Agenda of Governing Body - 29 October 2015

TERMS OF REFERENCE

Those powers which cannot legally be delegated:

(a) the power to make a rate; or

(b) the power to make a bylaw; or

(c) the power to borrow money, or purchase or dispose of assets, other than in accordance with the long term council community plan; or

(d) the power to adopt a long term plan, annual plan, or annual report; or

(e) the power to appoint a Chief Executive; or

(f) the power to adopt policies required to be adopted and consulted on under the Local Government Act 2002 in association with the long term plan or developed for the purpose of the local governance statement; or

(g) the power to adopt a remuneration and employment policy.

Additional responsibilities retained by the Governing Body:

(a) approval of a draft long term plan or draft annual plan prior to community consultation

(b) approval of a draft bylaw prior to community consultation

(c) resolutions required to be made by a local authority under the Local Electoral Act 2001, including the appointment of electoral officer

(d) adoption of, and amendment to, the Committee Terms of Reference, Standing Orders and Code of Conduct

(e) relationships with the Independent Māori Statutory Board, including the funding agreement and appointments to committees.

(f) approval of the Unitary Plan

(g) overview of the implementation of the Auckland Plan through setting direction on key strategic projects (e.g. the City Rail Link and the alternative funding mechanisms for transport) and receiving regular reporting on the overall achievement of Auckland Plan priorities and performance measures.

Exclusion of the public – who needs to leave the meeting

Members of the public

All members of the public must leave the meeting when the public are excluded unless a resolution is passed permitting a person to remain because their knowledge will assist the meeting.

Those who are not members of the public

General principles

· Access to confidential information is managed on a “need to know” basis where access to the information is required in order for a person to perform their role.

· Those who are not members of the meeting (see list below) must leave unless it is necessary for them to remain and hear the debate in order to perform their role.

· Those who need to be present for one confidential item can remain only for that item and must leave the room for any other confidential items.

· In any case of doubt, the ruling of the chairperson is final.

Members of the meeting

· The members of the meeting remain (all Governing Body members if the meeting is a Governing Body meeting; all members of the committee if the meeting is a committee meeting).

· However, standing orders require that a councillor who has a pecuniary conflict of interest leave the room.

· All councillors have the right to attend any meeting of a committee and councillors who are not members of a committee may remain, subject to any limitations in standing orders.

Independent Māori Statutory Board

· Members of the Independent Māori Statutory Board who are appointed members of the committee remain.

· Independent Māori Statutory Board members and staff remain if this is necessary in order for them to perform their role.

Staff

· All staff supporting the meeting (administrative, senior management) remain.

· Other staff who need to because of their role may remain.

Local Board members

· Local Board members who need to hear the matter being discussed in order to perform their role may remain. This will usually be if the matter affects, or is relevant to, a particular Local Board area.

Council Controlled Organisations

· Representatives of a Council Controlled Organisation can remain only if required to for discussion of a matter relevant to the Council Controlled Organisation.

1 Affirmation

His Worship the Mayor will read the affirmation.

2 Apologies

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

3 Declaration of Interest

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

4 Confirmation of Minutes

That the Governing Body:

a) confirm the ordinary minutes of its meeting, held on Thursday, 24 September 2015, as a true and correct record.

5 Acknowledgements and Achievements

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

6 Petitions

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

7 Public Input

Standing Order 7.7 provides for Public Input. Applications to speak must be made to the Democracy Advisor, in writing, no later than one (1) clear working day 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.

7.1 Public Input - Steve Abel, Greenpeace - Block Offer 2016 Submission

Purpose

1. Steve Abel, representing Greenpeace, will be present to speak to the meeting regarding the Block Offer 2016 submission.

Recommendation/s

That the Governing Body:

a) receive the presentation from Steve Abel regarding the Block Offer 2016 submission.

8 Local Board Input

Standing Order 6.2 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 one (1) day’s 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 6.1 to speak to matters on the agenda.

9 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.”

10 Notices of Motion

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

Governing Body

29 October 2015

Block Offer 2016 submission

File No.: CP2015/22040

Purpose

1. To approve Auckland Council’s submission to the Ministry of Business Innovation and Employment(MBIE) on the areas proposed to be offered for petroleum exploration permit applications in 2016 (Block Offer 2016).

Executive Summary

2. MBIE is consulting iwi/hapu and local authorities on areas it proposes to offer up for prospective oil and gas exploration through an annual tender process (Block Offer 2016). Consultation began on 3 September 2015 and closes on 30 October 2015.

3. If approved, this is Auckland Council’s third submission on Block offers.

4. The Block Offer 2016 proposal incorporates four offshore areas including the Northland-Reinga and New Caledonia Basin (16NRN-R1 ~186,000 km²) and the Taranaki Basin (16TAR-R1 ~73,000 km²). The boundaries of these two basins are the same as those released for tender following consultation on Block Offer 2015.

5. While not directly in Auckland’s coastal marine area (CMA), oil exploration and production in nearby regions and Exclusive Economic Zone could have effects on Auckland’s natural and physical resources and their social, cultural and economic use and value.

6. The issues remain in essence the same as with Block Offers 2014 and 2015, and Auckland Council could therefore seek the following changes to Block Offer 2016:

i. Amend the proposed Taranaki basin area to be at least 12 nautical miles offshore so it applies a precautionary approach and avoids the North Island West Coast Marine Mammal Sanctuary (the sanctuary) and potentially associated adverse effects on Maui’s dolphin and their habitat;

ii. Exploration activities to adhere to guidelines for minimising acoustic disturbance to marine mammals, including within 20 nautical miles of the sanctuary;

iii. Recognise the sensitivity of potentially impacted areas and minimise oil spill and discharge risks, particularly close to the coast, by applying the highest international standards and favouring tender applicants with the best environmental track records;

iv. Support integration by keeping iwi and local authorities informed of the permitting process and by sharing analysis and data between the Crown Minerals Act and Resource Management Act processes.

Recommendation/s

That the Governing Body:

a) approve the submission (Attachment D to the agenda report), including any amendments sought by the governing body, in response to the Ministry of Business Innovation and Employment’s Block Offer 2016 consultation.

b) delegate authority to the Mayor to approve final amendments to the submission sought by the governing body.

c) delegate to the Chief Executive the authority to lodge a submission, with a similar position as taken on Block Offer 2016, in the event that a Block Offer 2017 round of consultation coincides with the local government election period in 2016.

Comments

Proposed Block Offer 2016 Release Areas

7. The Block Offer 2016 proposal incorporates four offshore areas including the Northland-Reinga and New Caledonia Basin (16NRN-R1 ~186,000 km²) and the Taranaki Basin (16TAR-R1 ~73,000 km²) off the west coast of the North Island. The boundaries of these two basins are the same as those released for tender following consultation on Block Offer 2015. A map of all the ‘release areas’ proposed for Block Offer 2016 is appended as Attachment A. A map of the two large areas closest to the Auckland region is appended as Attachment B.

8. Of note is that:

· no areas proposed for release in Block Offer 2016 extend into the CMA of the Auckland region,

· the proposed areas include potential for exploration within very large areas off the North Island west coast,

· the proposed Taranaki basin area overlaps of with the more southern parts of the North Island West Coast Marine Mammal Sanctuary (the sanctuary - see Attachment B).

9. Further background information is provided in Attachment C, describing the block offer process, the regulatory framework for oil and gas exploration and changes between recent block offer rounds for the two basin areas offshore from the Auckland region.

Auckland Council’s previous submission on Block Offer 2015

10. Auckland Council lodged a submission to Block Offer 2015 (REG/2015/6 5 February 2015). The council submission sought measures to avoid or mitigate potential environmental risks, including amending areas to be outside of Auckland’s coastal marine area and outside the marine mammal sanctuary to reduce risks to the endangered Maui’s dolphins.

11. A number of local boards supported the council’s submission, whilst some local boards opposed all areas for Block Offer 2015.

12. Changes made by the Minister following consultation included moving the northern part of the Taranaki basin area so that it no longer overlapped with the Auckland region’s coastal marine area, but no change to the overlap with the marine mammal sanctuary further south. The boundary changes have been carried through into the Block Offer 2016 areas.

13. The Minister also required that any permits granted for exploration in the North Island Marine Mammal Sanctuary specifically comply with the 2013 Code of Conduct for Minimising Acoustic Disturbance to Marine Mammals from Seismic Survey Operations.

Auckland Council’s proposed submission on Block Offer 2016

14. As the issues around Block Offer 2016 (Attachment D) essentially remain the same, the proposed submission is in principle the same as the council’s submission on Block Offer 2015. It raises four recommended changes to minimise any potential environmental impacts.

a) Amend the proposed Taranaki basin area to be at least 12 nautical miles offshore so it applies a precautionary approach and avoids the North Island West Coast Marine Mammal Sanctuary (the sanctuary) and potentially associated adverse effects on Maui’s dolphin and their habitat;

b) Exploration activities to adhere to guidelines for minimising acoustic disturbance to marine mammals, including within 20 nautical miles of the sanctuary;

c) Recognise the sensitivity of potentially impacted areas and minimise oil spill and discharge risks, particularly close to the coast, by applying the highest international standards and favouring tender applicants with the best environmental track records;

d) Support integration by keeping iwi and local authorities informed of the permitting process and by sharing analysis and data between the Crown Minerals Act and Resource Management Act processes.

Option to avoid potential difficulties submitting on the next year’s Block Offer 2017

15. In the expectation that the government may continue to run an annual Block Offer process and that Block Offer 2017 consultation may coincide with the local government elections in 2016, a contingency is proposed to simplify what might otherwise be a difficult submission process. There were significant limitations to local board involvement during development and approval of the council’s submission on Block Offer 2014 consultation.

16. An option is therefore included (recommendation (d)) for the committee to determine whether or not it supports the position reached on the council’s submission on Block Offer 2016 also applying to any Block Offer 2017 consultation.

Consideration

Local Board views and implications

17. Local Boards were circulated the Block Offer 2016 proposal and explanatory notes on 21 September 2015. Informal positions received are included in this agenda report.

18. Waitakere Ranges Local Board provided a formal submission opposing the block offer process and seeking adoption of the precautionary principle because of the potential risks associated with oil and gas exploration to the legislatively^{^[1]} recognised, valued and vulnerable natural resources of the west coast.

19. Waiheke Island Local Board provided an informal submission that also opposes the block offer process in its entirety. They identify the wide regional and national significance of the concerns, in particular their relation to ‘important and fundamental issues and principles over the way in which New Zealand’s marine ecosystems and habitats of threatened marine fauna (and marine mammals in particular) are managed’. The Local Board also seeks assurance that future exploration and extraction within the Hauraki Gulf Marine Park will not be contemplated.

20. The Orakei Local Board provided an informal comment that ‘there should be no seabed mining or extraction within 200 nautical miles of the Hauraki Gulf’.

21. The Māngere-Otahuhu Local Board provided informal advice seeking a mineral and mining exclusionary zone along the length of the North Island, and therefore supporting a precautionary position of avoiding the Maui’s dolphin marine mammal sanctuary.

22. The Puketāpapa Local Board provided a formal submission expressing concern about the environmental risks associated with the block offer process and exploration activities, and seeking that the council submission strongly advocate for application of a precautionary approach. The Board also expresses concerns about the capability for effective oil spill response and seeks information on the requirements placed on applicants by the Environment Protection Authority and Maritime New Zealand.

23. The Manurewa Local Board’s formal submission identifies the important and vulnerable values of the Manukau Harbour and environs, requests all practical steps be taken to protect these, and supports the council’s request for Block Offer areas to avoid the marine mammal sanctuary.

24. The Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board’s formal submission opposes allocation of petroleum exploration permits in the proposed Block Offer areas because of community concerns over oil spill risks and potential risks to Maui’s dolphin and recovery of their population.

25. The Franklin Local Board’s informal submission raised concerns about environmental sensitivity and risks of oil spills, and supported the council’s previously requested actions to avoid or reduce risks to Maui’s dolphin habitat and remaining populations.

Māori impact statement

26. New Zealand Petroleum and Minerals (NZP&M) are required by the Crown Minerals Act to consult with iwi and hapu on the proposed release areas. Iwi and hapu therefore have a direct route to contribute their concerns into the Block Offer process. The Minister may then exclude areas from the Block Offer process where these have been identified by iwi or hapu as having particular significance and sensitivity. Once permits are granted, permit holders are also required to provide an annual report to the Minister on their engagement with potentially affected iwi and hapu.

27. In addition, the same opportunity to contribute and its accompanying explanatory information that was sent to Local Boards was circulated on 18 September to the full Auckland iwi/hapu contact list provided by Te Waka Angamua.

28. To date, Nga Maunga Whakahii o Kaipara has responded. The Board of Trustees approved the drafting of a submission that objects in principle to the block offer process, and will lodge their submission directly with NZP&M.

Implementation

29. Final decisions on any response to the council’s submission on Block Offer 2016, along with the subsequent announcement in December 2016 of any exploration permits granted, rests with the Minister of Energy and Resources.

30. Council officers will monitor the NZP&M Block Offer 2016 process and will inform the relevant council bodies of any significant developments.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Block Offer 2016 proposed areas	13
b View	Block Offer 2016 proposed areas closest to the Auckland region	15
c View	Block Offer background	17
d View	Auckland Council proposed submission on Block Offer 2016	21

Signatories

Author

Dominic McCarthy, Principal Specialist Environmental Strategy

Authorisers

Jacques Victor - GM Auckland Plan Strategy and Research

Jim Quinn - Chief of Strategy

Stephen Town - Chief Executive

Governing Body

29 October 2015

Report of the Hearings Panel on the Confirmation of Legacy Bylaws 2015

File No.: CP2015/21784

Purpose

1. To confirm seven full bylaws and residual parts of 12 other bylaws, made by Auckland’s former local authorities, to avoid them being automatically revoked on 31 October 2015.

Executive Summary

2. When Auckland Council was established on 1 November 2010, it inherited a series of bylaws (“legacy bylaws”) made by Auckland’s former councils.

3. Under section 63(3) of the Local Government (Auckland Transitional Provisions) Act, the legacy bylaws will be automatically revoked on 31 October 2015, unless confirmed, amended or revoked by the council before that date.

4. Over 2010-2015, Auckland Council and Auckland Transport have reviewed most of the legacy bylaws and have:

· adopted 22 new Auckland-wide bylaws (17 council bylaws and five Auckland Transport bylaws) to replace or consolidate the legacy bylaws, as outlined in Attachment A

· allowed some legacy bylaws or residual parts to be automatically revoked by the legislation on 31 October 2015, as they are no longer used and/or required.

5. This leaves seven legacy bylaws and residual parts of 12 other legacy bylaws that the council needs to address before the statutory deadline on 31 October 2015.

6. On 8 July 2015, the Regulatory and Bylaws Committee:

· recommended that the governing body adopt the “Statement of Proposal: Confirmation of Legacy Bylaws 2015,” which outlined a proposal to confirm seven legacy bylaws and residual parts of 12 other legacy bylaws

· appointed a hearings panel, comprised of Councillors Penrose (as Chair) and Filipaina, to hear submissions, deliberate and make recommendations to the governing body (Resolution number: RBC/2015/23).

7. On 30 July 2015, the council’s governing body accepted the Regulatory and Bylaws Committee’s recommendation and adopted the Statement of Proposal for public consultation (Resolution number: GB/2015/77).

8. The details of the proposal are as follows:

· to confirm the legacy bylaws (or residual parts) related to freedom camping, electric and barbed wire fencing adjoining public land, wharves, construction in the road corridor and other public places, and on-site wastewater management so they remain in force until 31 October 2020. The specific bylaws and clauses are detailed in the recommendations of this report and in Attachment B.

· to confirm the Auckland City Council Bylaws: Bylaw No. 27B – Billboards 2007 so that it remains in force until the relevant provisions of the Proposed Auckland Unitary Plan become fully operative (see Attachment B).

· no changes to the legacy bylaws are proposed.

9. The council publicly notified the Statement of Proposal on 3 August 2015 and received 12 submissions in response.

10. On 21 September 2015, the Hearings Panel considered the submissions and heard oral submissions from two submitters. The oral submissions were about freedom camping.

11. No contentious issues were raised about the proposal to confirm the bylaws in the submissions or hearings processes. The Hearings Panel therefore recommends the governing body confirm the seven legacy bylaws and residual parts of 12 other legacy bylaws, as proposed.

Recommendation/s

That the Governing Body:

a) confirm the following legacy bylaws, or residual parts, in accordance with section 63(3) of the Local Government (Auckland Transitional Provisions) Act 2010 until 31 October 2020, at which time these bylaws, or residual parts, will be automatically revoked:

i. On freedom camping:

a) Auckland City Council Bylaws: Bylaw No.20 - Public Places 2008: clauses 20.3.1 (g) and (v), and 20.8

b) Auckland Regional Council Parks Bylaw 2007: clauses 6.1(b) and 8

c) Franklin District Council Public Places Bylaw 2007: clause 5(5)(b) and the First Schedule

d) Manukau City Consolidated Bylaw 2008: Chapter 9 General Nuisance, Safety and Behaviour in Parks and Public Places: clause 4.1 (a) and (b)

e) North Shore City Council Bylaw 2000: Part 2 Public Places: clauses 2.3.1 (g) and (j)

f) Papakura District Council Public Places Bylaw 2008: clauses 3.4(b) and 18.1

g) Rodney District Council General Bylaw 1998: Chapter 8 Public Places clauses 6.1 (a) and (c), 7, and 8

h) Waitakere City Council Public Places Bylaw 2010: clauses 6.1(i), 7.1(a), 17, 18, and 19.

ii. On electric and barbed wire fences on property next to public land:

a) Papakura District Council Public Places Bylaw 2008: clause 12.1

b) Waitakere City Council Public Places Bylaw 2010: clause 15.2(b).

iii. On wharves:

a) Auckland City Council Bylaws: Bylaw No.8 - Wharves 2008

b) Rodney District Council General Bylaw 1998: Chapter 12 Use of Public Wharves and Boat Ramps

iv. On construction activities in the road corridor and other public places:

a) Auckland City Council Bylaws: Bylaw No.6 - Construction 2008

b) Franklin District Council Public Places Bylaw 2007:clause 11

c) Manukau City Consolidated Bylaw 2008: Chapter 5 Construction, Development, Street Damage and Vehicle Crossings

d) North Shore City Council Bylaw 2000: Part 13 Construction and Scaffolding

e) North Shore City Council Bylaw 2000: Part 2 Public Places: clause 2.11

f) Papakura District Council Public Places Bylaw 2008: clause 9

g) Rodney District Council General Bylaw 1998: Chapter 9 (Road Crossings and Numbering of Premises): clauses 4, 5 and 6.

v. On on-site wastewater management:

a) Auckland City Council Bylaws: Bylaw No. 29 - Waiheke Wastewater 2008

b) North Shore City Bylaw 2000: Part 20 Wastewater: clauses 20.1.2, 20.2.1, 20.2.2 and 20.7.3

c) Papakura District Council Wastewater Bylaw 2008: clauses 1, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14 and 16

d) Rodney District Council General Bylaw 1998: Chapter 20 Wastewater Drainage: clauses 2, 9 and 12.

b) confirm the Auckland City Council Bylaws: Bylaw No. 27B Billboards 2007, in accordance with section 63(3) of the Local Government (Auckland Transitional Provisions) Act 2010, until the relevant signage provisions of the Auckland Unitary Plan become operative, at which time this bylaw will be automatically revoked.

Comments

Background

12. When Auckland Council was established on 1 November 2010, it inherited a series of bylaws (“legacy bylaws”) that had been made by Auckland’s former councils.

13. Since then, the legacy bylaws have remained in force in the areas to which they previously applied, in accordance with the Local Government (Auckland Transitional Provisions) Act 2010. Under section 63(3) of that Act however, the legacy bylaws will be automatically revoked on 31 October 2015, unless confirmed, amended or revoked by the council before that date.

Bylaw Review Programme

14. Since amalgamation, the council and Auckland Transport have reviewed most of the legacy bylaws, leaving seven full bylaws and residual parts of 12 other bylaws to be addressed before 31 October 2015.

15. The outcomes of the reviews completed to date are summarised as follows:

· The council has adopted 17 new Auckland-wide bylaws (as listed in Attachment A) to replace or consolidate legacy bylaws

· Auckland Transport has adopted five new bylaws (as listed in Attachment A), of which three are administered by the council and two by Auckland Transport.

· The council has decided to allow a number of legacy bylaws to be automatically revoked by section 63(3) of the Local Government (Auckland Transitional Provisions) Act 2010 on 31 October 2015, as they are no longer used and/or required. This includes a decision by the Regulatory and Bylaws Committee in July 2015, when the committee determined that 19 of the remaining legacy bylaws should be automatically revoked (resolution number: RBC/2015/23). No further decisions on those legacy bylaws are required.

16. The seven full bylaws and residual parts of 12 other bylaws that still require a decision are addressed through this report.

Relevant decisions

17. On 8 July 2015, staff presented the Regulatory and Bylaws Committee with the “Statement of Proposal: Confirmation of Legacy Bylaws 2015,” which outlines the proposal to confirm seven legacy bylaws and residual parts of 12 other legacy bylaws. The committee:

· recommended that the governing body adopt the Statement of Proposal, for public consultation

18. On 30 July 2015, the council’s governing body accepted the Committee’s recommendation and adopted the Statement of Proposal for public consultation (Resolution number: GB/2015/77).

Proposal to confirm legacy bylaws

19. The table below summarises the details of the proposal:

Bylaw topics

Proposal

Detail

· Freedom camping

· Electric and barbed wire fencing adjoining public land

· Wharves

· Construction in the road corridor and other public places and

· On-site wastewater management

To confirm the legacy bylaws (or residual parts) so that they remain in force until 31 October 2020

· Confirming these legacy bylaws means they will remain in force from 1 November 2015 in the areas to which they applied at the date of confirmation.

· Confirming the legacy bylaws preserves the status quo and allows the council time to complete further work on the topics or issues that relate to the legacy bylaws.

· Staff expect to review the bylaws prior to 31 October 2020, and to make specific recommendations about whether to retain, replace, or revoke each one, as part of this review process. However, if such a review was not completed by 31 October 2020, the bylaws would be deemed to be revoked.

· Billboards

To confirm the Auckland City Council Bylaws: Bylaw No. 27B - Billboards 2007 so that it remains in force until the relevant provisions of the Proposed Auckland Unitary Plan become fully operative

· The legacy billboards bylaw will no longer be required once the signs-related provisions of the Proposed Auckland Unitary Plan become operative.

· Those provisions of the Proposed Auckland Unitary Plan are expected to become operative sometime in 2016. If the legacy billboards bylaw is not confirmed by 31 October 2015, there would be a “regulatory gap” in the management of billboards in the former Auckland City Council area.

Public consultation

20. The Statement of Proposal was notified on 3 August 2015 and the submission period closed on 3 September 2015. The council received 12 submissions on the proposal, including one late submission.

Overview of submissions

21. The submissions raised the following issues:

· Support for confirming the legacy bylaws, particularly those related to construction in the road corridor and other public places; on-site wastewater management; and billboards.

· Concerns about the enforcement of existing freedom camping rules, particularly in the Snell’s Beach area. Council staff will consider this information when completing the review of freedom camping provisions (planned for 2016).

· Concern that the whole Auckland Regional Council Parks Bylaw 2007 is not proposed for confirmation:

o The council has already revoked and replaced most of the provisions in the Auckland Regional Council Parks Bylaw 2007, as part of the adoption of the Public Safety and Nuisance Bylaw 2013, Animal Management Bylaw 2015 and the Trading and Events in Public Places Bylaw 2015.

o The Statement of Proposal outlines the council’s proposal to confirm the two remaining clauses of the Auckland Regional Council Parks Bylaw 2007 (clause 6.1(b) and clause 8).

Hearings and deliberations

22. After considering the submissions, on 21 September 2015 the Hearings Panel considered a staff report and heard oral submissions from two submitters. The Chair of the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board also attended the meeting to provide feedback.

23. The feedback raised at the hearings is summarised as follows:

· Submitters were concerned about the lack of effective enforcement of the current freedom camping rules.

· Submitters supported the proposal to retain the legacy bylaw provisions and would like to be involved in the development of any new Auckland-wide freedom camping bylaw.

24. No contentious issues were raised about the proposal to confirm the legacy bylaws in the submissions or hearings processes.

25. The Hearings Panel also completed its deliberations on 21 September 2015 when it resolved to:

· receive and adopt the hearing report

· accept the late submission by Housing New Zealand

· recommend to the governing body to confirm the retention of the 19 bylaws (or residual parts), made by the former local authorities in the Auckland region, as provided in Attachment 1 of the hearing report.

Hearings Panel recommendations

26. The Hearings Panel recommends the governing body confirm the seven legacy bylaws and residual parts of 12 other legacy bylaws, as detailed Attachment B of this report.

Consideration

Local Board views and implications

27. The local boards were notified of the public consultation process. However, specific local board consultation was not considered necessary as the proposal is to retain the status quo rather than to introduce new regulatory measures.

28. The chair of the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board attended the hearings and provided feedback about freedom camping issues.

29. The council will involve the local boards in the bylaw review processes planned for five of the legacy bylaw topics (noted in clauses 18 and 19).

Māori impact statement

30. Targeted consultation and workshops with iwi were not considered necessary for the proposal on the Confirmation of Legacy Bylaws 2015, as the proposal is to retain the status quo rather than to introduce new regulatory measures

31. Retaining the seven legacy bylaws and residual parts of 12 other legacy bylaws is not considered to have any particular impacts on Auckland’s Maori communities.

32. The council will actively involve Auckland’s Maori communities in the bylaw review processes that will be undertaken for five bylaw topics (noted in clauses 18 and 19), but particularly the bylaw review processes for freedom camping and on-site wastewater management. Those topics will be particularly important to Auckland’s Maori communities, as they involve managing Auckland’s environmental quality and the disposal of wastewater.

Implementation

33. Confirming the seven legacy bylaws and residual parts of 12 other legacy bylaws means the provisions will remain in force from 1 November 2015. The council will need to continue following its regulatory practices and procedures, though this will not require any additional resources.

34. After the legacy bylaws are confirmed, the council will notify the public through a public notice.

35. The council will need to review the confirmed bylaws by 31 October 2020. The indicative review timeframes are as follows:

· By 2017, the council expects to review the legacy bylaws on: freedom camping; construction in the road corridor and other public places (to be reviewed in conjunction with Auckland Transport); and on-site wastewater management, which will be reviewed once the rules for on-site wastewater in the Proposed Auckland Unitary Plan are finalised.

· By 2018, the council expects to review the remaining legacy bylaws on electric and barbed wire fencing adjoining public land; and the two bylaws on wharves (to be reviewed in conjunction with Auckland Transport).

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	New bylaws adopted by Auckland Council and Auckland Transport over 2010-2015	45
b View	Legacy bylaws and bylaw provisions proposed for confirmation by 31 October 2015	47

Signatories

Author	Councillor Calum Penrose – Hearings Panel Chairperson
Authoriser	Stephen Town - Chief Executive

Governing Body

29 October 2015

Governing Body

29 October 2015

Unitary Plan Committee – amendment of membership

File No.: CP2015/21151

Purpose

1. To amend the membership of the Unitary Plan Committee.

Executive Summary

2. The Unitary Plan Committee currently has eight councillor members and two Independent Māori Statutory Board (IMSB) members. The committee, which already has frequent meetings, is entering into an extensive and intensive work programme over coming months. Given the number of meetings and intensity of the work programme, it is recommended that the membership be increased to nine councillors plus the two current IMSB members. The Unitary Plan Committee Chair, Councillor Alf Filipaina, supports this recommendation.

3. It is not proposed to change the quorum for the committee, which will remain at five members.

4. It is recommended that Councillor Penrose be added to the membership of the Unitary Plan Committee.

Recommendation/s

That the Governing Body:

a) appoint Councillor Calum Penrose to the membership of the Unitary Plan Committee.

Comments

Governance arrangements

5. The Unitary Plan Committee was set up as a reporting committee of Auckland Development Committee. While major policy decisions go to Auckland Development Committee, the Unitary Plan Committee fulfils an extremely important function giving direction to staff on matters associated with the Unitary Plan, including Council’s submission to the Unitary Plan (final sign off is with the Auckland Development Committee), pre-hearing mediation and responding to matters raised by the submission process.

6. The Terms of Reference for the Unitary Plan Committee allow for frequent meetings to ensure timeliness of response to the Independent Hearings Panel. Councillor Filipaina, as Chair of the Committee, has identified the difficulty of getting regular attendance from all members on such a frequent basis.

7. Councillor Penrose is a regular attendee, although not a member of the Committee. With the work programme of the Regulatory and Bylaws Committee (of which he is Chairperson) now reducing, Councillor Penrose has expressed an interest in becoming a full member of the Unitary Plan Committee.

Consideration

Local Board Views

8. Local board views have not been sought as membership of Governing Body Committees is a matter of Governing Body procedure.

Māori Impact Statement

9. The Unitary Plan Committee includes representation for members of the IMSB. This is intended to ensure input from the IMSB into a wide range of council decision-making. No changes are proposed to this representation.

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Signatories

Author	Theresa Stratton - Principal Advisor Finance and Governance
Authoriser	His Worship the Mayor, Len Brown

Governing Body

29 October 2015

Nomination to University of Auckland Animal Ethics Committee

File No.: CP2015/21792

Purpose

1. To make a nomination to the University of Auckland Animal Ethics Committee.

Executive Summary

2. The University of Auckland is required to have an Animal Ethics Committee. One lay member of this committee must be appointed on the nomination of the council. The current member is Simon Randall, Chairperson Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board and his term has come to an end. He is available for re-nomination.

3. At this stage there are no other nominations however, nominations can occur at the Governing Body meeting.

Recommendation/s

That the Governing Body:

a) make a nomination to the University of Auckland’s Animal Ethics Committee.

Comments

4. The Animal Welfare Act 1999 (the Act) requires all organisations which use live animals for research, testing and teaching to have both a Code of Ethical Conduct and an Animal Ethics Committee. The University of Auckland is a code holder organisation.

5. The Animal Ethics Committee comprises at least four members, one of which needs to be nominated by Auckland Council (section 101(8)). All are appointed by the chief executive of the code holder organisation (University of Auckland).

6. The requirements of the legislation in section 101 are:

“(8) One member must be a person appointed by the code holder on the nomination of a territorial authority or regional council.

(9) The person appointed under subsection (8) must not be —

(a) a person who is in the employ of, or is otherwise associated with, the code holder; or

(b) a person who is associated with the scientific community or an animal welfare agency.

(10) The appointed members of each animal ethics committee hold office for such terms and on such conditions as are specified in the code of ethical conduct.”

7. The Code of Ethical Conduct refers to the council nominee as representing the public interest and sets the term of office for all members at three years.

8. The functions and powers of committee members, and the procedures that they must follow, are outlined in the Act, but their overall responsibility can be summarised as ensuring that no unnecessary harm or distress is caused to animals as a consequence of research or captivity.

9. A member of the committee is expected to:

- read applications (approximately five - ten applications a month)

- review applications (reviews will not usually be assigned to the same members every month but may involve one or two reviews in a given month)

- attend the committee meeting once a month (eleven per year) to discuss these applications (usually the morning of the last Friday of the month, for a duration of approximately three-four hours)

- take part in formal monitoring of approved protocols on an occasional basis which may involve attending site visits (approximately 12 hours per year) to animal holding facilities

- review approved applications in conjunction with another member of the committee (up to two hours per review excluding preparation and travel time, with two to three reviews per member per year).

10. There are legal implications for the university if no appointment is made, as the Act requires that a code holder must establish and maintain an animal ethics committee made up of at least four members.

11. The governing body resolved its nomination of the current appointee, Simon Randall, on 27 September 2012. The three-year term of appointment has now run its course and the governing body is asked to re-confirm Simon Randall as Auckland Council’s nominee or make a different nomination. At this stage there are no other nominations however, nominations can occur at the Governing Body meeting.

12. Mr Randall is available to stay on for another three-year term in this capacity. Relevant aspects of Mr Randall’s background include:

i) he has eight years of experience as an elected member in local government, and so has considerable experience in deliberation and decision-making

ii) he has university degrees which cover relevant papers in philosophy of science, ethics, critical reason, and a Masters of Science with first class honours in conservation and biosecurity

iii) he taught high school biology for three years which included teaching critical examination of animal testing

iv) he has been a member of the committee for the last three years

v) he meets the criteria of Section 101(9) of the Act.

Consideration

Local Board views and implications

13. This decision involves making an appointment to a university committee, which is a regional entity. Council has no formal engagement with the Animal Ethics Committee once the appointment is made. The current appointee is the chairperson of the Maungakiekie-Tamaki Local Board.

Māori impact statement

14. There is a requirement that an application to use native animals must receive Department of Conservation approval, which includes consultation with Māori.

Implementation

15. Staff will advise the university of the governing body’s decision.

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Signatories

Authors

Warwick McNaughton - Principal Advisor - Democracy Services

Authorisers

Marguerite Delbet - Manager Democracy Services

Phil Wilson - Governance Director

Stephen Town - Chief Executive

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