75%	Not less than 75%	Not less than 75%	Not less than 75%
	Percentage of residents satisfied with the surface of all sealed roads in the Auckland region	68%	New Measure	70%	73%	Not less than 75%	Not less than 75%
	Percentage of residents satisfied with overall road safety in the Auckland region	63%	New Measure	65%	66%	67%	74%
	Road maintenance standards (ride quality) as measured by smooth travel exposure (STE) for all urban and rural roads	Rural 95 Urban 85	New Measure	Rural 93 Urban 83	Rural 92 Urban 82	Rural 91 Urban 81	Rural 87 Urban 77
	Percentage of the sealed local road network that is resurfaced	10%	New Measure	10%	11%	11%	12%
	Percentage of footpaths in acceptable condition (as defined in AT’s AMP)	99%	New Measure	99%	99%	99%	98%
	Percentage of customer service requests relating to roads and footpaths which receive a response within the time frame specified in Auckland Council’s Long-term Plan.	85%	New Measure	85%	85%	85%	85%

Public Transport & Travel Demand Management

Note: Table below will be subject to change following further Auckland Transport Board consideration.

Level of service statement	Performance measure	Actual 2013/14	Long Term Plan targets
			2014/15	2015/16	2016/17	2017/18	2018/19- 24/25
Provide an effective, efficient and safe PT network that delivers an improved customer experience	Annual total public transport boardings	72,396,155	73,686,000	79,905,502	82,381,688	84,266,625	103,846,675
	Annual rail boardings	11,435,085	12,100,000	14,824,493	15,887,008	16,999,099	22,419,978
	Annual Rapid Transit Network busway boardings	2,426,745	2,511,000	2,850,054	3,205,950	3,365,549	4,056,887
	Annual ferry boardings	5,109,947	5,380,000	5,580,000	5,780,000	5,980,000	7,591,312
	Rail punctuality (proportion of scheduled rail services that arrived at their final destination within five minutes late of the scheduled time)	87.8%	New measure	90.0%	90.0%	90.0%	Range 90% to 95%
	Bus punctuality (proportion of scheduled bus services that departed their origin within one minute early and five minutes late of the scheduled time)	84.2%	New measure	92.0%	93.0%	94.0%	95.0%
	Ferry punctuality (proportion of scheduled ferry services that were not cancelled and that departed their origin within one minute early and five minutes late of the scheduled time)	99.7%	New measure	95%	95%	95%	95%
	PT subsidy per passenger kilometre	$0.28	$0.29	$0.32	$0.32	$0.32	$0.30
	Public and customer safety and security incidents across PT network per million passenger boardings	0.29	0.9	0.9	0.9	0.9	0.9
	Percentage of PT passengers satisfied with their PT service	81.4%	83%	83%	84%	85%	85%
	Percentage of PT passengers satisfied with their train service	76.1%	New measure	80%	83%	85%	85%
	Percentage of PT passengers satisfied with their bus service	81.6%	New measure	82%	83%	85%	85%
	Percentage of PT passengers satisfied with their ferry service	90.1%	New measure	90%	90%	90%	90%

Parking & Enforcement

Note: Table below will be subject to change following further Auckland Transport Board consideration.

Level of service statement	Performance measure	Actual 2013/14	Long Term Plan targets
			2014/15	2015/16	2016/17	2017/18	2018/19- 24/25
Ensure optimal use of parking resources	Off-street occupancy rates in city centre (peak 4-hour period)	88%	Within 80-90% range	80% - 90%	80% - 90%	80% - 90%	80% - 90%
	On-street occupancy rates in specified city centre precincts (peak 4-hour period)	73%	Within 70-90% range	70% - 90%	70% - 90%	70% - 90%	70% - 90%

Budget Committee 18 November 2014

Local Board measures and targets

Albert-Eden LB

Level of service statement	Performance measure	Actual 2013/14	Annual / Long Term Plan targets
			2014/15	2015/16	2016/17	2017/18	2018/25
Develop local business precincts and town centres as great places to do business	Percentage of Business Associations meeting their Business Improvement District (BID) Partnership Programme obligations	100%	85%	100%	100%	100%	100%
Provide leadership & support to protect and conserve the region’s natural environment, historic heritage and Māori cultural heritage	Proportion of local programmes that deliver intended environmental actions and/or outcomes	TBD	Not available	80%	85%	90%	90%
Provide safe, accessible, welcoming library facilities that support the delivery of quality learning programmes and services relevant to local communities.	Use of libraries as digital community hubs: Number of internet sessions per capita (PC & WiFi)	1.9	Not available	1.5	1.5	1.5	1.5
	Number of visits to library facilities per capita	6	Not available	5	5	5	5
	Percentage of customers satisfied with the quality of library service delivery	90%	Not available	85%	85%	85%	85%
	Percentage of visitors satisfied with the library environment	88%	Not available	85%	85%	85%	85%
Enable Aucklanders and communities to express themselves and improve their well-being through customer-centric advice, funding, facilitation and permitting	Percentage of funding/grant applicants satisfied with information, assistance and advice provided	51%	75%	75%	76%	78%	80%-82%
Deliver a variety of events, programmes and projects that improve safety, connect Aucklanders and engage them in their city and communities	Percentage of participants satisfied with council delivered local arts activities.	Not available	Not available	80%	85%	85%	85%
	Percentage of Aucklanders that feel connected to their neighbourhood and local community	Not available	Not available	70%	72%	74%	76%-78%
	Percentage of attendees satisfied with council delivered and funded local events	89%	85%	85%	85%	85%	85%
Provide safe, reliable and accessible social infrastructure for Aucklanders that contributes to placemaking and thriving communities	Percentage of Aucklanders that feel their local town centre is safe	Day: 84% Night: 35%	Day: 85% Night: 55%	Day: 85% Night: 37%	Day: 86% Night: 39%	Day: 87% Night: 40%	Day: 89% Night: 42%
	Facility Utilisation - utilisation at peak times and off-peak times for council managed community centres and venues for hire	Peak: 36% Off peak: 19%	Not available	Peak: 37% Off peak: 19%	Peak: 37% Off peak: 19%	Peak: 37% Off peak: 20%	Peak: 39% Off peak: 21%
	Percentage of community facilities bookings used for health and well-being related activity	Not available	Not available	20%-30%	20%-30%	20%-30%	20%-30%
	Number of visitors to community centres and venues for hire	439,435	Not available	448,095	452,488	456,925	461,405
Provide a range of recreational opportunities catering for community needs on local parks, reserves and beaches	Percentage of residents satisfied with the provision (quality, location and distribution) of local parks and reserves	TBD	75%	75%	75%	75%	75%
	Percentage of residents who visited a local park or reserve in last 12 months	92%	91%	90%	90%	90%	90%
Provide sports fields that are fit for purpose and cater for community needs.	Percentage of residents satisfied with the provision (quality, location and distribution) of sports fields	TBD	Not available	70%	70%	70%	70%
Provide programmes and facilities that ensure more Aucklanders are more active more often	Customers Net Promoter Score for Pool and Leisure Centres as a percentage	TBD	Not available	15%	15%	15%	15%

Devonport-Takapuna LB

Level of service statement	Performance measure	Actual 2013/14	Annual / Long Term Plan targets
			2014/15	2015/16	2016/17	2017/18	2018/25
Develop local business precincts and town centres as great places to do business	Percentage of Business Associations meeting their Business Improvement District (BID) Partnership Programme obligations	100%	85%	100%	100%	100%	100%
Provide leadership & support to protect and conserve the region’s natural environment, historic heritage and Māori cultural heritage	Proportion of local programmes that deliver intended environmental actions and/or outcomes	TBD	Not available	80%	85%	90%	90%
Provide safe, accessible, welcoming library facilities that support the delivery of quality learning programmes and services relevant to local communities.	Use of libraries as digital community hubs: Number of internet sessions per capita (PC & WiFi)	4.2	Not available	4	4	4	4
	Number of visits to library facilities per capita	9.1	Not available	8	8	8	8
	Percentage of customers satisfied with the quality of library service delivery	88%	Not available	85%	85%	85%	85%
	Percentage of visitors satisfied with the library environment	88%	Not available	85%	85%	85%	85%
Enable Aucklanders and communities to express themselves and improve their well-being through customer-centric advice, funding, facilitation and permitting	Percentage of funding/grant applicants satisfied with information, assistance and advice provided	47%	75%	75%	76%	78%	80%-82%
Deliver a variety of events, programmes and projects that improve safety, connect Aucklanders and engage them in their city and communities	Percentage of participants satisfied with council delivered local arts activities.	Not applicable	Not available	Not applicable	Not applicable	Not applicable	Not applicable
	Percentage of Aucklanders that feel connected to their neighbourhood and local community	Not available	Not available	75%	77%	79%	81%-83%
	Percentage of attendees satisfied with council delivered and funded local events	77%	85%	85%	85%	85%	85%
Provide safe, reliable and accessible social infrastructure for Aucklanders that contributes to placemaking and thriving communities	Percentage of Aucklanders that feel their local town centre is safe	Day: 93% Night: 41%	Day: 85% Night: 55%	Day: 93% Night: 43%	Day: 93% Night: 45%	Day: 93% Night: 46%	Day: 93% Night: 49%
	Facility Utilisation - utilisation at peak times and off-peak times for council managed community centres and venues for hire	Peak: 8% Off peak: 7%	Not available	Peak: 8% Off peak: 7%	Peak: 8% Off peak: 7%	Peak: 8% Off peak: 7%	Peak: 9% Off peak: 8%
	Percentage of community facilities bookings used for health and well-being related activity	Not available	Not available	20%-30%	20%-30%	20%-30%	20%-30%
	Number of visitors to community centres and venues for hire	121,771	Not available	124,170	125,388	126,617	127,859
Provide a range of recreational opportunities catering for community needs on local parks, reserves and beaches	Percentage of residents satisfied with the provision (quality, location and distribution) of local parks and reserves	TBD	75%	75%	75%	75%	75%
	Percentage of residents who visited a local park or reserve in last 12 months	95%	85%	90%	90%	90%	90%
Provide sports fields that are fit for purpose and cater for community needs.	Percentage of residents satisfied with the provision (quality, location and distribution) of sports fields	TBD	Not available	70%	70%	70%	70%
Provide programmes and facilities that ensure more Aucklanders are more active more often	Customers Net Promoter Score for Pool and Leisure Centres as a percentage	TBD	Not available	15%	15%	15%	15%

Franklin LB

Level of service statement	Performance measure	Actual 2013/14	Annual / Long Term Plan targets
			2014/15	2015/16	2016/17	2017/18	2018/25
Develop local business precincts and town centres as great places to do business	Percentage of Business Associations meeting their Business Improvement District (BID) Partnership Programme obligations	100%	85%	100%	100%	100%	100%
Provide leadership & support to protect and conserve the region’s natural environment, historic heritage and Māori cultural heritage	Proportion of local programmes that deliver intended environmental actions and/or outcomes	TBD	Not available	80%	85%	90%	90%
Provide safe, accessible, welcoming library facilities that support the delivery of quality learning programmes and services relevant to local communities.	Use of libraries as digital community hubs: Number of internet sessions per capita (PC & WiFi)	1.0	Not available	1	1	1	1
	Number of visits to library facilities per capita	5.3	Not available	4.5	4.5	4.5	4.5
	Percentage of customers satisfied with the quality of library service delivery	91%	Not available	85%	85%	85%	85%
	Percentage of visitors satisfied with the library environment	92%	Not available	85%	85%	85%	85%
Enable Aucklanders and communities to express themselves and improve their well-being through customer-centric advice, funding, facilitation and permitting	Percentage of funding/grant applicants satisfied with information, assistance and advice provided	30%	75%	75%	76%	78%	80%-82%
Deliver a variety of events, programmes and projects that improve safety, connect Aucklanders and engage them in their city and communities	Percentage of participants satisfied with council delivered local arts activities.	83%	Not available	85%	85%	85%	85%
	Percentage of Aucklanders that feel connected to their neighbourhood and local community	Not available	Not available	72%	74%	76%	78%-80%
	Percentage of attendees satisfied with council delivered and funded local events	84%	85\%	85%	85%	85%	85%
Provide safe, reliable and accessible social infrastructure for Aucklanders that contributes to placemaking and thriving communities	Percentage of Aucklanders that feel their local town centre is safe	Day: 77% Night: 28%	Day: 85% Night: 55%	Day: 78% Night: 30%	Day: 79% Night: 32%	Day: 80% Night: 33%	Day: 82% Night: 35%
	Facility Utilisation - utilisation at peak times and off-peak times for council managed community centres and venues for hire	Peak: 13% Off peak: 8%	Not available	Peak: 14% Off peak: 8%	Peak: 14% Off peak: 8%	Peak: 14% Off peak: 8%	Peak: 15% Off peak: 9%
	Percentage of community facilities bookings used for health and well-being related activity	Not available	Not available	20%-30%	20%-30%	20%-30%	20%-30%
	Number of visitors to community centres and venues for hire	300,088	Not available	306,002	309,002	312,032	315,091
Provide a range of recreational opportunities catering for community needs on local parks, reserves and beaches	Percentage of residents satisfied with the provision (quality, location and distribution) of local parks and reserves	TBD	75%	75%	75%	75%	75%
	Percentage of residents who visited a local park or reserve in last 12 months	87%	85%	90%	90%	90%	90%
Provide sports fields that are fit for purpose and cater for community needs.	Percentage of residents satisfied with the provision (quality, location and distribution) of sports fields	TBD	Not available	70%	70%	70%	70%
Provide programmes and facilities that ensure more Aucklanders are more active more often	Customers Net Promoter Score for Pool and Leisure Centres as a percentage	TBD	Not available	15%	15%	15%	15%

Great Barrier LB

Level of service statement	Performance measure	Actual 2013/14	Annual / Long Term Plan targets
			2014/15	2015/16	2016/17	2017/18	2018/25
Develop local business precincts and town centres as great places to do business	Percentage of Business Associations meeting their Business Improvement District (BID) Partnership Programme obligations	Not available	Not available	Not applicable	Not applicable	Not applicable	Not applicable
Provide leadership & support to protect and conserve the region’s natural environment, historic heritage and Māori cultural heritage	Proportion of local programmes that deliver intended environmental actions and/or outcomes	TBD	Not available	80%	85%	90%	90%
Provide safe, accessible, welcoming library facilities that support the delivery of quality learning programmes and services relevant to local communities.	Use of libraries as digital community hubs: Number of internet sessions per capita (PC & WiFi)	2.6	Not available	2	2	2	2
	Number of visits to library facilities per capita	10	Not available	9	9	9	9
	Percentage of customers satisfied with the quality of library service delivery	89%	Not available	85%	85%	85%	85%
	Percentage of visitors satisfied with the library environment	85%	Not available	85%	85%	85%	85%
Enable Aucklanders and communities to express themselves and improve their well-being through customer-centric advice, funding, facilitation and permitting	Percentage of funding/grant applicants satisfied with information, assistance and advice provided	41%	75%	75%	76%	78%	80%-82%
Deliver a variety of events, programmes and projects that improve safety, connect Aucklanders and engage them in their city and communities	Percentage of participants satisfied with council delivered local arts activities.	Not applicable	Not available	Not applicable	Not applicable	Not applicable	Not applicable
	Percentage of Aucklanders that feel connected to their neighbourhood and local community	Not available	Not available	80%	82%	84%	86%-88%
	Percentage of attendees satisfied with council delivered and funded local events	87%	85%	85%	85%	85%	85%
Provide safe, reliable and accessible social infrastructure for Aucklanders that contributes to placemaking and thriving communities	Percentage of Aucklanders that feel their local town centre is safe	Day: 89% Night: 76%	Day: 97% Night: 77%	Day: 89% Night: 76%	Day: 90% Night: 77%	Day: 90% Night: 77%	Day: 92% Night: 79%
	Facility Utilisation - utilisation at peak times and off-peak times for council managed community centres and venues for hire	Not appplicable	Not available	Not appplicable	Not appplicable	Not appplicable	Not appplicable
	Percentage of community facilities bookings used for health and well-being related activity	Not applicable	Not available	Not applicable	Not applicable	Not applicable	Not applicable
	Number of visitors to community centres and venues for hire	Not applicable	Not available	Not applicable	Not applicable	Not applicable	Not applicable
Provide a range of recreational opportunities catering for community needs on local parks, reserves and beaches	Percentage of residents satisfied with the provision (quality, location and distribution) of local parks and reserves	TBD	75%	75%	75%	75%	75%
	Percentage of residents who visited a local park or reserve in last 12 months	78%	91%	90%	90%	90%	90%
Provide sports fields that are fit for purpose and cater for community needs.	Percentage of residents satisfied with the provision (quality, location and distribution) of sports fields	TBD	Not available	70%	70%	70%	70%
Provide programmes and facilities that ensure more Aucklanders are more active more often	Customers Net Promoter Score for Pool and Leisure Centres as a percentage	Not available	Not available	Not available	Not available	Not available	Not available

Henderson-Massey LB

Level of service statement	Performance measure	Actual 2013/14	Annual / Long Term Plan targets
			2014/15	2015/16	2016/17	2017/18	2018/25
Develop local business precincts and town centres as great places to do business	Percentage of Business Associations meeting their Business Improvement District (BID) Partnership Programme obligations	100%	100%	100%	100%	100%	100%
Provide leadership & support to protect and conserve the region’s natural environment, historic heritage and Māori cultural heritage	Proportion of local programmes that deliver intended environmental actions and/or outcomes	TBD	Not available	80%	85%	90%	90%
Provide safe, accessible, welcoming library facilities that support the delivery of quality learning programmes and services relevant to local communities.	Use of libraries as digital community hubs: Number of internet sessions per capita (PC & WiFi)	2.7	Not available	2	2	2	2
	Number of visits to library facilities per capita	7	Not available	6.0	6.0	6.0	6.0
	Percentage of customers satisfied with the quality of library service delivery	89%	Not available	85%	85%	85%	85%
	Percentage of visitors satisfied with the library environment	87%	Not available	85%	85%	85%	85%
Enable Aucklanders and communities to express themselves and improve their well-being through customer-centric advice, funding, facilitation and permitting	Percentage of funding/grant applicants satisfied with information, assistance and advice provided	43%	75%	75%	76%	78%	80%-82%
Deliver a variety of events, programmes and projects that improve safety, connect Aucklanders and engage them in their city and communities	Percentage of participants satisfied with council delivered local arts activities.	Not applicable	Not available	Not applicable	Not applicable	Not applicable	Not applicable
	Percentage of Aucklanders that feel connected to their neighbourhood and local community	Not available	Not available	77%	79%	81%	83%-85%
	Percentage of attendees satisfied with council delivered and funded local events	81%	95%	85%	85%	85%	85%
Provide safe, reliable and accessible social infrastructure for Aucklanders that contributes to placemaking and thriving communities	Percentage of Aucklanders that feel their local town centre is safe	Day: 79% Night: 20%	Day: 85% Night: 55%	Day: 80% Night: 22%	Day: 81% Night: 24%	Day: 82% Night: 26%	Day: 84% Night: 30%
	Facility Utilisation - utilisation at peak times and off-peak times for council managed community centres and venues for hire	Peak: 3% Off peak: 11%	Not available	Peak: 31% Off peak: 11%	Peak: 31% Off peak: 11%	Peak: 31% Off peak: 11%	Peak: 33% Off peak: 13%
	Percentage of community facilities bookings used for health and well-being related activity	Not available	Not available	20%-30%	20%-30%	20%-30%	20%-30%
	Number of visitors to community centres and venues for hire	115,471	Not available	144,734	146,153	147,586	149,033
Provide a range of recreational opportunities catering for community needs on local parks, reserves and beaches	Percentage of residents satisfied with the provision (quality, location and distribution) of local parks and reserves	TBD	75%	75%	75%	75%	75%
	Percentage of residents who visited a local park or reserve in last 12 months	83%	80%	90%	90%	90%	90%
Provide sports fields that are fit for purpose and cater for community needs.	Percentage of residents satisfied with the provision (quality, location and distribution) of sports fields	TBD	Not available	70%	70%	70%	70%
Provide programmes and facilities that ensure more Aucklanders are more active more often	Customers Net Promoter Score for Pool and Leisure Centres as a percentage	TBD	Not available	15%	15%	15%	15%

Hibiscus and Bays LB

Level of service statement	Performance measure	Actual 2013/14	Annual / Long Term Plan targets
			2014/15	2015/16	2016/17	2017/18	2018/25
Develop local business precincts and town centres as great places to do business	Percentage of Business Associations meeting their Business Improvement District (BID) Partnership Programme obligations	100%	85%	100%	100%	100%	100%
Provide leadership & support to protect and conserve the region’s natural environment, historic heritage and Māori cultural heritage	Proportion of local programmes that deliver intended environmental actions and/or outcomes	TBD	Not available	80%	85%	90%	90%
Provide safe, accessible, welcoming library facilities that support the delivery of quality learning programmes and services relevant to local communities.	Use of libraries as digital community hubs: Number of internet sessions per capita (PC & WiFi)	1.7	Not available	1.4	1.4	1.4	1.4
	Number of visits to library facilities per capita	9.3	Not available	8	8	8	8
	Percentage of customers satisfied with the quality of library service delivery	94%	Not available	85%	85%	85%	85%
	Percentage of visitors satisfied with the library environment	93%	Not available	85%	85%	85%	85%
Enable Aucklanders and communities to express themselves and improve their well-being through customer-centric advice, funding, facilitation and permitting	Percentage of funding/grant applicants satisfied with information, assistance and advice provided	57%	75%	75%	76%	78%	80%-82%
Deliver a variety of events, programmes and projects that improve safety, connect Aucklanders and engage them in their city and communities	Percentage of participants satisfied with council delivered local arts activities.	Not available	Not available	80%	85%	85%	85%
	Percentage of Aucklanders that feel connected to their neighbourhood and local community	Not available	Not available	77%	79%	81%	83%-85%
	Percentage of attendees satisfied with council delivered and funded local events	83%	85%	85%	85%	85%	85%
Provide safe, reliable and accessible social infrastructure for Aucklanders that contributes to placemaking and thriving communities	Percentage of Aucklanders that feel their local town centre is safe	Day: 94% Night: 42%	Day: 85% Night: 55%	Day: 94% Night: 43%	Day: 94% Night: 44%	Day: 95% Night: 45%	Day: 95% Night: 47%
	Facility Utilisation - utilisation at peak times and off-peak times for council managed community centres and venues for hire	Peak: 26% Off peak: 24%	Not available	Peak: 26% Off peak: 25%	Peak: 27% Off peak: 25%	Peak: 27% Off peak: 25%	Peak: 28% Off peak: 27%
	Percentage of community facilities bookings used for health and well-being related activity	Not available	Not available	20%-30%	20%-30%	20%-30%	20%-30%
	Number of visitors to community centres and venues for hire	57,598	Not available	58,733	59,309	59,890	60,478
Provide a range of recreational opportunities catering for community needs on local parks, reserves and beaches	Percentage of residents satisfied with the provision (quality, location and distribution) of local parks and reserves	TBD	75%	75%	75%	75%	75%
	Percentage of residents who visited a local park or reserve in last 12 months	91%	85%	90%	90%	90%	90%
Provide sports fields that are fit for purpose and cater for community needs.	Percentage of residents satisfied with the provision (quality, location and distribution) of sports fields	TBD	Not available	70%	70%	70%	70%
Provide programmes and facilities that ensure more Aucklanders are more active more often	Customers Net Promoter Score for Pool and Leisure Centres as a percentage	TBD	Not available	15%	15%	15%	15%

Howick LB

Level of service statement	Performance measure	Actual 2013/14	Annual / Long Term Plan targets
			2014/15	2015/16	2016/17	2017/18	2018/25
Develop local business precincts and town centres as great places to do business	Percentage of Business Associations meeting their Business Improvement District (BID) Partnership Programme obligations	100%	85%	100%	100%	100%	100%
Provide leadership & support to protect and conserve the region’s natural environment, historic heritage and Māori cultural heritage	Proportion of local programmes that deliver intended environmental actions and/or outcomes	TBD	Not available	80%	85%	90%	90%
Provide safe, accessible, welcoming library facilities that support the delivery of quality learning programmes and services relevant to local communities.	Use of libraries as digital community hubs: Number of internet sessions per capita (PC & WiFi)	2.5	Not available	2	2	2	2
	Number of visits to library facilities per capita	9	Not available	8	8	8	8
	Percentage of customers satisfied with the quality of library service delivery	91%	Not available	85%	85%	85%	85%
	Percentage of visitors satisfied with the library environment	89%	Not available	85%	85%	85%	85%
Enable Aucklanders and communities to express themselves and improve their well-being through customer-centric advice, funding, facilitation and permitting	Percentage of funding/grant applicants satisfied with information, assistance and advice provided	54%	75%	75%	76%	78%	80%-82%
Deliver a variety of events, programmes and projects that improve safety, connect Aucklanders and engage them in their city and communities	Percentage of participants satisfied with council delivered local arts activities.	Not applicable	Not available	Not applicable	Not applicable	Not applicable	Not applicable
	Percentage of Aucklanders that feel connected to their neighbourhood and local community	Not available	Not available	78%	80%	82%	84%-86%
	Percentage of attendees satisfied with council delivered and funded local events	86%	85%	85%	85%	85%	85%
Provide safe, reliable and accessible social infrastructure for Aucklanders that contributes to placemaking and thriving communities	Percentage of Aucklanders that feel their local town centre is safe	Day: 82% Night: 42%	Day: 85% Night: 55%	Day: 83% Night: 43%	Day: 84% Night: 44%	Day: 85% Night: 45%	Day: 87% Night: 47%
	Facility Utilisation - utilisation at peak times and off-peak times for council managed community centres and venues for hire	Peak: 32% Off peak: 18%	Not available	Peak: 33% Off peak: 18%	Peak: 33% Off peak: 18%	Peak: 34% Off peak: 19%	Peak: 35% Off peak: 20%
	Percentage of community facilities bookings used for health and well-being related activity	Not available	Not available	20%-30%	20%-30%	20%-30%	20%-30%
	Number of visitors to community centres and venues for hire	130,076	Not available	132,639	133,940	135,253	136,579
Provide a range of recreational opportunities catering for community needs on local parks, reserves and beaches	Percentage of residents satisfied with the provision (quality, location and distribution) of local parks and reserves	TBD	75%	75%	75%	75%	75%
	Percentage of residents who visited a local park or reserve in last 12 months	91%	85%	90%	90%	90%	90%
Provide sports fields that are fit for purpose and cater for community needs.	Percentage of residents satisfied with the provision (quality, location and distribution) of sports fields	TBD	Not available	70%	70%	70%	70%
Provide programmes and facilities that ensure more Aucklanders are more active more often	Customers Net Promoter Score for Pool and Leisure Centres as a percentage	TBD	Not available	15%	15%	15%	15%

Kaipatiki LB

Level of service statement	Performance measure	Actual 2013/14	Annual / Long Term Plan targets
			2014/15	2015/16	2016/17	2017/18	2018/25
Develop local business precincts and town centres as great places to do business	Percentage of Business Associations meeting their Business Improvement District (BID) Partnership Programme obligations	100%	100%	100%	100%	100%	100%
Provide leadership & support to protect and conserve the region’s natural environment, historic heritage and Māori cultural heritage	Proportion of local programmes that deliver intended environmental actions and/or outcomes	TBD	Not available	80%	85%	90%	90%
Provide safe, accessible, welcoming library facilities that support the delivery of quality learning programmes and services relevant to local communities.	Use of libraries as digital community hubs: Number of internet sessions per capita (PC & WiFi)	2.6	Not available	2	2	2	2
	Number of visits to library facilities per capita	8.3	Not available	7.5	7.5	7.5	7.5
	Percentage of customers satisfied with the quality of library service delivery	93%	Not available	85%	85%	85%	85%
	Percentage of visitors satisfied with the library environment	94%	Not available	85%	85%	85%	85%
Enable Aucklanders and communities to express themselves and improve their well-being through customer-centric advice, funding, facilitation and permitting	Percentage of funding/grant applicants satisfied with information, assistance and advice provided	51%	75%	75%	76%	78%	80%-82%
Deliver a variety of events, programmes and projects that improve safety, connect Aucklanders and engage them in their city and communities	Percentage of participants satisfied with council delivered local arts activities.	Not available	Not available	80%	85%	85%	85%
	Percentage of Aucklanders that feel connected to their neighbourhood and local community	Not available	Not available	75%	77%	79%	81%-83%
	Percentage of attendees satisfied with council delivered and funded local events	71%	85%	85%	85%	85%	85%
Provide safe, reliable and accessible social infrastructure for Aucklanders that contributes to placemaking and thriving communities	Percentage of Aucklanders that feel their local town centre is safe	Day: 86% Night: 33%	Day: 90% Night: 55%	Day: 86% Night: 35%	Day: 87% Night: 37%	Day: 87% Night: 39%	Day: 89% Night: 42%
	Facility Utilisation - utilisation at peak times and off-peak times for council managed community centres and venues for hire	Peak: 10% Off peak: 3%	Not available	Peak: 11% Off peak: 3%	Peak: 11% Off peak: 3%	Peak: 11% Off peak: 3%	Peak: 12% Off peak: 4%
	Percentage of community facilities bookings used for health and well-being related activity	Not available	Not available	20%-30%	20%-30%	20%-30%	20%-30%
	Number of visitors to community centres and venues for hire	119,657	Not available	122,015	123,211	124,419	125,639
Provide a range of recreational opportunities catering for community needs on local parks, reserves and beaches	Percentage of residents satisfied with the provision (quality, location and distribution) of local parks and reserves	TBD	75%	75%	75%	75%	75%
	Percentage of residents who visited a local park or reserve in last 12 months	92%	96%	90%	90%	90%	90%
Provide sports fields that are fit for purpose and cater for community needs.	Percentage of residents satisfied with the provision (quality, location and distribution) of sports fields	TBD	Not available	70%	70%	70%	70%
Provide programmes and facilities that ensure more Aucklanders are more active more often	Customers Net Promoter Score for Pool and Leisure Centres as a percentage	TBD	Not available	15%	15%	15%	15%

Mangere-Otahuhu LB

Level of service statement	Performance measure	Actual 2013/14	Annual / Long Term Plan targets
			2014/15	2015/16	2016/17	2017/18	2018/25
Develop local business precincts and town centres as great places to do business	Percentage of Business Associations meeting their Business Improvement District (BID) Partnership Programme obligations	100%	85%	100%	100%	100%	100%
Provide leadership & support to protect and conserve the region’s natural environment, historic heritage and Māori cultural heritage	Proportion of local programmes that deliver intended environmental actions and/or outcomes	TBD	Not available	80%	85%	90%	90%
Provide safe, accessible, welcoming library facilities that support the delivery of quality learning programmes and services relevant to local communities.	Use of libraries as digital community hubs: Number of internet sessions per capita (PC & WiFi)	4.5	Not available	4	4	4	4
	Number of visits to library facilities per capita	9.3	Not available	8.5	8.5	8.5	8.5
	Percentage of customers satisfied with the quality of library service delivery	89%	Not available	85%	85%	85%	85%
	Percentage of visitors satisfied with the library environment	84%	Not available	85%	85%	85%	85%
Enable Aucklanders and communities to express themselves and improve their well-being through customer-centric advice, funding, facilitation and permitting	Percentage of funding/grant applicants satisfied with information, assistance and advice provided	43%	75%	75%	76%	78%	80%-82%
Deliver a variety of events, programmes and projects that improve safety, connect Aucklanders and engage them in their city and communities	Percentage of participants satisfied with council delivered local arts activities.	82%	Not available	85%	85%	85%	85%
	Percentage of Aucklanders that feel connected to their neighbourhood and local community	Not available	Not available	77%	79%	81%	83%-85%
	Percentage of attendees satisfied with council delivered and funded local events	84%	85%	85%	85%	85%	85%
Provide safe, reliable and accessible social infrastructure for Aucklanders that contributes to placemaking and thriving communities	Percentage of Aucklanders that feel their local town centre is safe	Day: 72% Night: 20%	Day: 85% Night: 55%	Day: 73% Night: 22%	Day: 74% Night: 24%	Day: 75% Night: 25%	Day: 77% Night: 27%
	Facility Utilisation - utilisation at peak times and off-peak times for council managed community centres and venues for hire	Peak: 37% Off peak: 21%	Not available	Peak: 37% Off peak: 21%	Peak: 38% Off peak: 22%	Peak: 38% Off peak: 22%	Peak: 39% Off peak: 23%
	Percentage of community facilities bookings used for health and well-being related activity	Not available	Not available	20%-30%	20%-30%	20%-30%	20%-30%
	Number of visitors to community centres and venues for hire	377,000	Not available	384,429	388,199	392,005	395,848
Provide a range of recreational opportunities catering for community needs on local parks, reserves and beaches	Percentage of residents satisfied with the provision (quality, location and distribution) of local parks and reserves	TBD	75%	75%	75%	75%	75%
	Percentage of residents who visited a local park or reserve in last 12 months	90%	85%	90%	90%	90%	90%
Provide sports fields that are fit for purpose and cater for community needs.	Percentage of residents satisfied with the provision (quality, location and distribution) of sports fields	TBD	Not available	70%	70%	70%	70%
Provide programmes and facilities that ensure more Aucklanders are more active more often	Customers Net Promoter Score for Pool and Leisure Centres as a percentage	TBD	Not available	15%	15%	15%	15%

Manurewa LB

Level of service statement	Performance measure	Actual 2013/14	Annual / Long Term Plan targets
			2014/15	2015/16	2016/17	2017/18	2018/25
Develop local business precincts and town centres as great places to do business	Percentage of Business Associations meeting their Business Improvement District (BID) Partnership Programme obligations	100%	100%	100%	100%	100%	100%
Provide leadership & support to protect and conserve the region’s natural environment, historic heritage and Māori cultural heritage	Proportion of local programmes that deliver intended environmental actions and/or outcomes	TBD	Not available	80%	85%	90%	90%
Provide safe, accessible, welcoming library facilities that support the delivery of quality learning programmes and services relevant to local communities.	Use of libraries as digital community hubs: Number of internet sessions per capita (PC & WiFi)	2.0	Not available	1.8	1.8	1.8	1.8
	Number of visits to library facilities per capita	7.2	Not available	6.5	6.5	6.5	6.5
	Percentage of customers satisfied with the quality of library service delivery	88%	Not available	85%	85%	85%	85%
	Percentage of visitors satisfied with the library environment	87%	Not available	85%	85%	85%	85%
Enable Aucklanders and communities to express themselves and improve their well-being through customer-centric advice, funding, facilitation and permitting	Percentage of funding/grant applicants satisfied with information, assistance and advice provided	43%	75%	75%	76%	78%	80%-82%
Deliver a variety of events, programmes and projects that improve safety, connect Aucklanders and engage them in their city and communities	Percentage of participants satisfied with council delivered local arts activities.	90%	Not available	90%	90%	90%	90%
	Percentage of Aucklanders that feel connected to their neighbourhood and local community	Not available	Not available	75%	77%	79%	82%-84%
	Percentage of attendees satisfied with council delivered and funded local events	71%	85%	85%	85%	85%	85%
Provide safe, reliable and accessible social infrastructure for Aucklanders that contributes to placemaking and thriving communities	Percentage of Aucklanders that feel their local town centre is safe	Day: 56% Night: 11%	Day: 85% Night: 55%	Day: 57% Night: 13%	Day: 58% Night: 15%	Day: 59% Night: 17%	Day: 61% Night: 19%
	Facility Utilisation - utilisation at peak times and off-peak times for council managed community centres and venues for hire	Peak: 32% Off peak: 16%	Not available	Peak: 32% Off peak: 17%	Peak: 33% Off peak: 17%	Peak: 33% Off peak: 17%	Peak: 34% Off peak: 18%
	Percentage of community facilities bookings used for health and well-being related activity	Not available	Not available	20%-30%	20%-30%	20%-30%	20%-30%
	Number of visitors to community centres and venues for hire	141,373	Not available	144,159	145,572	147,000	148,441
Provide a range of recreational opportunities catering for community needs on local parks, reserves and beaches	Percentage of residents satisfied with the provision (quality, location and distribution) of local parks and reserves	TBD	75%	75%	75%	75%	75%
	Percentage of residents who visited a local park or reserve in last 12 months	90%	85%	90%	90%	90%	90%
Provide sports fields that are fit for purpose and cater for community needs.	Percentage of residents satisfied with the provision (quality, location and distribution) of sports fields	TBD	Not available	70%	70%	70%	70%
Provide programmes and facilities that ensure more Aucklanders are more active more often	Customers Net Promoter Score for Pool and Leisure Centres as a percentage	TBD	Not available	15%	15%	15%	15%

Maungakiekie-Tamaki LB

Level of service statement	Performance measure	Actual 2013/14	Annual / Long Term Plan targets
			2014/15	2015/16	2016/17	2017/18	2018/25
Develop local business precincts and town centres as great places to do business	Percentage of Business Associations meeting their Business Improvement District (BID) Partnership Programme obligations	100%	100%	100%	100%	100%	100%
Provide leadership & support to protect and conserve the region’s natural environment, historic heritage and Māori cultural heritage	Proportion of local programmes that deliver intended environmental actions and/or outcomes	TBD	Not available	80%	85%	90%	90%
Provide safe, accessible, welcoming library facilities that support the delivery of quality learning programmes and services relevant to local communities.	Use of libraries as digital community hubs: Number of internet sessions per capita (PC & WiFi)	3.1	Not available	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5
	Number of visits to library facilities per capita	8.2	Not available	6.5	6.5	6.5	6.5
	Percentage of customers satisfied with the quality of library service delivery	93%	Not available	85%	85%	85%	85%
	Percentage of visitors satisfied with the library environment	90%	Not available	85%	85%	85%	85%
Enable Aucklanders and communities to express themselves and improve their well-being through customer-centric advice, funding, facilitation and permitting	Percentage of funding/grant applicants satisfied with information, assistance and advice provided	56%	75%	75%	76%	78%	80%-82%
Deliver a variety of events, programmes and projects that improve safety, connect Aucklanders and engage them in their city and communities	Percentage of participants satisfied with council delivered local arts activities.	Not available	Not available	80%	85%	85%	85%
	Percentage of Aucklanders that feel connected to their neighbourhood and local community	Not available	Not available	73%	75%	77%	79%-81%
	Percentage of attendees satisfied with council delivered and funded local events	89%	85%	85%	85%	85%	85%
Provide safe, reliable and accessible social infrastructure for Aucklanders that contributes to placemaking and thriving communities	Percentage of Aucklanders that feel their local town centre is safe	Day: 74% Night: 21%	Day: 85% Night: 55%	Day: 75% Night: 23%	Day: 76% Night: 25%	Day: 77% Night: 27%	Day: 79% Night: 29%
	Facility Utilisation - utilisation at peak times and off-peak times for council managed community centres and venues for hire	Peak: 27% Off peak: 15%	Not available	Peak: 27% Off peak: 16%	Peak: 27% Off peak: 16%	Peak: 28% Off peak: 16%	Peak: 29% Off peak: 17%
	Percentage of community facilities bookings used for health and well-being related activity	Not available	Not available	20%-30%	20%-30%	20%-30%	20%-30%
	Number of visitors to community centres and venues for hire	326,250	Not available	332,679	335,941	339,235	342,561
Provide a range of recreational opportunities catering for community needs on local parks, reserves and beaches	Percentage of residents satisfied with the provision (quality, location and distribution) of local parks and reserves	TBD	75%	75%	75%	75%	75%
	Percentage of residents who visited a local park or reserve in last 12 months	95%	85%	90%	90%	90%	90%
Provide sports fields that are fit for purpose and cater for community needs.	Percentage of residents satisfied with the provision (quality, location and distribution) of sports fields	TBD	Not available	70%	70%	70%	70%
Provide programmes and facilities that ensure more Aucklanders are more active more often	Customers Net Promoter Score for Pool and Leisure Centres as a percentage	TBD	Not available	15%	15%	15%	15%

Orakei LB

Level of service statement	Performance measure	Actual 2013/14	Annual / Long Term Plan targets
			2014/15	2015/16	2016/17	2017/18	2018/25
Develop local business precincts and town centres as great places to do business	Percentage of Business Associations meeting their Business Improvement District (BID) Partnership Programme obligations	100%	85%	100%	100%	100%	100%
Provide leadership & support to protect and conserve the region’s natural environment, historic heritage and Māori cultural heritage	Proportion of local programmes that deliver intended environmental actions and/or outcomes	TBD	Not available	80%	85%	90%	90%
Provide safe, accessible, welcoming library facilities that support the delivery of quality learning programmes and services relevant to local communities.	Use of libraries as digital community hubs: Number of internet sessions per capita (PC & WiFi)	0.9	Not available	0.8	0.8	0.8	0.8
	Number of visits to library facilities per capita	6.8	Not available	5.5	5.5	5.5	5.5
	Percentage of customers satisfied with the quality of library service delivery	96%	Not available	85%	85%	85%	85%
	Percentage of visitors satisfied with the library environment	91%	Not available	85%	85%	85%	85%
Enable Aucklanders and communities to express themselves and improve their well-being through customer-centric advice, funding, facilitation and permitting	Percentage of funding/grant applicants satisfied with information, assistance and advice provided	69%	75%	75%	76%	78%	80%-82%
Deliver a variety of events, programmes and projects that improve safety, connect Aucklanders and engage them in their city and communities	Percentage of participants satisfied with council delivered local arts activities.	Not available	Not available	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A
	Percentage of Aucklanders that feel connected to their neighbourhood and local community	Not available	Not available	75%	77%	79%	81%-83%
	Percentage of attendees satisfied with council delivered and funded local events	71%	85%	85%	85%	85%	85%
Provide safe, reliable and accessible social infrastructure for Aucklanders that contributes to placemaking and thriving communities	Percentage of Aucklanders that feel their local town centre is safe	Day: 83% Night: 38%	Day: 85% Night: 55%	Day: 84% Night: 39%	Day: 85% Night: 40%	Day: 86% Night: 41%	Day: 88% Night: 43%
	Facility Utilisation - utilisation at peak times and off-peak times for council managed community centres and venues for hire	Peak: 29% Off peak: 19%	Not available	Peak: 30% Off peak: 19%	Peak: 30% Off peak: 19%	Peak: 30% Off peak: 19%	Peak: 31% Off peak: 20%
	Percentage of community facilities bookings used for health and well-being related activity	Not available	Not available	20%-30%	20%-30%	20%-30%	20%-30%
	Number of visitors to community centres and venues for hire	378,275	Not available	385,729	389,511	393,330	397,187
Provide a range of recreational opportunities catering for community needs on local parks, reserves and beaches	Percentage of residents satisfied with the provision (quality, location and distribution) of local parks and reserves	TBD	85%	75%	75%	75%	75%
	Percentage of residents who visited a local park or reserve in last 12 months	93%	85%	90%	90%	90%	90%
Provide sports fields that are fit for purpose and cater for community needs.	Percentage of residents satisfied with the provision (quality, location and distribution) of sports fields	TBD	Not available	70%	70%	70%	70%
Provide programmes and facilities that ensure more Aucklanders are more active more often	Customers Net Promoter Score for Pool and Leisure Centres as a percentage	TBD	Not available	15%	15%	15%	15%

Otara-Papatoetoe LB

Level of service statement	Performance measure	Actual 2013/14	Annual / Long Term Plan targets
			2014/15	2015/16	2016/17	2017/18	2018/25
Develop local business precincts and town centres as great places to do business	Percentage of Business Associations meeting their Business Improvement District (BID) Partnership Programme obligations	100%	85%	100%	100%	100%	100%
Provide leadership & support to protect and conserve the region’s natural environment, historic heritage and Māori cultural heritage	Proportion of local programmes that deliver intended environmental actions and/or outcomes	TBD	Not available	80%	85%	90%	90%
Provide safe, accessible, welcoming library facilities that support the delivery of quality learning programmes and services relevant to local communities.	Use of libraries as digital community hubs: Number of internet sessions per capita (PC & WiFi)	5.0	Not available	4.5	4.5	4.5	4.5
	Number of visits to library facilities per capita	11.5	Not available	9.5	9.5	9.5	9.5
	Percentage of customers satisfied with the quality of library service delivery	85%	Not available	85%	85%	85%	85%
	Percentage of visitors satisfied with the library environment	82%	Not available	85%	85%	85%	85%
Enable Aucklanders and communities to express themselves and improve their well-being through customer-centric advice, funding, facilitation and permitting	Percentage of funding/grant applicants satisfied with information, assistance and advice provided	50%	75%	75%	76%	78%	80%-82%
Deliver a variety of events, programmes and projects that improve safety, connect Aucklanders and engage them in their city and communities	Percentage of participants satisfied with council delivered local arts activities.	90%	Not available	90%	90%	90%	90%
	Percentage of Aucklanders that feel connected to their neighbourhood and local community	Not available	Not available	75%	77%	79%	81%-83%
	Percentage of attendees satisfied with council delivered and funded local events	77%	85%	85%	85%	85%	85%
Provide safe, reliable and accessible social infrastructure for Aucklanders that contributes to placemaking and thriving communities	Percentage of Aucklanders that feel their local town centre is safe	Day: 78% Night: 18%	Day: 85% Night: 55%	Day: 79% Night: 19%	Day: 80% Night: 20%	Day: 81% Night: 21%	Day: 83% Night: 24%
	Facility Utilisation - utilisation at peak times and off-peak times for council managed community centres and venues for hire	Peak: 20% Off peak: 13%	Not available	Peak: 21% Off peak: 14%	Peak: 21% Off peak: 14%	Peak: 21% Off peak: 14%	Peak: 22% Off peak: 15%
	Percentage of community facilities bookings used for health and well-being related activity	Not available	Not available	20%-30%	20%-30%	20%-30%	20%-30%
	Number of visitors to community centres and venues for hire	207,604	Not available	211,695	213,771	215,867	217,983
Provide a range of recreational opportunities catering for community needs on local parks, reserves and beaches	Percentage of residents satisfied with the provision (quality, location and distribution) of local parks and reserves	TBD	75%	75%	75%	75%	75%
	Percentage of residents who visited a local park or reserve in last 12 months	85%	85%	90%	90%	90%	90%
Provide sports fields that are fit for purpose and cater for community needs.	Percentage of residents satisfied with the provision (quality, location and distribution) of sports fields	TBD	Not available	70%	70%	70%	70%
Provide programmes and facilities that ensure more Aucklanders are more active more often	Customers Net Promoter Score for Pool and Leisure Centres as a percentage	TBD	Not available	15%	15%	15%	15%

Papakura LB

Level of service statement	Performance measure	Actual 2013/14	Annual / Long Term Plan targets
			2014/15	2015/16	2016/17	2017/18	2018/25
Develop local business precincts and town centres as great places to do business	Percentage of Business Associations meeting their Business Improvement District (BID) Partnership Programme obligations	100%	100%	100%	100%	100%	100%
Provide leadership & support to protect and conserve the region’s natural environment, historic heritage and Māori cultural heritage	Proportion of local programmes that deliver intended environmental actions and/or outcomes	TBD	Not available	80%	85%	90%	90%
Provide safe, accessible, welcoming library facilities that support the delivery of quality learning programmes and services relevant to local communities.	Use of libraries as digital community hubs: Number of internet sessions per capita (PC & WiFi)	1.2	Not available	1	1	1	1
	Number of visits to library facilities per capita	5.7	Not available	4.5	4.5	4.5	4.5
	Percentage of customers satisfied with the quality of library service delivery	93%	Not available	85%	85%	85%	85%
	Percentage of visitors satisfied with the library environment	90%	Not available	85%	85%	85%	85%
Enable Aucklanders and communities to express themselves and improve their well-being through customer-centric advice, funding, facilitation and permitting	Percentage of funding/grant applicants satisfied with information, assistance and advice provided	59%	75%	75%	76%	78%	80%-82%
Deliver a variety of events, programmes and projects that improve safety, connect Aucklanders and engage them in their city and communities	Percentage of participants satisfied with council delivered local arts activities.	90%	Not available	90%	90%	90%	90%
	Percentage of Aucklanders that feel connected to their neighbourhood and local community	Not available	Not available	73%	75%	77%	79%-81%
	Percentage of attendees satisfied with council delivered and funded local events	75%	85%	85%	85%	85%	85%
Provide safe, reliable and accessible social infrastructure for Aucklanders that contributes to placemaking and thriving communities	Percentage of Aucklanders that feel their local town centre is safe	Day: 61% Night: 13%	Day: 85% Night: 55%	Day: 62% Night: 15%	Day: 63% Night: 17%	Day: 64% Night: 19%	Day: 66% Night: 23%
	Facility Utilisation - utilisation at peak times and off-peak times for council managed community centres and venues for hire	Peak: 15% Off peak: 11%	Not available	Peak: 15% Off peak: 11%	Peak: 15% Off peak: 11%	Peak: 15% Off peak: 12%	Peak: 17% Off peak: 13%
	Percentage of community facilities bookings used for health and well-being related activity	Not available	Not available	20%-30%	20%-30%	20%-30%	20%-30%
	Number of visitors to community centres and venues for hire	97,796	Not available	99,723	100,701	101,688	102,685
Provide a range of recreational opportunities catering for community needs on local parks, reserves and beaches	Percentage of residents satisfied with the provision (quality, location and distribution) of local parks and reserves	TBD	75%	75%	75%	75%	75%
	Percentage of residents who visited a local park or reserve in last 12 months	87%	90%	90%	90%	90%	90%
Provide sports fields that are fit for purpose and cater for community needs.	Percentage of residents satisfied with the provision (quality, location and distribution) of sports fields	TBD	Not available	70%	70%	70%	70%
Provide programmes and facilities that ensure more Aucklanders are more active more often	Customers Net Promoter Score for Pool and Leisure Centres as a percentage	TBD	Not available	15%	15%	15%	15%

Puketapapa LB

Level of service statement	Performance measure	Actual 2013/14	Annual / Long Term Plan targets
			2014/15	2015/16	2016/17	2017/18	2018/25
Develop local business precincts and town centres as great places to do business	Percentage of Business Associations meeting their Business Improvement District (BID) Partnership Programme obligations	Not available	Not applicable	Not applicable	Not applicable	Not applicable	Not applicable
Provide leadership & support to protect and conserve the region’s natural environment, historic heritage and Māori cultural heritage	Proportion of local programmes that deliver intended environmental actions and/or outcomes	TBD	Not available	80%	85%	90%	90%
Provide safe, accessible, welcoming library facilities that support the delivery of quality learning programmes and services relevant to local communities.	Use of libraries as digital community hubs: Number of internet sessions per capita (PC & WiFi)	1.7	Not available	1.5	1.5	1.5	1.5
	Number of visits to library facilities per capita	5.2	Not available	4.0	4.0	4.0	4.0
	Percentage of customers satisfied with the quality of library service delivery	87%	Not available	85%	85%	85%	85%
	Percentage of visitors satisfied with the library environment	92%	Not available	85%	85%	85%	85%
Enable Aucklanders and communities to express themselves and improve their well-being through customer-centric advice, funding, facilitation and permitting	Percentage of funding/grant applicants satisfied with information, assistance and advice provided	56%	75%	75%	76%	78%	80%-82%
Deliver a variety of events, programmes and projects that improve safety, connect Aucklanders and engage them in their city and communities	Percentage of participants satisfied with council delivered local arts activities.	Not applicable	Not available	Not applicable	Not applicable	Not applicable	Not applicable
	Percentage of Aucklanders that feel connected to their neighbourhood and local community	Not available	Not available	71%	73%	75%	77%-79%
	Percentage of attendees satisfied with council delivered and funded local events	77%	85%	85%	85%	85%	85%
Provide safe, reliable and accessible social infrastructure for Aucklanders that contributes to placemaking and thriving communities	Percentage of Aucklanders that feel their local town centre is safe	Day: 82% Night: 34%	Day: 85% Night: 55%	Day: 83% Night: 35%	Day: 84% Night: 36%	Day: 85% Night: 37%	Day: 87% Night: 39%
	Facility Utilisation - utilisation at peak times and off-peak times for council managed community centres and venues for hire	Peak: 35% Off peak: 24%	Not available	Peak: 36% Off peak: 24%	Peak: 36% Off peak: 25%	Peak: 37% Off peak: 25%	Peak: 38% Off peak: 26%
	Percentage of community facilities bookings used for health and well-being related activity	Not available	Not available	20%-30%	20%-30%	20%-30%	20%-30%
	Number of visitors to community centres and venues for hire	317,779	Not available	324,041	327,218	330,427	333,667
Provide a range of recreational opportunities catering for community needs on local parks, reserves and beaches	Percentage of residents satisfied with the provision (quality, location and distribution) of local parks and reserves	TBD	75%	75%	75%	75%	75%
	Percentage of residents who visited a local park or reserve in last 12 months	95%	85%	90%	90%	90%	90%
Provide sports fields that are fit for purpose and cater for community needs.	Percentage of residents satisfied with the provision (quality, location and distribution) of sports fields	TBD	Not available	70%	70%	70%	70%
Provide programmes and facilities that ensure more Aucklanders are more active more often	Customers Net Promoter Score for Pool and Leisure Centres as a percentage	TBD	Not available	15%	15%	15%	15%

Rodney LB

Level of service statement	Performance measure	Actual 2013/14	Annual / Long Term Plan targets
			2014/15	2015/16	2016/17	2017/18	2018/25
Develop local business precincts and town centres as great places to do business	Percentage of Business Associations meeting their Business Improvement District (BID) Partnership Programme obligations	Not available	100%	100%	100%	100%	100%
Provide leadership & support to protect and conserve the region’s natural environment, historic heritage and Māori cultural heritage	Proportion of local programmes that deliver intended environmental actions and/or outcomes	TBD	Not available	80%	85%	90%	90%
Provide safe, accessible, welcoming library facilities that support the delivery of quality learning programmes and services relevant to local communities.	Use of libraries as digital community hubs: Number of internet sessions per capita (PC & WiFi)	2.1	Not available	1.8	1.8	1.8	1.8
	Number of visits to library facilities per capita	9	Not available	8.5	8.5	8.5	8.5
	Percentage of customers satisfied with the quality of library service delivery	94%	Not available	85%	85%	85%	85%
	Percentage of visitors satisfied with the library environment	93%	Not available	85%	85%	85%	85%
Enable Aucklanders and communities to express themselves and improve their well-being through customer-centric advice, funding, facilitation and permitting	Percentage of funding/grant applicants satisfied with information, assistance and advice provided	56%	75%	75%	76%	78%	80%-82%
Deliver a variety of events, programmes and projects that improve safety, connect Aucklanders and engage them in their city and communities	Percentage of participants satisfied with council delivered local arts activities.	Not applicable	Not available	Not applicable	Not applicable	Not applicable	Not applicable
	Percentage of Aucklanders that feel connected to their neighbourhood and local community	Not available	Not available	80%	82%	84%	86%-88%
	Percentage of attendees satisfied with council delivered and funded local events	91%	85%	85%	85%	85%	85%
Provide safe, reliable and accessible social infrastructure for Aucklanders that contributes to placemaking and thriving communities	Percentage of Aucklanders that feel their local town centre is safe	Day: 91% Night: 50%	Day: 85% Night: 55%	Day: 91% Night: 51%	Day: 92% Night: 52%	Day: 92% Night: 53%	Day: 94% Night: 55%
	Facility Utilisation - utilisation at peak times and off-peak times for council managed community centres and venues for hire	Peak: 15% Off peak: 8%	Not available	Peak: 15% Off peak: 8%	Peak: 15% Off peak: 8%	Peak: 15% Off peak: 8%	Peak: 17% Off peak: 9%
	Percentage of community facilities bookings used for health and well-being related activity	Not available	Not available	20%-30%	20%-30%	20%-30%	20%-30%
	Number of visitors to community centres and venues for hire	30,536	Not available	31,138	31,443	31,751	32,063
Provide a range of recreational opportunities catering for community needs on local parks, reserves and beaches	Percentage of residents satisfied with the provision (quality, location and distribution) of local parks and reserves	TBD	75%	75%	75%	75%	75%
	Percentage of residents who visited a local park or reserve in last 12 months	91%	85%	90%	90%	90%	90%
Provide sports fields that are fit for purpose and cater for community needs.	Percentage of residents satisfied with the provision (quality, location and distribution) of sports fields	TBD	Not available	70%	70%	70%	70%
Provide programmes and facilities that ensure more Aucklanders are more active more often	Customers Net Promoter Score for Pool and Leisure Centres as a percentage	TBD	Not available	15%	15%	15%	15%

Upper Harbour LB

Level of service statement	Performance measure	Actual 2013/14	Annual / Long Term Plan targets
			2014/15	2015/16	2016/17	2017/18	2018/25
Develop local business precincts and town centres as great places to do business	Percentage of Business Associations meeting their Business Improvement District (BID) Partnership Programme obligations	Not available	100%	100%	100%	100%	100%
Provide leadership & support to protect and conserve the region’s natural environment, historic heritage and Māori cultural heritage	Proportion of local programmes that deliver intended environmental actions and/or outcomes	TBD	Not available	80%	85%	90%	90%
Provide safe, accessible, welcoming library facilities that support the delivery of quality learning programmes and services relevant to local communities.	Use of libraries as digital community hubs: Number of internet sessions per capita (PC & WiFi)	0.8	Not available	0.7	0.7	0.7	0.7
	Number of visits to library facilities per capita	3	Not available	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5
	Percentage of customers satisfied with the quality of library service delivery	96%	Not available	85%	85%	85%	85%
	Percentage of visitors satisfied with the library environment	94%	Not available	85%	85%	85%	85%
Enable Aucklanders and communities to express themselves and improve their well-being through customer-centric advice, funding, facilitation and permitting	Percentage of funding/grant applicants satisfied with information, assistance and advice provided	35%	45%	75%	76%	78%	80%-82%
Deliver a variety of events, programmes and projects that improve safety, connect Aucklanders and engage them in their city and communities	Percentage of participants satisfied with council delivered local arts activities.	Not available	Not available	80%	85%	85%	85%
	Percentage of Aucklanders that feel connected to their neighbourhood and local community	Not available	Not available	75%	77%	79%	81%-83%
	Percentage of attendees satisfied with council delivered and funded local events	93%	90%	85%	85%	85%	85%
Provide safe, reliable and accessible social infrastructure for Aucklanders that contributes to placemaking and thriving communities	Percentage of Aucklanders that feel their local town centre is safe	Day: 88% Night: 46%	Day: 95% Night: 60%	Day: 88% Night: 47%	Day: 89% Night: 48%	Day: 89% Night: 49%	Day: 91% Night: 51%
	Facility Utilisation - utilisation at peak times and off-peak times for council managed community centres and venues for hire	Not available	Not available	TBD	TBD	TBD	TBD
	Percentage of community facilities bookings used for health and well-being related activity	Not available	Not available	20%-30%	20%-30%	20%-30%	20%-30%
	Number of visitors to community centres and venues for hire	41,728	Not available	42,550	42,968	43,389	43,814
Provide a range of recreational opportunities catering for community needs on local parks, reserves and beaches	Percentage of residents satisfied with the provision (quality, location and distribution) of local parks and reserves	TBD	76%	75%	75%	75%	75%
	Percentage of residents who visited a local park or reserve in last 12 months	93%	98%	90%	90%	90%	90%
Provide sports fields that are fit for purpose and cater for community needs.	Percentage of residents satisfied with the provision (quality, location and distribution) of sports fields	TBD	Not available	70%	70%	70%	70%
Provide programmes and facilities that ensure more Aucklanders are more active more often	Customers Net Promoter Score for Pool and Leisure Centres as a percentage	Not available	Not available	Not available	Not available	Not available	Not available

Waiheke LB

Level of service statement	Performance measure	Actual 2013/14	Annual / Long Term Plan targets
			2014/15	2015/16	2016/17	2017/18	2018/25
Develop local business precincts and town centres as great places to do business	Percentage of Business Associations meeting their Business Improvement District (BID) Partnership Programme obligations	Not available	Not applicable	Not applicable	Not applicable	Not applicable	Not applicable
Provide leadership & support to protect and conserve the region’s natural environment, historic heritage and Māori cultural heritage	Proportion of local programmes that deliver intended environmental actions and/or outcomes	TBD	Not available	80%	85%	90%	90%
Provide safe, accessible, welcoming library facilities that support the delivery of quality learning programmes and services relevant to local communities.	Use of libraries as digital community hubs: Number of internet sessions per capita (PC & WiFi)	2.8	Not available	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5
	Number of visits to library facilities per capita	11	Not available	10.0	10.0	10.0	10.0
	Percentage of customers satisfied with the quality of library service delivery	89%	Not available	85%	85%	85%	85%
	Percentage of visitors satisfied with the library environment	40%	Not available	85%	85%	85%	85%
Enable Aucklanders and communities to express themselves and improve their well-being through customer-centric advice, funding, facilitation and permitting	Percentage of funding/grant applicants satisfied with information, assistance and advice provided	52%	75%	75%	76%	78%	80%-82%
Deliver a variety of events, programmes and projects that improve safety, connect Aucklanders and engage them in their city and communities	Percentage of participants satisfied with council delivered local arts activities.	Not applicable	Not available	Not applicable	Not applicable	Not applicable	Not applicable
	Percentage of Aucklanders that feel connected to their neighbourhood and local community	Not available	Not available	80%	82%	84%	86%-88%
	Percentage of attendees satisfied with council delivered and funded local events	82%	85%	85%	85%	85%	85%
Provide safe, reliable and accessible social infrastructure for Aucklanders that contributes to placemaking and thriving communities	Percentage of Aucklanders that feel their local town centre is safe	Day: 94% Night: 82%	Day: 85% Night: 55%	Day: 94% Night: 82%	Day: 94% Night: 82%	Day: 95% Night: 83%	Day: 95% Night: 84%
	Facility Utilisation - utilisation at peak times and off-peak times for council managed community centres and venues for hire	Peak: 13% Off peak: 8%	Not available	Peak: 13% Off peak: 8%	Peak: 14% Off peak: 8%	Peak: 14% Off peak: 8%	Peak: 15% Off peak: 9%
	Percentage of community facilities bookings used for health and well-being related activity	Not available	Not available	20%-30%	20%-30%	20%-30%	20%-30%
	Number of visitors to community centres and venues for hire	27,195	Not available	27,731	28,003	28,277	28,555
Provide a range of recreational opportunities catering for community needs on local parks, reserves and beaches	Percentage of residents satisfied with the provision (quality, location and distribution) of local parks and reserves	TBD	75%	75%	75%	75%	75%
	Percentage of residents who visited a local park or reserve in last 12 months	95%	85%	90%	90%	90%	90%
Provide sports fields that are fit for purpose and cater for community needs.	Percentage of residents satisfied with the provision (quality, location and distribution) of sports fields	TBD	Not available	70%	70%	70%	70%
Provide programmes and facilities that ensure more Aucklanders are more active more often	Customers Net Promoter Score for Pool and Leisure Centres as a percentage	Not available	Not available	Not available	Not available	Not available	Not available

Waitakere Ranges LB

Level of service statement	Performance measure	Actual 2013/14	Annual / Long Term Plan targets
			2014/15	2015/16	2016/17	2017/18	2018/25
Develop local business precincts and town centres as great places to do business	Percentage of Business Associations meeting their Business Improvement District (BID) Partnership Programme obligations	100%	75%	100%	100%	100%	100%
Provide leadership & support to protect and conserve the region’s natural environment, historic heritage and Māori cultural heritage	Proportion of local programmes that deliver intended environmental actions and/or outcomes	TBD	Not available	80%	85%	90%	90%
Provide safe, accessible, welcoming library facilities that support the delivery of quality learning programmes and services relevant to local communities.	Use of libraries as digital community hubs: Number of internet sessions per capita (PC & WiFi)	1.9	Not available	1.5	1.5	1.5	1.5
	Number of visits to library facilities per capita	6.1	Not available	5.5	5.5	5.5	5.5
	Percentage of customers satisfied with the quality of library service delivery	92%	Not available	85%	85%	85%	85%
	Percentage of visitors satisfied with the library environment	92%	Not available	85%	85%	85%	85%
Enable Aucklanders and communities to express themselves and improve their well-being through customer-centric advice, funding, facilitation and permitting	Percentage of funding/grant applicants satisfied with information, assistance and advice provided	28%	75%	75%	76%	78%	80%-82%
Deliver a variety of events, programmes and projects that improve safety, connect Aucklanders and engage them in their city and communities	Percentage of participants satisfied with council delivered local arts activities.	Not available	Not available	80%	85%	85%	85%
	Percentage of Aucklanders that feel connected to their neighbourhood and local community	Not available	Not available	74%	76%	78%	80%-82%
	Percentage of attendees satisfied with council delivered and funded local events	92%	85%	85%	85%	85%	85%
Provide safe, reliable and accessible social infrastructure for Aucklanders that contributes to placemaking and thriving communities	Percentage of Aucklanders that feel their local town centre is safe	Day: 81% Night: 28%	Day: 85% Night: 55%	Day: 82% Night: 30%	Day: 83% Night: 32%	Day: 84% Night: 34%	Day: 86% Night: 37%
	Facility Utilisation - utilisation at peak times and off-peak times for council managed community centres and venues for hire	Peak: 30% Off peak: 18%	Not available	Peak: 31% Off peak: 19%	Peak: 31% Off peak: 19%	Peak: 32% Off peak: 19%	Peak: 33% Off peak: 20%
	Percentage of community facilities bookings used for health and well-being related activity	Not available	Not available	20%-30%	20%-30%	20%-30%	20%-30%
	Number of visitors to community centres and venues for hire	62,189	Not available	120,498	121,679	122,872	124,077
Provide a range of recreational opportunities catering for community needs on local parks, reserves and beaches	Percentage of residents satisfied with the provision (quality, location and distribution) of local parks and reserves	TBD	75%	75%	75%	75%	75%
	Percentage of residents who visited a local park or reserve in last 12 months	91%	80%	90%	90%	90%	90%
Provide sports fields that are fit for purpose and cater for community needs.	Percentage of residents satisfied with the provision (quality, location and distribution) of sports fields	TBD	Not available	70%	70%	70%	70%
Provide programmes and facilities that ensure more Aucklanders are more active more often	Customers Net Promoter Score for Pool and Leisure Centres as a percentage	Not available	Not available	Not available	Not available	Not available	Not available

Waitemata LB

Level of service statement	Performance measure	Actual 2013/14	Annual / Long Term Plan targets
			2014/15	2015/16	2016/17	2017/18	2018/25
Develop local business precincts and town centres as great places to do business	Percentage of Business Associations meeting their Business Improvement District (BID) Partnership Programme obligations	100%	100%	100%	100%	100%	100%
Provide leadership & support to protect and conserve the region’s natural environment, historic heritage and Māori cultural heritage	Proportion of local programmes that deliver intended environmental actions and/or outcomes	TBD	Not available	80%	85%	90%	90%
Provide safe, accessible, welcoming library facilities that support the delivery of quality learning programmes and services relevant to local communities.	Use of libraries as digital community hubs: Number of internet sessions per capita (PC & WiFi)	10.0	Not available	8	8	8	8
	Number of visits to library facilities per capita	19	Not available	14	14	14	14
	Percentage of customers satisfied with the quality of library service delivery	92%	Not available	85%	85%	85%	85%
	Percentage of visitors satisfied with the library environment	90%	Not available	85%	85%	85%	85%
Enable Aucklanders and communities to express themselves and improve their well-being through customer-centric advice, funding, facilitation and permitting	Percentage of funding/grant applicants satisfied with information, assistance and advice provided	52%	75%	75%	76%	78%	80%-82%
Deliver a variety of events, programmes and projects that improve safety, connect Aucklanders and engage them in their city and communities	Percentage of participants satisfied with council delivered local arts activities.	89%	Not available	90%	90%	90%	90%
	Percentage of Aucklanders that feel connected to their neighbourhood and local community	Not available	Not available	74%	76%	78%	80%-82%
	Percentage of attendees satisfied with council delivered and funded local events	84%	85%	85%	85%	85%	85%
Provide safe, reliable and accessible social infrastructure for Aucklanders that contributes to placemaking and thriving communities	Percentage of Aucklanders that feel their local town centre is safe	Day: 85% Night: 34%	Day: 85% Night: 55%	Day: 86% Night: 35%	Day: 87% Night: 36%	Day: 88% Night: 37%	Day: 90% Night: 39%
	Facility Utilisation - utilisation at peak times and off-peak times for council managed community centres and venues for hire	Peak:25% Off peak: 10%	Not available	Peak:25% Off peak: 10%	Peak:26% Off peak: 10%	Peak:26% Off peak: 11%	Peak:27% Off peak: 12%
	Percentage of community facilities bookings used for health and well-being related activity	Not available	Not available	20%-30%	20%-30%	20%-30%	20%-30%
	Number of visitors to community centres and venues for hire	532,050	Not available	542,535	547,854	553,226	558,650
Provide a range of recreational opportunities catering for community needs on local parks, reserves and beaches	Percentage of residents satisfied with the provision (quality, location and distribution) of local parks and reserves	TBD	81%	75%	75%	75%	75%
	Percentage of residents who visited a local park or reserve in last 12 months	95%	93%	90%	90%	90%	90%
Provide sports fields that are fit for purpose and cater for community needs.	Percentage of residents satisfied with the provision (quality, location and distribution) of sports fields	TBD	Not available	70%	70%	70%	70%
Provide programmes and facilities that ensure more Aucklanders are more active more often	Customers Net Promoter Score for Pool and Leisure Centres as a percentage	TBD	Not available	15%	15%	15%	15%

Whau LB

Level of service statement	Performance measure	Actual 2013/14	Annual / Long Term Plan targets
			2014/15	2015/16	2016/17	2017/18	2018/25
Develop local business precincts and town centres as great places to do business	Percentage of Business Associations meeting their Business Improvement District (BID) Partnership Programme obligations	Not available	75%	100%	100%	100%	100%
Provide leadership & support to protect and conserve the region’s natural environment, historic heritage and Māori cultural heritage	Proportion of local programmes that deliver intended environmental actions and/or outcomes	TBD	Not available	80%	85%	90%	90%
Provide safe, accessible, welcoming library facilities that support the delivery of quality learning programmes and services relevant to local communities.	Use of libraries as digital community hubs: Number of internet sessions per capita (PC & WiFi)	2.9	Not available	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5
	Number of visits to library facilities per capita	9.4	Not available	7.5	7.5	7.5	7.5
	Percentage of customers satisfied with the quality of library service delivery	92%	Not available	85%	85%	85%	85%
	Percentage of visitors satisfied with the library environment	92%	Not available	85%	85%	85%	85%
Enable Aucklanders and communities to express themselves and improve their well-being through customer-centric advice, funding, facilitation and permitting	Percentage of funding/grant applicants satisfied with information, assistance and advice provided	36%	75%	75%	76%	78%	80%-82%
Deliver a variety of events, programmes and projects that improve safety, connect Aucklanders and engage them in their city and communities	Percentage of participants satisfied with council delivered local arts activities.	Not available	Not available	80%	85%	85%	85%
	Percentage of Aucklanders that feel connected to their neighbourhood and local community	Not available	Not available	70%	72%	74%	76%-78%
	Percentage of attendees satisfied with council delivered and funded local events	71%	85%	85%	85%	85%	85%
Provide safe, reliable and accessible social infrastructure for Aucklanders that contributes to placemaking and thriving communities	Percentage of Aucklanders that feel their local town centre is safe	Day: 77% Night: 24%	Day: 85% Night: 55%	Day: 78% Night: 26%	Day: 79% Night: 28%	Day: 80% Night: 29%	Day: 82% Night: 31%
	Facility Utilisation - utilisation at peak times and off-peak times for council managed community centres and venues for hire	Peak: 26% Off peak: 14%	Not available	Peak: 27% Off peak: 15%	Peak: 27% Off peak: 15%	Peak: 27% Off peak: 15%	Peak: 28% Off peak: 16%
	Percentage of community facilities bookings used for health and well-being related activity	Not available	Not available	20%-30%	20%-30%	20%-30%	20%-30%
	Number of visitors to community centres and venues for hire	231,619	Not available	248,162	250,596	253,053	255,534
Provide a range of recreational opportunities catering for community needs on local parks, reserves and beaches	Percentage of residents satisfied with the provision (quality, location and distribution) of local parks and reserves	TBD	75%	75%	75%	75%	75%
	Percentage of residents who visited a local park or reserve in last 12 months	92%	80%	90%	90%	90%	90%
Provide sports fields that are fit for purpose and cater for community needs.	Percentage of residents satisfied with the provision (quality, location and distribution) of sports fields	TBD	Not available	70%	70%	70%	70%
Provide programmes and facilities that ensure more Aucklanders are more active more often	Customers Net Promoter Score for Pool and Leisure Centres as a percentage	TBD	Not available	15%	15%	15%	15%

Budget Committee 18 November 2014

Significance and Engagement Policy

File No.: CP2014/25969

Purpose

1.       To report on the feedback received on the draft Significance and Engagement Policy and revisions made in response to that feedback.

2.       To recommend that the Governing Body adopt the Significance and Engagement policy.

Executive summary

3.       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.

4.       Feedback was received from around 50 members of the public and 30 community organisations and agencies. In addition, feedback was received from five tribal authorities.

5.       The feedback ranged from support for the draft policy, through to requests for both substantive and specific changes. In addition, there was considerable feedback about how the council should apply the policy which will be used in updating the engagement guidelines that support this policy.

6.       Key changes that have been made in response to local boards, mana whenua, stakeholder and community feedback are:

·        Affirming the council’s commitment to engagement – whether or not the decision is identified as being significant

·        Introducing a new section on engagement with Māori

·        Adding information about Auckland’s diverse communities

·        Providing more detail on communications and engagement approaches to aid clarity

·        Adding a new section on sources of information and a glossary

Recommendation/s

That the Budget Committee:

a)      receive the feedback report on the draft Significance and Engagement Policy and approve the revisions made as a result of that feedback

b)      note that not all local board feedback has been received but will be included as part of the report to the Governing Body

c)      authorise the Chair and the lead officer to be able to make minor changes to the policy based on analysis of further local board input or minor amendments

d)      recommend that the Governing Body adopt the Significance and Engagement Policy (as amended).

Comments

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.     The council consulted on the draft S&E policy applying section 82 and 82A of the LGA (there was no requirement to use the SCP). It was published on Shape Auckland and was promoted through:

·        Media releases and interviews on two ethnic radio stations

·        Regional and local board stakeholder mailing lists

·        Social media activities including a new app Town Hall Social

·        Deaf Radio - a sign language version of the draft policy and ability to make sign language submissions

·        Internally through the intranet, news item and the consultation and engagement network

12.     Local boards helped to identify organisations to hold face to face meetings with. There were also workshops with all advisory panels and attendance at the mana whenua information hui plus a follow-up meeting and workshop with representatives. 

Summary of feedback received and recommended revisions

13.     Feedback was received from around 50 members of the public and 30 community organisations and agencies. In addition, feedback was received from five tribal authorities.

14.     The feedback ranged from support for the draft policy, through to requests for both substantive and specific changes. In addition, there was considerable feedback about how the council should apply the policy which will be used in updating the engagement guidelines that support this policy. The attached feedback summary report shows the major topic areas in the respondents’ feedback that relate to the policy, a brief description of each of the topic areas and officer recommendations.

15.     Key changes that have been made in response to local boards, mana whenua, stakeholder and community feedback are:

·        Affirming the council’s commitment to engagement – whether or not the decision is identified as being significant

·        Introducing a new section on Māori

·        Adding information about Auckland’s diverse communities

·        Providing more detail on communications and engagement approaches to aid clarity

·        Adding a new section on sources of information and a glossary

Consideration

Local board views and implications

16.     Local boards have a statutory role of identifying and communicating the views of the community on regional strategies, policies, plans and bylaws of the council.  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. While the policy applies to local boards, the development of the Significance and Engagement Policy is not intended to constrain or restrict this role.

17.     Workshops have been held with local boards to discuss the draft policy and the draft policy was discussed at business meetings.

18.     Resolutions have been received from most local boards but a few are still finalizing their responses.

19.     In general, local boards endorsed the principle led approach taken in drafting the policy, agreed that the development of guidelines will support the policy and the sharing of best practice and requested that staff make use of local boards extensive community engagement experience to inform the development of the guidelines.

20.     Other feedback is included in the attached report.

Māori impact statement

21.     Auckland Council recognize that Māori need to be engaged in a meaningful way. The Treaty of Waitangi Audit 2012 and the Auckland Council Guide on Engaging with Māori were considered during the development of the draft policy. Discussions were also held with staff from the Independent Māori Statutory Board.

22.     The draft policy was presented at an information hui that was attended by representatives from 10 tribal authorities and followed up with a workshop. Feedback has been received from Te Uri o Hau, the Ngati Tamaoho Trust, Ngati Manuhiri, Ngati Te Ata, Nga Maunga Whakahii o Kaipara Development Trust.

23.     In general, mana whenua feedback has emphasized the importance of ensuring that the policy reflects that engagement with mana whenua is different to engagement with the public and that the principles, methods and relationship needed to be clearer to the wider public.

24.     Other feedback is included in the attached report.

Implementation

25.     During the consultation process, feedback was received on how the council could improve its engagement processes. This feedback will be reflected on during the redevelopment of the engagement guidelines and the Guide on engaging with Māori.

26.     Discussions with advisory panels have helped to form new guidelines on inclusive engagement, engaging with the ethnic community, the pacific community and with youth.

27.     The guidelines are expected to be finalised over the coming months and launched early next year.

28.     A key concern raised during the consultation was about sharing data from past consultations so that we start from a position of knowing what has been said in the past. Ways of managing, analysing and sharing consultation feedback are currently being explored.

29.     Evaluation and ongoing monitoring was also an issue raised during the consultation.

·        The council already measures satisfaction with consultation as part of Annual Reporting metrics and it is not anticipated that further monitoring is required.

·        The council holds an annual awards event for consultation and engagement as a way of recognising good practice.

·        Evaluation is carried out for large consultations and it is anticipated that there will be more regular evaluation carried out and shared internally to help improve practice.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
aView	Significance and Engagement Policy	95
bView	Summary of feedback	119

Signatories

Authors	Carol Hayward - Senior Specialist Engagement & Consultation
Authorisers	Karl Ferguson - Communication & Engagement Director Kevin Ramsay - Chief Financial Officer

Budget Committee 18 November 2014

Budget Committee 18 November 2014

Budget Committee 18 November 2014

· Table of Contents

1 Place holder for a Mihi 4

2 Context 5

3 Engaging Auckland’s communities. 6

4 Consultation requirements. 13

5 Applying the policy. 18

Appendix 1 – Auckland Council’s decision-making. 20

Appendix 2 – Definitions. 21

1        Place holder for a Mihi

2        Context

Introduction

Auckland Council’s new Significance and Engagement Policy is effective from 1 December 2014. This policy is required under the Local Government Act 2002 (the LGA).

The policy:

·    identifies how and when communities can expect to be engaged in, or specifically consulted on, decisions about issues, proposals, assets, decisions and activities;

·    enables the council and our communities to understand the significance that Council places on certain issues, proposals, assets, decisions, and activities.

The council considers community views and preferences when making decisions.  We gather information about the views and preferences of Auckland’s diverse communities in many ways and use this information to inform our decisions. We consult or engage on a wide range of specific decisions because we recognise how important they are to our communities, or because we are required to by statute.

We view engagement as a genuine dialogue with our diverse communities to help us make better decisions.  Public input is important in ensuring our decisions reflect the aspirations of mana whenua, residents, ratepayers, community groups and businesses.

We are committed to meeting our broad legal obligations to Māori including responsibilities under Te Tiriti o Waitangi, the Treaty of Waitangi. The council recognises these responsibilities are distinct from the Crown’s and fall within a local government Tāmaki Makaurau context.  We also recognise the enduring presence, aspirations, and cultural obligations of mana whenua as kaitiaki (stewards) in Tāmaki Makaurau. 

Auckland Council works with the Independent Māori Statutory Board on matters that affect Māori, and takes into account their advice.

Auckland’s increasing diversity is an important consideration for many engagement processes and we regularly refine our tools and methods so that we can engage more effectively with groups and communities who have often been less involved in council decisions.

The Significance and Engagement Policy applies across the council group including to our Council Controlled Organisations (CCOs) through the CCO Accountability Policy.

3        Engaging Auckland’s communities

Effective community engagement is central to the success of Auckland Council

Auckland’s Thriving Communities Action Plan identifies that thriving communities have citizens who care about, and want to participate in, their democracy. The council will actively seek to improve opportunities for engagement and demonstrate how public input has influenced decisions.

The council engages with communities on a number of levels including as customers, citizens, ratepayers, subject matter experts and as partners. For the purposes of this policy, the use of the term communities is used to reflect these different roles and includes mana whenua, stakeholders, residents and ratepayers.

The mayor has a responsibility to ensure there is effective community engagement. Local boards are also responsible for communicating with local communities to help inform local decision making and communicate local views to the governing body on regional issues.

As well as carrying out consultation on certain decisions, we will seek to establish ongoing relationships with our communities to provide opportunities for matters to be raised which are not currently under consultation.  We may do this in a variety of ways including having a presence at markets and public spaces, through our ongoing conversation channels such as those below, front line staff, workshops and community events.

In general, the council aims to keep the community informed of opportunities to be engaged through:

·     digital approaches such as email newsletters and social media;

·     Shape Auckland (the council’s website for consultations);

·     advertisements and articles in the media;

·     information and displays in libraries and service centres; and

·     the council’s newsletter, Our Auckland.

·     the People’s Panel – a survey-based mailing list 

Consultation and engagement is about an ongoing conversation with Aucklanders. It takes many shapes and forms through a variety of channels including:

3.1      Māori

Auckland Council has duties, obligations, and commitments to Māori and to the Independent Māori Statutory Board (IMSB).  Where appropriate, these guide our decision-making including on matters of significance and our engagement approach.

Our duties, obligations, and commitments are to:

·     consider the recognition and protection of Māori rights and interests within Tāmaki Makaurau, Auckland

·     consider Treaty principles

·     enable Māori participation in the council’s decision-making processes

·     recognise Māori cultural values and perspectives including mātauranga Māori (Māori knowledge), tikanga (Māori principles and protocols) and kaitiakitanga (Māori stewardship)

·     contribute to Māori capacity

·     enable and promote Māori well-being

·     work with and take into account the advice of the IMSB.

Māori in Auckland includes mana whenua and mataawaka.  Mana whenua are the indigenous population who have occupied the region for almost a millennium, made up of iwi and hapū of Tāmaki Makaurau, Auckland. The council recognises 19 tribal authorities as representing mana whenua interests in Tāmaki Makaurau.

Mataawaka are Māori whose tribal affiliations are from outside Auckland and are part of the wider Māori community as residents and ratepayers.

Auckland Council acknowledges that it has different requirements for engaging with mana whenua and mataawaka.

In addition to meeting our statutory requirements, where appropriate we aim to achieve best practice in working with mana whenua as partners. Māori are best placed to express and advocate their cultural interests, values and mātauranga (traditional knowledge). We aim to ensure due weight is given to Māori cultural interests, values, and mātauranga in the exercise of their cultural obligations as kaitiaki.

3.2      Diverse and changing communities

Around twenty per cent of Aucklanders have some kind of access need. This includes, but is not limited to, people with visual, hearing or literacy impairments and those who speak English as a second language.

The Census 2013 results show:

·    Nearly 60 per cent of Aucklanders identified as European. This is a relatively low proportion when compared to New Zealand as a whole (74 per cent). Within this group we include New Zealand European or Pakeha, British, Irish, Dutch, Australian and German peoples.

·    Just over 23 per cent of Aucklanders identified with an Asian ethnicity, a much higher proportion than for New Zealand as a whole (11.8 per cent), and higher than recorded at the previous census. Within this group we include Chinese, Indian, Korean, Filipino and Sri Lankan peoples.

·    Nearly 15 per cent of Aucklanders identified as Pacific peoples with Fijian and Tongan showing the biggest increases since the 2006 Census.

·    While Auckland has a younger population than many other parts of New Zealand, there was also a 26.9 per cent increase in the number of residents who were aged 65 years and over between 2006 and 2013.

In any engagement programme we will consider how to meet the needs of our communities in respect of language, accessibility and cultural expectations.

3.3      Engagement principles

The LGA lists principles we are expected to meet. When we engage with the community, there are a number of good practice measures listed that the council will follow to meet some of those principles. We have set these out in this section.

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, we will:

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

·     ensure options are realistic and deliverable when presenting them for community feedback

·     ensure questions are objective (i.e. not leading), allowing people to express their views freely

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

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

·     value contributions made and time given

·     give timely feedback on the results of the 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, we will:

·     build ongoing relationships with communities through a range of approaches such as advisory panels, the People’s Panel, reference groups and forums, mana whenua and mataawaka hui

·     provide the community with a reasonable opportunity to present their views, and actively consider the best way to engage with 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 the 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, we 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

·     invest in community capacity building to enable participation when required

·     use plain language and avoid jargon and acronyms

·     make the process of engagement inclusive and accessible

·     consider how to meet other community needs  in respect of language, accessibility and cultural expectations.

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

To meet this principle we will:

·     recognise the enduring presence, aspirations, and cultural obligations of mana whenua as kaitiaki (stewards) in Tāmaki Makaurau

·     actively consider the recognition and protection of Māori rights and interests within Tāmaki Makaurau and how we contribute to the needs and aspirations of Māori

·     where a significant decision relates to land or a body of water, take into account the relationship of Māori, and their culture and traditions with their ancestral land, water, sites, waahi tapu, valued flora and fauna, and other taonga

·     ensure all council reports consider impacts on Māori

·     establish and maintain processes to provide opportunities for Māori to contribute to our decision-making processes including partnership approaches where appropriate

·     support Māori to fully engage with us, for example through ( but not limited to) capability and capacity building

·     build ongoing relationships with Māori through a range of approaches that enables:

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

·     Māori to guide how they want to engage with the council.

A local authority should ensure prudent stewardship and the efficient and effective use of its resources in the interests of its district or region, including by planning effectively for the future management of its assets; and

To meet this principle, we will:

·      consider the appropriateness of the engagement approach for the particular decision being made

3.4  Methods for engagement

This policy sets out the engagement and decision-making principles which we will follow; our statutory consultation requirements; and explains how we will go about determining significance. 

All of these matters guide and inform the level and type of engagement that council will undertake for any particular issue. The International Association of Public Participation (IAP2) (set out below) indicates different engagement approaches on a spectrum from providing information through to community empowerment. 

IAP2 Spectrum of Public Participation

Auckland Council will seek opportunities to involve or collaborate with our communities, such as through place-making initiatives and community-led planning.

The type and nature of the decision also guides how the council will go about communicating with and engaging with our communities. This table provides an indicative guide to this:

Type or nature of decision	Examples of how we may engage
Small and simple (low significance) (e.g. redevelopment of community halls, park improvements, footpath and road works)	Localised promotion, for example, through display boards and local media. Targeted engagement, for example through service users where appropriate. Promotion through e-newsletters and social media. Information online and in local libraries and service centres. Surveys and open days may also be appropriate.
Medium (e.g. cycle lanes, works on main roads, action plans, local area plans)	Targeted engagement, online engagement which may include a survey and social media. Hui or events. Information in libraries and service centres. Promotion through e-newsletters, the local media or through OurAuckland.
Large or complex (high significance) (e.g. major new roads, changes to the passenger transport network, Local Alcohol Policy, Long-term Plan)	Large-scale publicity and promotion. There could be an informal engagement/ discussion phase plus a formal phase of consultation. Likely to need consideration of different cultural styles and needs for engagement. Likely to include a range of events and a focus on online activities. Promotion through OurAuckland and e-newsletters.

4        Consultation requirements

The council must consider the community’s views and preferences in all decisions we make.  We gather information about the views and preferences of Auckland’s diverse communities in many ways and use this information to inform our decisions.  Consultation is one form of engagement. We will consult our communities on certain decisions because we recognise how important they are to our communities, or because we are required to by statute. Consultation processes under the LGA have been amended and now allow the council greater flexibility in how we go about consulting with our communities.

The council regularly consults communities through processes such as the local board plans and the Long-term Plan which determine council’s strategic direction at a local and regional level, as well as how we prioritise projects and set budgets.  In addition, we consult on a wide range of operational issues such as park upgrades and service improvement.

The LGA contains principles which guide our consultation process. These are set out below. The LGA refers to consultation in two different but closely related ways: ‘consultation’ and the ‘special consultative procedure’ (SCP).  As the name implies, the ‘special consultative procedure’ is a particular kind of consultation.  This is discussed further below.

This policy sets out what a “significant” decision is (see below at 4.3).

We can also decide to consult at any time on any decision, where we consider that this is appropriate. For most council decisions, there is no express requirement to consult the public, but we will consider people’s views and preferences.

4.1      Consultation (Section 82/82A of the LGA)

Before the council makes a significant decision, the council will consult the public, following the principles set out at section 82 of the LGA. In practice, this means that we will:

·     identify people who will be affected by or have an interest in the decision;

·     provide them with reasonable access to relevant information in an appropriate format on the process and scope of the decision;

·     encourage people to give their views;

·     give people a reasonable opportunity to give their views in an appropriate way;

·     listen to, and consider those views, with an open mind; and

·     after the decision, provide access to the decision and any other relevant material.

This policy sets out what a “significant” decision is (see below at 3.3).

When the LGA requires us to consult on a particular draft policy or decision, then we will prepare and make available:

·     a description of what we want to do, and why;

·     an analysis of the practical options (with advantages and disadvantages);

·     a draft of the policy or relevant document (or details of the changes to any policy or document).

This is set out in section 82A of the LGA.

4.2      Special consultative procedure (SCP)

Part 6 of the LGA specifies the use of the special consultative procedure (SCP) for some plans and processes, including:

·     long-term plan

·     local board plans

·     setting rates

·     bylaws of significant interest to the public or of significant impact

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 (see section 3.3 below).  In addition to the consultation principles listed above, under the SCP, we must:

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

·     allow feedback for a minimum of a month;

·     ensure people are given an opportunity to present their views to the council through spoken interaction (or using sign language).

4.3      Determining Significance

This section describes:

·     the council’s general approach to determining the significance of proposals and decisions;

·     any thresholds, criteria or procedures for assessing the extent to which issues are significant;

·     the council’s list of ‘strategic assets’. This is a requirement under the LGA.

General approach to determining significance

The governing body and local boards will consider the following matters when determining the degree of significance of a decision

·     The number of people affected, the degree to which they are affected and the likely impact of a decision,

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

·     The impact of the decision on governing body or local board ability to deliver on actions that contribute to the Auckland Plan, as well as any statutory responsibility,

·     The impact of the decision on intended service levels for a group of activities, including the start/or stop of any group of activity,

·     The degree to which the decision or proposal can be reversed should circumstances warrant.

Thresholds

The council’s thresholds relevant to determining significance are:

·     creating a new group of activity;

·     stopping carrying out a group of activity;

·     increasing (by 33 per cent or more) or decreasing (by 20 per cent decrease or more) spending on a group of activity;

·     transferring the ownership or control of our strategic assets.

 Where a decision meets this criteria it will be “significant” and will automatically trigger a requirement to consult.

Strategic assets

Our strategic assets are those vital for delivering services to Auckland. We consider them as whole networks because it is the asset class as a whole that delivers the service. A network includes components which are integral to the functioning of the network as a whole. We also have some iconic assets with strategic significance. In addition, the LGA determines that shares in a port/airport company and assets required to provide affordable housing as part of the council’s social policy are strategic.

Our strategic assets are:

·    public transport network, including Britomart

·    roading network

·    stormwater network

·    water and wastewater network

·    parks network

·    network of swimming pools

·    network of community centres and halls

·    community library network

·    cemeteries, heritage scheduled buildings and structures

·    freehold interest in waterfront land held by the Ports of Auckland Limited and the Auckland Waterfront Development Agency

·    shares in substantive CCOs

·    Auckland Central Library and the historical library collection

·    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)

·    social housing network including housing for the elderly

·    shares in Auckland International Airport Limited

·    shares in Ports of Auckland Limited.

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 that policy when making decisions on strategic assets under their control.

Other matters relating to significance

Where a significant decision is in relation to land or a body of water we will take into account the relationship of Māori, and their culture and traditions with their ancestral land, water, sites, waahi tapū, valued flora and fauna, and other taonga.

All reports by officers to the council, a council committee or a local board which are seeking a decision will include a statement addressing the issue of significance. If the proposal is considered to be significant the report will include a statement about how the relevant sections of the LGA and this Significance and Engagement Policy have been addressed.

The Significance and Engagement Policy will not apply 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. The LGA separately sets out a process for the council to follow if the council has a good reason to make a decision significantly inconsistent with this policy.

Bylaws

When we are making, changing or revoking a council bylaw, we will follow the SCP consultation process if the bylaw is:

·     of significant interest to the public (the general significance criteria listed above will apply here); or

·     likely to have a significant impact on the public.

For all other council bylaw matters we will consult following the principles in section 82.

5        Applying the policy

5.1      Supporting information

The following have been developed to support staff implement the policy:

·     The Consultation and Engagement Guidebook 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.

In addition, the council provides regular engagement training opportunities through the International Association of Public Participation and there is a consultation and engagement network which was established as a way of sharing good practice, lessons learned and to support those who regularly engage with the community.

5.2  Reference material

There are many sources of information that help to guide the council on what is already known about community views and preferences. This includes, but is not limited to:

·     Local board plans

·     Submissions on the council’s other strategic documents

·     IMSB’s Māori Plan and Issues of Significance

·     Iwi management plans

·     Past consultation and market research data

·     People’s Panel survey results

5.3  Policy development and monitoring

This policy is effective from 1 December 2014 and will be incorporated into the Long-term Plan (in summary form). The council will monitor the effectiveness of the policy as part of the annual reporting process by measuring satisfaction with the decision-making process.

5.4      Managing conflicts of interest

We have a code of conduct to help guide elected representatives and staff to manage conflicts of interest within the engagement and decision-making process.

5.5      Other legislation

The Resource Management Act 1991 sets out processes for public involvement in certain decisions, for example for resource consents and preparing and changing district plans. Not all of these decisions are required to be publicly notified but when they are, we will follow the relevant legal provisions.

There are specific processes under different legislation for certain policies (for example, under the Gambling Act, Sale and Supply of Alcohol Act or Psychoactive Substances Act). Some of these have specific consultation requirements. When consulting on these policies, the council will set out clearly the consultation process that will be followed.

5.6  For more information

Visit Shape Auckland to find out more about the council’s consultation and engagement process. For more information:

·     Go to: shapeauckland.co.nz

·     Email: consultation@aucklandcouncil.govt.nz

·     Phone us: 09 301 0101

Appendix 1 – Auckland Council’s decision-making

Local government is charged with enabling democratic local decision-making and action by, and on behalf of, communities. Our governing body makes regional decisions while local boards make local decisions. Local boards also have a key role in identifying and communicating the views of local communities on regional strategies, policies, plans and bylaws to the governing body.

5.7      The mayor and governing body

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.

The mayor is responsible for ensuring effective engagement with Aucklanders, including those too young to vote. We have a number of advisory panels to provide us with advice on issues of importance to their communities (youth, ethnic people, pacific people, seniors, disability, rural) and to advise on effective engagement with those communities.

5.8      Local boards

With regard to community engagement and consultation, they 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.

Appendix 2 – Definitions

Term	Definition
Governing body	The term used to refer to the mayor and councillors
Group of activities	One or more related activities and services provided by the Auckland Council and, where appropriate, the activities and services provided by those entities that comprise the Auckland Council Group (including all subsidiaries, associates and joint venture arrangements). For example, water supply or public transport travel demand management
Hapū	A number of whānau related through a common ancestor – section of a large kinship group
Hui	To meet, meeting
IAP2	The International Association of Public Participation is a member association which seeks to promote and improve the practice of public participation or community engagement
Independent Māori Statutory Board	A board established through statute (Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009) to assist the 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 mataawaka of Tāmaki Makaurau, and by ensuring that the council acts in accordance with statutory provisions referring to the Treaty of Waitangi
Iwi	A number of hapū related through a common ancestor
Iwi management plans	Documents prepared by iwi that councils must consider when developing or amending RMA plans
Kaitiaki	Steward, guardian
Local board	Auckland's 21 local boards are a key part of the council's governance, representing and making decisions for local communities
LGA	Local Government Act 2002
Mana whenua	The people of the land who have mana or customary authority – their historical, cultural and genealogical heritage are attached to the land and sea
Mataawaka	Māori whose tribal affiliations are from outside the Auckland region
People’s Panel	The People’s Panel is a way for Aucklanders to have their say on the council's plans, activities and services by taking part in short emailed surveys
SCP	Special Consultative Procedure is a particular kind of consultation defined by the LGA
Shape Auckland	The council’s website for all consultation information (shapeauckland.co.nz)
Te Tiriti o Waitangi	The Māori language version of the Treaty of Waitangi: this differs in parts to the English version
Tāmaki Makaurau	The Māori name for Auckland
Taonga	A treasured item: it can be tangible or intangible
Tikanga	Principles and protocols
Waahi tapu	Sacred ancestral sites and places of significance to iwi, hapū or whanau
Whānau	Family, extended family

Budget Committee 18 November 2014

Budget Committee 18 November 2014

December 2014

Budget Committee 18 November 2014

Draft Significance and Engagement Policy - Feedback summary report

Local Board	Resolution	Recommendation
Albert-Eden	That the Albert-Eden Local Board: a) Endorses the principle-led approach taken to the drafting the policy; b) Requests that two statements be added under the principles on page 10: i) “Be pro-active to maximise participation from all parts of the community in an effort to ensure that the feedback received is broadly representative of the community’s views”;   ii) “Commit to on-going investigation of innovative ways to increase awareness of council business (including that of local boards) and of innovative ways to engage with communities”. c) Requests that a reference to community-led approach be explicitly made in the policy; d) Requests that the policy be applicable across the Auckland Council family, including to the council-controlled organisations; e) Agrees that the development of consultation and engagement guidelines for Auckland Council will support the policy and the sharing of best practice; f) Requests that the guidelines provide practical examples of good and bad practices; g) Requests that staff make use of local boards’ extensive community engagement experience to inform the development of the guidelines.	Noted. Some amendments have been made to the policy to reflect points in (b)
Devonport - Takapuna	The Devonport-Takapuna Local Board (the Board) supports most aspects of the Significance and Engagement Policy. In particular, the Board has comments on the following: Engagement principles - The Board agrees with the engagement principles outlined in the policy. The Devonport-Takapuna board area is an engaged community and the Board values opportunities to interact with the public on issues of significance. Consultation outcomes - Information on outcomes is lacking in this policy. There is no mention of what indicators Council will use to determine whether the policy is effective.  There is also no mention of how Council will review their levels of engagement. Reviewing the outcomes of the engagement policy is a vital method for determining whether it has achieved its aim. Methods of engagement - The framework for engagement (Inform, Consult, Involve, Collaborate, and Empower) is straight-forward and aligns with the Board’s current consultation approach. Breaking consultation projects down into simple and complex projects should be useful and reduce over-consulting on smaller issues.  Building relationships through engagement - Valuing people’s time and contribution is essential. There is a need to ensure that any engagement is done in a timely and succinct way to avoid engagement overload, leading to public apathy and disengagement with Council.  Conclusion - The Board is supportive of the Significance and Engagement Policy. It agrees that the principle and methods of engagement are practical and applicable. The Board emphasizes that it still wishes to maintain the flexibility and influence to consult in a manner that suits the situation.	Noted. Amendments have been made to reflect comments relating to consultation outcomes
Franklin	a) That the Franklin Local Board endorses the principle-led approach taken in the policy of the draft Significance and Engagement Policy; b) That the Franklin Local Board agrees that the development of consultation and engagement guidelines for Auckland Council will support the policy and the sharing of best practice based on learnings from previous consultation; c) That the Franklin Local Board supports local boards having a flexible approach to tailor consultation for each issue or decision appropriate to local communities; d) That the Franklin Local Board requests that staff make use of local boards’ extensive community engagement experience to inform the development of the guidelines and use local networks to connect with the community.	Noted
Henderson - Massey	That the Henderson-Massey Local Board: a) Provides the following feedback on the draft Auckland Council Significance and Engagement Policy: i. Endorses the principle-led approach taken to the drafting the policy; ii. Agrees that the development of consultation and engagement guidelines for Auckland Council will support the policy and the sharing of best practice; iii. Requests that staff make use of local boards’ extensive community engagement experience to inform the development of the guidelines.	Noted
Hibiscus and Bays	That the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board: a) provides the following feedback on the draft significance engagement policy: i) Endorse the principal-led  approach taken to drafting the policy; ii) Agree that the development of consultation and engagement guidelines for Auckland Council will support the policy and the sharing of best practice; iii) Request that staff make use of local board’s extensive community engagement experience to inform the development of the guidelines.	Noted
Mangere-Otahuhu	That the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board provides the following feedback on the draft significance and engagement policy: a) Endorses the principle-led approach taken to the drafting of the policy. b) Agrees that the development of consultation and engagement guidelines for Auckland Council will support the policy and the sharing of best practice. c) Requests that staff make use of the extensive community engagement experience of the local boards and Local Board Services to inform the development of guidelines and action points.  d) Supports the development of mechanisms to engage and build understanding with those communities who are typically heard from least often.	Noted
Maungakiekie-Tamaki	That the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board: a) endorses the draft policy based on the following principles from the Local Government Act which state that a local authority should: i) conduct business in an open, transparent, and democratically accountable manner; and give effect to its identified priorities and outcomes in an efficient and effective manner; ii) make itself aware of, and have regard to, the views of all its communities; iii) when making a decision, take account of the diversity of the community, and of  the community’s interests; and the interests of future as well as current communities; and the likely impact of any decision on them; iv) provide opportunities for Māori to contribute to its decision-making process. b) notes that the development of consultation and engagement guidelines for Auckland Council will support the policy and the sharing of best practice. c) requests that local boards be involved in the development of the guidelines which will support the delivery of the policy, given their extensive community engagement experience and their responsibility to engage with the community. d) requests that consultation timeframes be reflective of the complexity of the topic being consulted on and, where possible, of the impact of recognised holiday periods on the ability of people to contribute to the consultation process.	Noted
Orakei	That the Orākei Local Board: a) receives the Significance and Engagement Policy report; b) endorses the principle-led approach taken to the drafting the policy; c) would like the policy to include: i) A reference to the generally low levels of public engagement achieved using past consultation and engagement methods since Auckland Council was established, in order to provide a more compelling context for stronger engagement; ii) Two additional engagement principles at 4.1 on page 9: a) ‘present consultation issues and options in such a way which captures people’s attention’ so as to ensure council engagement achieves greater cut-through than is currently the case b) ‘conducts engagement in a cost effective way but which is aimed at achieving much higher levels of engagement than in the past’; iii) A sentence on the council’s commitment to build capacity for community groups to ensure the community is well prepared to engage with Auckland Council on page 10; iv) An explanation as to what ‘Māori community infrastructure’ refers to on page 10; d) agrees that the development of consultation and engagement guidelines for Auckland Council will support the policy and the sharing of best practice; e) requests that staff work with local boards’ that have had the best success engaging with the public to inform the development of the guidelines; f) acknowledges the need for local boards to have flexibility with their engagement practices and requests that the guidelines be practical and include examples of good practice and practices to be avoided.	Noted. Additional comments have been made to address the board’s specific feedback while other comments are felt to be more appropriate to the guidelines
Otara-Papatoetoe	That the Ōtara-Papatoetoe Local Board: a) provide the following feedback on the draft Auckland Council Significance and Engagement policy; b) endorse the principle-led approach taken to the drafting of the policy; c) agree that the development of consultation and engagement guidelines for Auckland Council will support the policy and the sharing of best practice; d) request that staff make use of local boards’ extensive community engagement experience to inform the development of the guidelines; e) support capacity building and the development of “soft” community infrastructure that enables full engagement of communities beyond those usually engaged; f) support the use of culturally appropriate engagement mechanisms to engage with unique communities; g) recognise that some individuals choose not to be engaged in some Council decisions.	Noted
Papakura	a) That the Papakura Local Board endorses the principle-led approach taken to the drafting of the Significance and Engagement policy; b) That the Papakura Local Board agrees that the development of consultation and engagement guidelines for Auckland Council will support the policy and the sharing of best practice; c) That the Papakura Local Board requests that staff make use of local boards’ extensive community engagement experience to inform the development of the guidelines.	Noted
Puketapapa	That the Puketāpapa Local Board: a)         endorse the draft policy based on the following principles from the Local Government Act which state that a local authority should: i)        conduct business in an open, transparent, and democratically accountable manner; and give effect to its identified priorities and outcomes in an efficient and effective manner; ii)       make itself aware of, and have regard to, the views of all its communities; iii)      when making a decision, take account of the diversity of the community, and of  the community’s interests; and the interests of future as well as current communities; and the likely impact of any decision on them; iv)      provide opportunities for Māori to contribute to its decision-making process. b)        note that the development of consultation and engagement guidelines for Auckland Council will support the policy and the sharing of best practice. c)         request that local boards be involved in the development of the guidelines which will support the delivery of the policy, given their extensive community engagement experience and their responsibility to engage with the community. d)        request that consultation timeframes be reflective of the complexity of the topic being consulted on, the diversity of the consultation community, and, where possible, of the impact of recognised holiday periods on the ability of people to contribute to the consultation process. e)        request that resourcing for consultation is sufficient to enable community capacity building, in line with Auckland Council’s Thriving Communities document.	Noted
Rodney	That the Rodney Local Board: a) endorse the principle-led approach taken to drafting the Significance and Engagement Policy. b) agrees that the development of consultation and engagement guidelines for Auckland Council will support the policy and the sharing of best practice. c) request that staff make use of local boards’ extensive community engagement experience to inform the development of guidelines.	Noted
Upper Harbour	That the Upper Harbour Local Board: a) express its concern that Auckland residents will become disengaged due to the numerous consultation processes utilised by council. b)  endorse the principal-led approach taken to drafting the policy. c)   request that staff make use of local board’s extensive community engagement experience to inform the development of the guidelines. d)  request that existing survey information be used as a database to capture feedback provided by residents through other consultation processes.	Noted
Waiheke	That the Waiheke Local Board: a) Receives the draft Auckland Council Significance and Engagement Policy.	Noted
Waitakere Ranges	That the Waitākere Ranges Local Board: a) Supports the direction of the engagement part of the policy around the flexibility of input. b) Supports Council Controlled Organisations (CCOs) delivering on the intents of the engagement policy, though notes that CCOs need to be attuned to matters of local significance. c) Asks that a process be put in place to give advance warning to local boards of matters of interest that are due to be reported to the Governing Body. This will better enable local boards to engage with the Governing Body through the “Local Board Input” part of meetings. d) Recommends, in light of the recent deferral of around half of its capital expenditure programme by the Governing Body, the Significance Policy should include a threshold to address any similar circumstances in future, for example: “Any significant reduction (20 percent or more) to the total funding available for either the capital or operational programmes in an adopted Local Board Agreement will trigger a requirement to consult.“ e) Recommends that the significance policy define the phrase “a group of activity”, and that it be of a finer grain than the very high level groups used in the Long-term Plan. f) Recommends that the significance and engagement policy includes the need to consult when proposing to drop funding to an activity area where there is statutory obligation. g) Recommends that council includes in its engagement policy the aspiration that the whole of Auckland, including outer rural areas, have access to broadband services to ensure universal, cost effective access to council consultations and engagement electronically. The policy should acknowledge that this represents a cost saving for council.	Noted. Additional comments have been made to address the board’s specific feedback while other comments are seen to be more appropriate to the guidelines. Funding issues are covered by LTP and Annual Plan consultation processes
Waitemata	a) That the Significance and Engagement Policy report be received. b) The Waitemata Local Board provides the following general feedback on the draft significance and engagement policy: ·    Endorses the principle-led approach taken to the drafting the policy; ·    Agrees that the development of consultation and engagement guidelines for Auckland Council will support the policy and the sharing of best practice; and ·    Requests that staff make use of local boards’ extensive community engagement experience to inform the development of the guidelines. c) That the Waitematā Local Board delegates to Board Chair Shale Chambers and Deputy Chairperson Pippa Coom to provide feedback on the Significance and Engagement Policy as set out in Attachment A of the report by 7 November 2014.	Noted
Whau	That the Whau Local Board: a) Provides the following feedback on the draft Auckland Council Significance and Engagement Policy. i. Endorses the principle-led approach taken to the drafting the policy. ii. Agrees that the development of consultation and engagement guidelines for Auckland Council will support the policy and the sharing of best practice. iii. Requests that staff make use of local boards’ extensive community engagement experience to inform the development of the guidelines.	Noted

Summary of mana whenua feedback

Feedback has been received from Te Uri o Hau, Ngati Tamaoho, Ngati Manuhiri, Ngati Te Ata, Ngati Whatua o Kaipara.

Topic	Main points/ themes	Recommendations
1.    General	Mana Whenua and Mataawaka should be identified separately to IMSB so that the IMSB is not seen as the default organisation to engage with. Reflect that Hapu and iwi management plans identify engagement principles.	Covered by new content in section 3.1 Will be included in the guidelines
2.    Legislation	Reflection of the need to have meaningful relationships in natural resource and environmental management. This relationship is not by democracy nor by the council’s general relationships with communities and stakeholders Reflect that the LGA states that a local authority must ensure that it has in place processes for consulting with Māori.	Covered by new content in section 3.1 and updated principles in section 3.3 Reinforced in section 3.1
3.      Methods/ size matrix	Distinction between relationship with mana whenua in decision-making and mataawaka groups and processes for each Add more collaborative / empowering processes. Add more methods specific to mana whenua	Covered by new content in section 3.1 Methods are dealt with in more detail in the engagement guidelines
4.      Significance criteria and thresholds	General criteria include significance of the impact on mana whenua and mataawaka – include settlement / Māori plans etc or consider the schedule of issues of significance	Covered by new content in section 3.3
5.      Strategic assets	Consider statutory relationship between mana whenua and Auckland Council in regards to the Treaty Settlement of Maunga , future management of Kaipara Harbour and allow for other future arrangements. Consider including open space, heritage sites and landscapes.	These are not considered to be the council’s strategic assets. A new section on Maori and on other matters relating to significance covers the relationship between mana whenua and the council.
6.      Input to decision-making / supporting information	Mana whenua strategies and policies, iwi / hapu plans such as Environment Management and education, Treaty settlement claims / Memorandum of understanding	New section added in chapter 5 on reference material
7.    Other feedback	Identify what the key areas of interest are of each mana whenua so that engagement can be prioritised but ensure visibility of engagement opportunities	This is an opportunity we would like to take up, and where we receive information, it would be appropriate for the guidelines

Summary of the community and stakeholder feedback and general comments

The feedback ranged from support for the draft policy, through to requests for both substantive and specific changes. In addition, there was considerable feedback about how the council should apply the policy which will be used in updating the engagement guidelines that support this policy. The table shows the major topic areas in the respondents’ feedback that relate to the policy and a description of each of the topic areas. The table is followed by a list of the most commonly made points under each of the topic areas.

Topic	Main points/ themes	Recommendation
Principles of engagement	Almost two thirds of the respondents either agreed or strongly agreed that the draft policy’s principles will support the needs of Auckland's diverse communities to get involved in council decision-making. Respondents requested that the policy’s principles show that Council will empower communities to provide feedback about and/ or participate in decision-making on matters that affect them, including but not limited to matters deemed to be ‘significant’. The engagement processes need to be accessible to people of all ages, ethnicities and abilities and not unduly favour a people, group or organisation over another. The requirement for ‘efficient decision-making’ needs to be carefully balanced with adequate engagement, and flexibility and discretion needs to be carefully balanced with making clear commitments to what the Council will consult the public on. An additional suggestion requested adding in open data principles.	Feedback received is largely in line with existing principles or activities. Additional principles that are recommended for inclusion are a greater emphasis on partnerships and community led approaches and referring to Shape Auckland as the hub for consultations. Other feedback on the principles were felt to either be covered already or to be more appropriate for the guidelines.
Màori Engagement	The feedback proposed that policy wording about Māori should be similar in tone to other parts of the policy, but also acknowledge that mana whenua, iwi and other Māori groups will or may be engaged differently to other parts of the community. Legislations, approaches and protocol for engaging with Māori should be referred to, such as Treaty of Waitangi-based relationships.	A new section has been added to clarify this
Methods/ size matrix	Just over half of the respondents either agreed or strongly agreed that the draft policy is an appropriate and useful guide as to how Auckland Council will engage with the community. The majority of comments on the policy’s methods-size matrix said that it was a useful idea and a good way to show what an appropriate community engagement approach would be, given the scale or significance of an issue or proposal.	Revisions to the policy have been made to provide further clarity – no substantive changes are required.
Significance criteria and thresholds	Almost one third of the respondents either agreed or strongly agreed that the draft policy provides clarity about what a significant decision is and when the community will be engaged. The significance section was more concerning to most respondents than other parts of the policy. Many people, groups and organisations thought the criteria were confusing and that there needed to be more clarity about their application. Many also felt that the approach was very top-down, which was at odds with the rest of the policy; the general sentiment was that the public should be allowed to input into the assessment of a matter’s significance, and that treaty claims and settlements should be included. A number of people asked for further clarity as to what, if any, engagement would occur if a matter was deemed to not be significant.	Revisions to the policy have been made to provide further clarity – no substantive changes are required.
Strategic assets	The respondents recommended additional items for inclusion in the list of strategic assets. Many asked for the consultation about proposals to change ownership or sell local government strategic assets	Revisions to the policy have been made to provide further clarity – no substantive changes are required.
Special Consultative Procedure	There was a lot of support for making the special consultative procedure less onerous and more accessible, but there was also concern that not requiring all bylaws to go through the SCP and not requiring every submitter to be responded to would reduce transparency. The respondents asked for more clarity around what kinds of bylaw, policy and rates proposals would require consultation and/or a special consultative procedure.  Feedback also included a request for longer submission periods and avoiding public holidays eg around Christmas.	Further clarity has been provided on when the SCP will be used and how the consultation process will be determined for bylaws. The council already avoids public holidays such as Christmas for public consultation and extends consultation periods where possible. No changes are recommended in the policy but further details should be provided in the guidelines on this.
Other feedback	There was some comment that the policy did not make a clear commitment to public engagement and consultation, that there was some ambivalence about the strategic and operational importance of engagement, and how the policy applies to CCOs. Some respondents asked about how effectiveness would be measured, a definition of key terms developed, and how consultation under the RMA and other legislation would interface with this policy. The decision-making diagram and reference to legislation should include Treaty settlements, legislation pertaining to iwi and Iwi management plans.	Further emphasis has been included within the policy about the council’s commitment to community engagement. A glossary has been added in response to feedback, plus an indication of how the policy’s effectiveness will be measured. References have been made to iwi management plans and treaty settlements.

---

[1] The Auckland & Manukau targeted rate is likely to be in the range of $240 to $245, and may fall by around $10 over time per property dependant on decisions around gulf islands subsidies, and the ability of certain property types to opt out of service provision.

[2] The Auckland & Manukau targeted rate is likely to be in the range of $240 to $245, and may fall by around $10 over time per property dependant on decisions around gulf islands subsidies, and the ability of certain property types to opt out of service provision.

[3] Based on recommendations in the previous report on this agenda.

[4] Relevant applications are determined by being identified in the consents received report

[5] Premises are compared against a list of criteria and assign one of four grades: A (High), B (Good), D (Poor) and E (Unsatisfactory). There is no 'C' grade as all food premises are either above or below 'average' food safety standards

[6] Known dogs is a common term in dog control. Whilst the aim is to have 100% of dogs registered there will always be some that have come to the attention of dog control, but the registration process is not completed

[7] A Resource Recovery Facility is a facility in the community where the public can drop off reusable and recyclable items. Resource Recovery Facilities can vary greatly - from simple drop off stations in small rural areas through to large eco-industrial parks.

[8] Physically Improved -  includes daylighting, naturalisation, riparian protection and enhancement, and in stream enhancement features

Physically Degraded - includes piping, lining and other structures that contribute negatively to the environment.

Excludes: Water quality aspects of watercourse improvement and degradation such as contaminants and temperature

[9] Mana whenua organisations currently total 19, reporting as a number was thought clearer than a percentage

[10] The CDEM score is from the Ministry of Civil Defence & Emergency annual Colmar Brunton survey. It covers these aspects of Civil Defence: reduction, readiness, response, and recovery.

[11] Note 1: For the purposes of this measure major events refer to all events in ATEEDs event portfolio i.e. events that ATEED has invested in.  RORI is the sum of money that accrues in Auckland from an event, less the amount that originates within Auckland.

[12] The Mayor’s Youth Employment Traction Plan includes a new office to coordinate youth employment initiatives across the region, a pledge to boost numbers in Auckland Council’s graduate and cadet programmes by more than 50 per cent, and regular summits to bring together young people, business leaders and youth organisations.

[13] Any event with public attendance constitutes at least one event day.  A commercial event day is any ticketed event and also includes non-ticketed events organised by profit focussed entities (Private sport franchises, national and provincial sports organisations, major concerts)

[14] Training sessions organised by Auckland Football, Northern Football, NZ Police etc. staged on a sports field.  Includes OFC by virtue of free access rights and school athletics events.  Athletics Auckland, NZ Police Training, University bookings, AKL City Athletics, Ellerslie Athletics, Blood Services and others.

[15] Like for like relates to the comparison of Net Return on properties as at 30 June of the reporting period with those same properties as at the same date two years prior.

[16] Properties that are available for rent are those that are tenantable. Tenantable properties are properties managed by ACPL during the year that excludes untenantable properties below.

Un-tenantable or unrentable properties include:

•     Properties that are undergoing minor maintenance or capital works (where tenants re not allow on site)

•     Properties that are under assessment to ensure they meet legal requirements such as H&S and BWOF compliance etc.

•     Properties that are pieces/strips of bare land only

•     Properties not habitable (cannot be leased/used)

•     Properties that are undergoing the acquisitions or disposals process (e.g. going through ACPL's rationalisation process ,awaiting demolition/land clearance/sale, properties transferring to Council, properties that are not in ACPL’s books)

[17] Weighted average of various indices relevant to each asset class included in the portfolio.

[18] Airport  to CBD (via Manukau Rd)
St Lukes to St Johns (via Balmoral/Greenlane West/Greenlane East/Remuera Rd)
Albany to Birkenhead (via Glenfield Rd)
Henderson to CBD (via Great North Rd)
SH1 to Ti Rakau Dr (via Te Irirangi Dr)
SH20 to Portage Rd (via Tiverton/Wolverton Rd)

[19] Neilson St (SH20 to SH1) 16mins
Neilson St (SH1 to SH20) 12 mins
SEART (Sylvia Park to East Tamaki) 11 mins
SEART (East Tamaki to Sylvia Park) 12 mins
Wairau Rd (SH1 to SH18) 8 mins
Wairau Rd  (SH18 to SH1) 8 mins
Harris Rd (East Tamaki to SH1) 10 mins

Harris Rd (SH1 to East Tamaki) 11 mins