Agenda of Māngere-ŌtāhuhuLocal Board

Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

21 October 2015

Community-led response to alcohol licensing and advertising - update

File No.: CP2015/21469

Purpose

1. This report provides an update on the community-led response to alcohol licensing and advertising project and requests local board consideration of funding towards a community event to celebrate the successes of the project and the retention of alcohol bans in the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board area.

Executive Summary

2. The Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board has aspirations in their Local Board Plan to minimise the impact of alcohol-related harm in local communities and have submitted on and advocated for the control of alcohol-related billboards and signs. This work commenced in the previous (2014/15) financial year.

3. The Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board supports the enablement of local communities to make objections to alcohol licence applications and complaints about alcohol advertising, and has addressed barriers to community participation in these processes by contracting an independent consultant to provide policy advice and technical support to community members and stakeholder organisations. This is a joint project with the Ōtara-Papatoetoe Local Board, and was approved in July 2014.

4. No new applications and 11 objections for renewal licences have been made since January 2015, however new applications are still being received in other local board areas. This may to some degree be related to the persistent community-led response to alcohol licensing in the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu and Ōtara-Papatoetoe Local Board areas.

5. The project contractor reports that a wide network of objectors has developed, with regular objectors covering Māngere, Ōtāhuhu, Papatoetoe and Ōtara. The contractor report says skill levels and confidence of objectors has grown significantly with repeated experiences at hearings. Objectors are now training each other, passing on experiences and supporting each other through the processes. It was evident to the contractor that this network grew notably through the recent alcohol ban review process.

6. An event to celebrate the success of the community led response to alcohol licensing project and the recent review of alcohol bans in the local board areas has been planned by the Turehou Maori Wardens. The Turehou Maori Wardens will get together with the Otara Gambling Alcohol Action Group; Respect Our Community Campaign (ROCC) and individual submitters to the recent alcohol ban review on Saturday 31 October 2015.

7. The project contractor reports community participants have given feedback that there have been (in their view) inconsistent approaches and decisions from the District Licensing Committee, sometimes making it difficult for objectors to understand and respond. In May 2015, the board provided feedback to the Regional Strategy and Policy Committee on the District Licensing Committee review. As a result, opportunities for improvement that were identified through the District Licensing Committee review were endorsed by the Regional Strategy and Policy Committee in August 2015.

8. Signage complaints have also now been made to most existing off-licence premises in Māngere, Ōtāhuhu, Otara and Papatoetoe where there is non-complying alcohol signage outside the premises. Some of these signage complaints have occurred through objections to licence applications, while others have been made via direct complaints. The contractor reports that community complainants have identified a number of successes in having alcohol product and roof signage removed.

Recommendation/s

That the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board:

a) Receive the community-led response to alcohol licensing and advertising report.

b) Approve funding of $1,000 from the community response fund, to Turehou Maori Wardens ki Otara Charitable Trust towards the costs of organising and hosting an event on Saturday 31 October 2015, to celebrate the successes of the community-led response to alcohol licensing and advertising project and the retention of alcohol bans in the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu and Ōtara-Papatoetoe Local Board areas.

Comments

Background

9. The Māngere-Ōtāhuhu and Ōtara-Papatoetoe Local Boards have aspirations in their respective Local Board Plans to minimise the impact of alcohol-related harm in local communities and have submitted on and advocated for the control of alcohol-related billboards and signs. This work commenced in the previous (2014/15) financial year.

10. Living in safe and healthy neighbourhoods is a priority in the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board Plan 2014. The plan asserts that “We want to see the communities of Māngere-Ōtāhuhu thriving in safe environments, and having opportunities to contribute to safety. Much of the crime in our area stems from drug and alcohol abuse and we are determined to tackle this issue. The harmful effects of gambling and alcohol are even worse for those in communities who are living on low incomes, in rented homes and not always in employment. Much of the impact is on children, who are denied a fair start in life. We all want our children to have the care and opportunities they deserve. The board will take a lead role in developing local policy around liquor licensing, continuing to push strongly for fewer off-licences to be granted and with stricter conditions, such as shorter opening hours and operating in more socially responsible ways.” (Page 38).

11. The Sale and Supply of Alcohol Act 2012 (‘Act’) came into force on 18 December 2013 and aims to reduce the harm caused by excessive drinking. The Act gives communities more of a voice over the sale and supply of alcohol in their area. In particular, it expands the criteria upon which communities may object to a licence application.

12. The board had objected to several liquor licences in the past on a case by case basis, and a copy of the previous resolutions relating to alcohol are attached. Attachment A.

13. Barriers to community participation in liquor licensing processes such as lack of knowledge; objections not being simple, or each application requiring a tailored objection specific to the case, were identified. In July 2014, the board resolved to address these barriers and support their local communities to make objections with the idea of limiting new applications and seeking better conditions for existing off-licences.

14. An independent consultant, Dr Grant Hewison, was contracted to provide policy advice and technical support to community organisations, members of the public and local board members. The support relates to both new and the renewal of alcohol licence applications within the local board area and utilises the Community Action Against Alcohol Harm Facebook page to communicate relevant alcohol licence applications and other information relevant to the community-led project.

Link to facebook page: www.facebook.com/CommunityActionAgainstAlcoholHarm

15. The Community Action Against Alcohol Harm Facebook page is a shared resource with the Ōtara-Papatoetoe Local Board. It was launched on 13 October 2014 and is a place for concerned community members to come together in a positive way and get access to information and tools to support them making their voices heard in alcohol licensing and alcohol harm minimisation processes.

16. The success of these resources and support were reported to both local boards in June 2015, and decisions were made to continue with a joint local board project to enable communities to be more empowered and have greater input into alcohol licensing processes, and also to develop a new community-led project around alcohol signage removal.

17. As a result, Dr Hewison now provides policy advice and technical support for a coordinated, community-led approach to removing existing non-compliant alcohol advertising signage from private premises such as bottle stores in the local board areas. Part of this role is also assisting the groups to promote and highlight progress and achievements.

18. Some project milestones have been achieved and the Turehou Maori Wardens are organising an event to celebrate the success of the community led response to alcohol licensing project and the recent review of alcohol bans in the local board areas on Saturday 31 October. The Turehou Maori Wardens will get together with the Otara Gambling Alcohol Action Group; Respect Our Community Campaign (ROCC) and individual submitters to the recent alcohol ban review.

19. The event is planned to be held from 10am to 1pm over both local board areas. Non-permanent alcohol ban stencils will be painted/chalked on the footpaths in town centres and outside major parks where alcohol bans have been retained, extended and confirmed. The event will conclude with a celebratory BBQ lunch at the Māngere East Community Centre. Funding of $1,000 per board from the community response fund is requested to cover the cost of cardboard for the ‘stencil templates’, non-permanent paint/chalk and the BBQ. The celebration provides the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu and Ōtara-Papatoetoe Local Board members’ the opportunity to personally thank their communities and further promote their commitment to minimise the impact of alcohol-related harm in local communities.

Alcohol Licensing

20. Since January 2015, there has been no new off-licence applications made in the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu and Ōtara-Papatoetoe Local Board areas (apart from Countdown Māngere East which represents a new licence replacing an existing licence). However, applications for new licences are still being received in other local board areas. This may to some degree be related to the persistent community-led response to alcohol licensing in the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu and Ōtara-Papatoetoe Local Board areas.

21. However, 11 objections have been made for renewals in the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu and Ōtara-Papatoetoe Local Board areas from 1 January to 30 August 2015. Several other applications were notified to the community and assessed, with no objections being made.

22. Of the 11 objections, two have now been heard by the District Licensing Committee and one has been ‘settled’ with a hearing. The nine remaining in the system are set out below:

Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

· Hall Avenue Liquor Centre (167 Hall Avenue, Māngere)

o objection to closing hours, no single sales, excessive advertising

· Ōtāhuhu Discount Liquor (7/626-628 Great South Road)

o objection to closing hours, no single sales, excessive advertising, co-location with a petrol station

· Super Liquor Ōtāhuhu (52 Atkinson Avenue, Ōtāhuhu)

o objection to closing hours, no single sales, excessive advertising

· R8 Nightclub

o objection to issues of patrons drinking, loitering and fighting in Māngere Town Centre carpark

Ōtara-Papatoetoe Local Board

· Black Rose Nightclub (318 Great South Road, Papatoetoe)

o objection to variation of hours to open at 12 noon rather than 9.30pm

· Caspar Road Liquor Centre (2b Caspar Road, Papatoetoe)

o objection to closing hours, no single sales, excessive advertising

· Countdown Papatoetoe (Hunters Plaza, 217 Great South Road, Papatoetoe)

o objections to management of shoplifting of alcohol, support for single alcohol area being shifted to rear of premises

· Thirsty Liquor Everitt Road (62 Everitt Road, Ōtara)

o objection to closing hours, no single sales, excessive advertising

· Liquor Spot Papatoetoe

o objection to closing hours, no single sales, excessive advertising

23. Between 1 January and 30 August 2015, the Auckland District Licensing Committee (‘DLC’) had issued decisions regarding:

Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

· Countdown Airport (400 George Bolt Drive, Māngere)

· Quick Stop Liquor Māngere (51 Imrie Avenue, Māngere)

· Countdown Māngere East (1/359 Massey Road, Māngere East)

· Kingsford Superette (57 Raglan Street, Māngere East)

· Liquor Specialists (64 Vine Street, Māngere East)

· Savill Drive Liquor (1/1 Savill Drive)

· Choice Liquor Mart (91 Māngere Road, Ōtāhuhu)

Ōtara-Papatoetoe Local Board

· Portage Road Discount Liquor (51 Portage Road, Papatoetoe)

24. The successes of the objectors are summarised in paragraphs 31 and 32 of this report. While no renewals have been refused altogether, a number of conditions are becoming commonplace (e.g. no single sales). When there are no objections, typically no conditions are applied to a licence. Negotiated settlements were achieved with Pak’nSave Māngere (Bader Drive, Māngere).

25. Once conditions are in place, community groups are now also doing checks of their own to make sure there is compliance with the conditions set down by the District Licensing Committee.

26. The full decisions are available at:

http://www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/EN/AboutCouncil/meetings_agendas/hearings/Pages/districtlicensingcommitteehearings2014.aspx

Report of the project contractor, Dr G Hewison

27. The project contractor has reported that a wide network of objectors has been developed, with regular objectors covering Māngere, Ōtāhuhu, Papatoetoe and Ōtara. Dr Hewison states that the skill levels and confidence of objectors has grown significantly with repeated experiences at hearings. Objectors are now training each other, passing on experiences and supporting each other through the processes. It was evident to the contractor that this network grew notably through the recent alcohol ban review process.

28. All licence notifications are being identified and posted on the Community Action Against Alcohol Harm Facebook page, with people coming forward to make objections.

29. Following notification and an objection being lodged, the objectors usually contact the applicant to discuss whether the objection can be withdrawn on the basis of undertakings or conditions being given. In some cases, this can be achieved, for example Pak’nSave Māngere. In most cases, applicants do not agree to the undertakings or conditions being sought, such as earlier closing hours or closing during after-school periods. In these cases, a number of objectors have decided to take the matter to a hearing.

30. The contractor reports that community objectors feel that the approach and decisions of the DLC remain inconsistent, making it difficult for objectors to respond. In some instances, the DLC has actively supported the goals of objectors (e.g. Choice Liquor Mart), while in other instances; the DLC has opposed the standing of objectors (e.g. Hall Avenue Liquor Centre and Countdown Airport).

31. The contractor reports that a number of conditions and undertakings requested by objectors are now being accepted, with applicants often agreeing to these in advance of a hearing:

· There is not to be any sale of single units of beer, cider or RTDs in less than 445ml packaging with the exception of boutique and handcrafted beer and cider.

· 50% clear visibility through the front windows of the premises.

· No sandwich board signs on the footpath advertising alcohol products.

· Persons in school uniform are not to enter onto, or remain on the premises at any time (where the premises are located close to a school).

32. With regard to supermarkets, objectors have often been able to achieve agreement to earlier closing hours (e.g. 10pm rather than 11pm) and that partitions are placed between the entrance/exit and alcohol area (if it is adjacent to the alcohol area) so that the alcohol section is not visible from the entrance/exit.

33. The view of the contractor is that community objectors supported by the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu and Ōtara-Papatoetoe Local Boards are acting as an important ‘check and balance’ on the whole system. At a minimum, recent decisions have recognised this role being played by the community. The result has been in conditions to licences and undertakings or better outcomes than if no objection had been made.

Alcohol Signage

34. Complaints have now been made to most existing off-licence premises in Māngere, Ōtāhuhu, Otara and Papatoetoe with non-complying alcohol signage outside. The initial focus has been on those significantly in breach of rule 5.14.9.5.2 of the Manukau District Plan. These rules do not allow signs on rooftops or brand/product signage unless there is resource consent. These complaints made to date include:

· Otara Liquor Warehouse (62 Everitt Road)

· Discount Liquor East Tamaki (1 Birmingham Road)

· Portage Road Discount Liquor (Portage Road)

· Wymondley Discount Liquor (2C Larsen Street)

· Chapel Downs Discount Liquor (D/112 Dawson Road)

· Bairds Road Discount Liquor Centre (127 Bairds Road)

· Cherry One (Liquor Spot) (271 East Tamaki Road)

· KK Liquor (4/93 Ferguson Road)

· Papatoetoe Liquor Stop - Liquor Spot (8/14 St George Street)

· Paradise Bar (Bairds Road, Ōtara)

Below are before and after photos of the Liquor Specialists Vine Street, Māngere East. The ‘before’ has product signage, the ‘after’ has a re-named and re-branded store.

These photos show work in progress at the Choice Liquor Mart, Ōtāhuhu. There is temporary soft drink signage covering alcohol advertising.

35. With regard to alcohol signage within Ōtāhuhu (that is within the legacy Auckland City Council area), the Manukau District Plan did not apply. Consideration is being given to whether the alcohol signage complies with the new Auckland Council and Auckland Transport Signage Bylaw 2015 that came into effect on 1 October 2015.

Consideration

Local Board views and implications

36. Some of the signage complaints have occurred through objections to licence applications, while others have been made via direct complaints.

37. The contractor reports that there have been a number of successes with alcohol product and roof signage removed, such as

· Portage Road Discount Liquor

· Thirsty Liquor Vine Street

· Choice Liquor Mart

38. Further follow-up complaints are now being generated.

Local Board views and implications

39. Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board has continued to support individuals or organisations within its communities to object to liquor license applications (on a case by case basis) for 2015/16.

40. In May 2015, the board provided feedback to the Regional Strategy and Policy Committee on the on the District Licensing Committee structure review. This was supported by Fa’anānā Efeso Collins, Chair of Ōtara-Papatoetoe Local Board and Nick Bakulich representing Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board giving a presentation to the Regional Strategy and Policy Committee in June 2015.

41. As a result, opportunities for improvement that were identified through the District Licensing Committee review were endorsed by the Regional Strategy and Policy Committee in August 2015.

Māori impact statement

42. Research published in The New Zealand Medical Journal (2005) indicates that Māori are disproportionately impacted by the negative effects of alcohol abuse. Māori might therefore stand to benefit from a community-led approach that provides checks and balances on liquor licence applications and the removal of signage and billboards promoting alcohol consumption.

43. Some urban marae and other mataawaka organisations may share the local board’s objectives regarding controls on supply and promotion of alcohol. The provision of local board support services for this project extends to known Māori organisations, thereby further enabling them to address such objectives.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Previous Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board resolutions relating to alcohol	21

Signatories

Authors	Carol McGarry - Democracy Advisor
Authorisers	Carol McKenzie-Rex - Relationship Manager

Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

21 October 2015

Report back on 2014/2015 Local Environment and Waste Minimisation Programme and Proposed 2015/2016 Local Environment and Waste Minimisation Programme

File No.: CP2015/17837

Purpose

1. To provide a report back on the local environment and waste minimsation work programme funded by the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board (the board) in 2014/2015.

2. To present a proposed work programme supporting the board’s 2015/2016 budgets for environmental initiatives, including Manukau Harbour and Tamaki Estuary; Manukau Harbour Forum; waste reduction education and awareness; and southern recycling centre options development.

Executive Summary

3. In 2014/2015, the board funded a diverse environment work programme, including a water sensitive design project, industry pollution prevention programme and ecological restoration. This report provides a summary report back on the achievements of that programme.

4. This report also presents a proposed environment work programme to the board for its 2015/2016 environmental initiatives, including Manukau Harbour and Tamaki Estuary budget line ($130,000). It is recommended that the board use this budget to support ongoing ecological restoration work at Pukaki Crater and Otuataua Stonefields, as well as the Wai Care programme in the Harania and Tararata Creeks. A review of restoration opportunity along the Oruarangi is also proposed as part of the 2015/2016 environment work programme.

5. In addition, this report proposes a work programme supporting the waste reduction education and awareness ($20,000) and southern recycling centre options development ($20,000) budgets included in the board’s 2015/2016 locally driven initiatives (LDI) budget.

Recommendations

That the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board:

a) Approves the 2015/2016 environment work programme as outlined below;

Budget Line	Project	Objective	Cost
Manukau Harbour Forum	Manukau Harbour Forum	· To fund year 2 of the Manukau Harbour Forum work programme	$12,000
Environmental Initiatives, including Manukau Harbour and Tamaki Estuary	Pukaki Crater	· To support restoration of the Pukaki Crater.	$20,000
	Portage Canal Foreshore Reserve	· To support restoration of the Portage Canal Foreshore reserve.	$20,000
	Otuataua Stonefields	· To undertake additional weed control work, and a further lizard survey.	$10,000
	Wai Care	· To undertake riparian restoration along the Harania and Tararata Creeks · To engage schools and young people in caring for their local streams · To monitor water quality in three streams.	$35,000
	Oruarangi	· To review previous restoration activity, and scope future restoration work. · To provide funding for initial restoration work.	$15,000
	Industry Pollution Prevention Programme	· To support prevention of pollution at source through a proactive educational programme, targeting business and industry in Ōtāhuhu.	$20,000
Waste reduction education and awareness	Community Waste Minmisaton Initiatives	· To support community engagement and awareness around upcoming changes to inorganic collection.	$20,000
	Southern recycling centre options development	· To further develop local options for establishing a resource recovery facility in the board area.	$20,000
Total			$172,000

b) Notes that funding for the Manukau Harbour Forum was agreed at the board’s May 2015 meeting.

Comments

6. In 2014/2015 the board resolved to allocate its environmental initiatives budget ($130,000) to a number of projects supporting water quality improvements and ecological restoration across the board area, with a particular focus on the Manukau Harbour.

7. Table 1 below provides a summary of the achievements and outcomes of the 2014/2015 environment work programme.

Project	Achievements
Manukau Harbour Forum	· In 2014/2015, the Forum’s work programme focused on developing a strategic communications plan, including developing content for the Manukau Harbour Forum and Manukau Harbour pages on the Auckland Council website as well as the ongoing newsletters to stakeholders and interested parties. At the time of writing, a total of three of the flagship sites events had been held. · A report back to the Forum on its 2014/2015 work programme was considered at the Forum’s August 2015 meeting. A copy of that report is appended as Attachment A.
Industry Pollution Prevention Programme	· The commencement of the 2014/2015 IPPP was delayed due to capacity issues with our contractor and Makaurau Marae. It is not expected to be completed until September 2015. · A full report back on the programme will be provided to the board upon conclusion of the programme.
Otuataua Stonefields	· This project supported strategic weed control at the reserve to support regionally rare lava forest remnants. This included control of gorse, Chinese privet, woolly nightshade, moth plant, pampas, blackberry and climbing asparagus across the 100hectare reserve. · As per the board’s resolution at its May 2015 meeting, the project to build a fence around the māwhai population was put on indefinite hold as a new māwhai population had been discovered following the additional weed control described above. Funding was re-directed towards the Pukaki Crater restoration project noted below.
Pukaki Crater	· After consultation with iwi and a consulting archaeologist, it was agreed that mitigating erosion in the south-west corner of the site (near the urupā) was a priority for restoration. Funding has supported a consultant to prepare and lodge resource consents for the required fencing and planting. Fencing materials have also been sourced in anticipation of being installed in the 2015/2016 financial year. · Control of woolly nightshade, gorse, and blue morning glory was undertaken around the crater rim.
Wai Care	· In 2014/2015, the board-funded Wai Care programme focussed on restoration activity along the southern tributary of the Harania Creek. A recent community planting day saw a total of 4300 plants put in the ground by volunteers from Sutton Park Primary, Nga Tapuwae, Southern Cross and Otahuhu colleges, Te Kura Kaupapa Maori ō Mangere (TKKMM), Auckland Seventh-Day Adventist High School, the Tongan RSA and local residents. Litter clean ups also took place in this location. · Monitoring continued at Harania and Tararata streams to record keep a watch on sediment and other pollution sources (especially ‘first flush’ flows following lengthy summer dry spells) and to develop an understanding of temporal water quality trends. The results of this monitoring are appended as Attachment B. · The report back from our contractor on the Wai Care programme is appended as Attachment C.
Water Sensitive Design – Te Puea Marae	· Funding from the board has supported the purchase and installation of a 2000L garden watering tank with a pump for watering the existing edible gardens and two garden tanks for self-watering herb gardens. These devices were installed at the marae in August 2015. The marae committee will be considering the installation of interperative signage explaining the water sensitive design devices and their impacts at its next meeting.
Southern Resource Recovery Scoping Study	· A report on phase one of the scoping study was presented at a joint workshop in July 2015. The phase one work focused on ‘People, Place and Planning’ – identifying potential operators of resource recovery facilities, encouraging collaborations between organisations, and determining capacity building requirements. · This project is not due for completion until the end of the 2015 calendar year.

Table 1: Achievements of 2014/2015 local environment work programme

Proposed 2015/2016 Local Environment and Waste Minimisation Work Programme

8. It is recommended that the 2015/2016 local environment work programme similarly consist of a range of projects supporting water quality improvements, ecological restoration and waste minimisation initiatives. Table 2 below provides a summary of the proposed 2015/2016 environment work programme, with additional information noted in paragraphs 9 to 35 below.

Budget Line	Project	Summary	Cost
(Line item)	Manukau Harbour Forum	· To support year 2 of the Manukau Harbour Forum work programme.	$12,000
Environmental Initiatives, including Manukau Harbour and Tamaki Estuary	Industry Pollution Prevention Programme	· To support prevention of pollution at source through a proactive educational programme, targeting business and industry in Ōtāhuhu.	$20,000
	Oruarangi	· To review previous restoration activity, and scope future restoration work. · To provide funding for initial restoration work.	$15,000
	Portage Canal Foreshore Reserve	· To support restoration of the Portage Canal Foreshore reserve.	$20,000
	Otuataua Stonefields	· To undertake additional weed control work, and a further lizard survey.	$10,000
	Pukaki Crater	· To support restoration of the Pukaki Crater.	$20,000
	Wai Care	· To undertake riparian restoration along the Harania and Tararata Creeks · To engage schools and young people in caring for their local streams · To monitor two streams for water quality	$35,000
(Line Item)	Waste Minimisation Initiatives	· To support community engagement and awareness around upcoming changes to inorganic collection.	$20,000
(Line Item)	Southern Recycling Centre Options Development	· To further develop local options for establishing a resource recovery facility in the board area.	$20,000
		Total	$172,000

Table 2: Summary of proposed 2015/2016 environment work programme

Manukau Harbour Forum

9. The board agreed to fund year 2 of the Manukau Harbour Forum (the Forum) work programme at its May 2015 meeting (resolution number MO/2015/73). It is recommended that this be funded from the specific line item for Manukau Harbour Forum.

10. In 2014/2015, the Forum’s work programme focused on developing a strategic communications plan, including developing content for the Manukau Harbour Forum and Manukau Harbour pages on the Auckland Council website as well as the ongoing newsletters to stakeholders and interested parties. At the time of writing, a total of three of the flagship sites events had been held.

11. A report back to the Forum on its 2014/2015 work programme was considered at the Forum’s August 2015 meeting. A copy of that report is appended as Attachment A.

Industry Pollution Prevention Programme ($20,000)

12. The board has funded an Industry Pollution Prevention Programme (IPPP) as part of its local environment work programme for the past two financial years. The IPPP is a non-regulatory tool designed to address pollution at source by working with business and industry to assess site practices that may result in pollution entering local waterways.

13. In 2013/2014, the project was in part an immediate reaction to a significant pollution incident in the Oruarangi Awa. In 2014/2015, the IPPP took a more proactive approach with education sessions undertaken with businesses. As well as focusing on spill response and chemical handling, representatives of Makaurau Marae attended the education sessions to provide a Maori perspective on the importance of healthy waterways.

14. The commencement of the 2014/2015 IPPP was delayed due to capacity issues with our contractor and Makaurau Marae. It is not expected to be completed until September 2015. A full report back on the programme to the board will be provided upon conclusion of the programme.

15. As the IPPP has for the past two financial years focused on industry within the Airport Oaks, Māngere subcatchment, it is recommended that in 2015/2016 the focus moves to the Ōtāhuhu area. The 2015/2016 programme will target the area marked in red on the map appended at Attachment D. This locale is adjacent to the Manukau Harbour edge and is characterised by larger heavy industrial sites in the western half, along James Fletcher Drive, and smaller businesses of all types in the eastern half around Great South Road.

16. It is recommended the programme commence in the western half at the harbour edge, and work eastwards. The targeted area is large and may require a second phase to complete visits to all businesses with potential pollution risks. It is recommended that the board have regard to funding a second programme in this area when considering its 2016/2017 LDI budget.

Oruarangi ($15,000)

17. In June 2013, a spill of purple dye upstream of the Oruarangi Awa resulted in significant ecological damage to the Oruarangi. Prior to this incident, extensive restoration and riparian planting had been undertaken along the banks by the local community. It is recommended that the board allocate funding of $15,000 through its environment work programme for a stocktake of previous work, and to identify future planting requirements. This would include the development of a planting plan for the Oruarangi.

18. This planting plan provides an opportunity for the Makaurau Marae nursery to provide plants for the restoration. In addition, the marae have indicated interest in a restoration project that could involve the kapa haka group.

19. Stormwater are designing a wetland upstream that will provide for first flush treatment of stormwater before it enters the river, and contain any future spills. This proposal is currently at the business case development stage.

Portage Canal Foreshore Reserve

20. The Portage Canal Foreshore Reserve is listed as a medium to high priority for restoration in the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board Ecological Prioritisation Report (prioritisation report). The prioritisation report also notes that restoration of this area will support wildlife linkages. Students from nearby Fairburn Primary School have been helping to restore and care for the reserve through the local and sports parks’ ‘Adopt a Park’ programme since 2013.

21. Local parks have agreed to develop a formal restoration plan for the reserve. However, it is recommended that the board set aside funding of $20,000 to support implementation of that plan. The school is supportive of taking on a more active role in caring for the reserve, including monitoring of stream quality and stream life. Opportunities for the Wai Care programme to support that goal will be explored as part of the proposed Wai Care programme described in paragraphs 27 to 30 below.

Otuataua Stonefields

22. The Otuataua Stonefields is noted as a reserve of significant ecological value in the prioritisation report. Two projects at the Otuataua Stonefields were agreed as part of the 2014/2015 work programme. The first project was to review current pest animal control methodology, and to undertake weed control over and above that funded through the local board’s parks budget. As a result of that weed control work, a second māwhai (native cucumber) population was discovered. As such, the second project to build a fence to protect the original population was no longer required.^{^[1]}

23. The review of pest animal control concluded that existing methods are sufficient. However, it is recommended to continue with the additional weed control. In 2014/2015, control of gorse, Chinese privet, woolly nightshade, moth plant, pampas, blackberry and climbing asparagus was undertaken. Although these weed species are not required to be removed in the Regional Pest Management Strategy (RPMS), they will compete with native plants if not effectively controlled.

24. Two lizard species were noted at Otuataua following a survey funded by the board in 2013/2014. However, one species previously recorded was not observed during the 2013/2014 survey. It is recommended that a second survey be undertaken as part of this project to confirm that information.

Pukaki Crater

25. Pukaki Crater is also listed as a medium to high priority for restoration in the prioritisation plan. The reserve includes rare lava forest, and freshwater wetland areas. The restoration plan recommends undertaking restoration planting and weed control around the crater rim. However, as part of preparations to undertake that work, it was noted that a more pressing issue was erosion near the urupā. As such, this work was undertaken using the board’s 2014/2015 funding.

26. In 2015/2016, it is suggested that the recommended planting and weed control around the crater rim be undertaken at a cost of $20,000.

Wai Care

27. For the past two financial years, the board-funded Wai Care programme in this area has consisted of three streams; water quality monitoring, riparian restoration, and engagement with local schools. It is recommended that the board fund a similar programme as part of its 2015/2016 work programme.

28. It is proposed to continue water sampling with local volunteers at selected sites along Hara, with particular emphasis on hydrocarbons, sediment, phosphate and e. coli. In addition, the water quality programme will engage with Makaurau Marae in the monitoring of the Oruarangi.

29. At present, there are three schools actively engaged in the Wai Care programme (Te Kura Kaupapa Maori ō Māngere, Auckland Seventh Day Adventist High School, and Otahuhu Intermediate). It is recommended that the Wai Care programme continue to provide in classroom education to local schools about the importance of waterways, as well as engaging schools in the monitoring and restoration of local streams.

30. Funding for restoration planting along the Tararata and Harania is proposed as part of the overall budget for Wai Care. A further $15,000 has been made available through resource consent offset planting for restoration along the Haranai Creek.

Waste Reduction and Education Awareness

Local Waste Minimisation Projects

31. During the development of the Waste Management and Minimisation Plan (WMMP), it was recognised that alignment of waste services across the region, particularly the move towards user pays, would be challenging for residents in the south. As such, significant regional investment has been made in supporting waste minimisation education and engagement over the past two financial years. This education is primarily being delivered through a community contract with the ME0 Family Services Centre.

32. The board has also recognised that new waste collection services will impact on its community and as such has set aside $20,000 in its 2015/2016 LDI for waste reduction and education awareness. It is recommended that the board allocate this budget line to extend the work being delivered through the community contracts, with a particular focus on educating residents on impending changes to inorganic collections.

33. As part of its decision making on the Long-term Plan 2015-2025, the governing body agreed that from this financial year the inorganic collection service will consist of annual, on property, booked collection. The local waste minimisation programme could consist of a door knocking campaign, using local community waste champions working alongside Council’s in-house Waste Wise Advisors (WaWas). In addition, it is suggested that a creative engagement event, possibly at the Māngere market, take place during the inorganic collection period to demonstrate turning waste into resources.

Southern Recycling Centre Options Development

34. Along with four other local boards in southern Auckland, the board contributed funding of $10,000 to support a scoping study to establish the resource recovery network in the south. Regional funding of $50,000 was also made available to support this project. A report on the completion of phase one work to identify potential operators of resource recovery facilities, encourage collaboration between organisations, and determine capacity building requirements was presented at a joint workshop in July 2015. The scoping study is due for completion at the end of 2015.

35. As the scoping study is not yet complete, it is not possible to note specific projects to be supported by the board’s budget for southern recycling centre options development. However, it is likely that this budget will support capacity building of groups to eventually run recycling centres, as well as work to identify possible recycling sites within the board area.

Regional Projects

36. Along with the work described in paragraphs 34 to 35 above, regional funding supports a number of community waste minimisation education programmes available to Māngere-Ōtāhuhu residents. A full list and brief description of those projects is appended at Attachment D.

Other Opportunities

37. The Enviroschools Programme is a long standing whole-school and early childhood centre approach which has been active in the Auckland region since 2002. The programme encourages young people to actively participate to help create a sustainable future for the Auckland region. The four Enviroschools in the board area are as follows;

· Mangere Bridge Kindergarten;

· Otahuhu Intermediate

· Otahuhu School; and

· Otahuhu Kindergarten.

38. An opportunity has arisen to for local boards to support their local Enviroschools through funding the purchase of new signage. The Toimata Foundation (formerly the Enviroschools Foundation) has developed an inspiring new sign to be placed outside each Enviroschool (example of the design is below). These signs will show the early childhood centres and schools’ commitment to sustainability and highlight the growing network of Enviroschools which are supported by Auckland Council.

39. The cost of purchasing this signage is approximately $452.00 ($113 per sign).

Consideration

Local Board views and implications

40. The proposed environment work programme has been developed to align with the outcome of ‘a place where environment and heritage are protected, enhanced and preserved’ as expressed in the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board Plan (the Plan). In particular, the work programme supports the following key initiatives noted in the plan;

· Coastal and Waterways restoration projects;

· Manukau Harbour Forum projects;

· Increased community engagement and awareness on reducing waste; and

· Assess and develop options for resource recovery in the south.

41. In addition, a number of the proposed projects provide an opportunity for school children and young people in the board area to be involved in community project.

42. The draft 2015/2016 environment work programme was presented to the board at a workshop in July 2015. The proposed waste minimisation projects were also discussed separately with the portfolio holder.

Māori impact statement

43. Makaurau Marae will be involved in any restoration proposal for the Oruarangi. Representatives of the marae have approached Council staff requesting support for the nursery and guidance on restoration opportunities.

44. Any restoration work at Pukaki Crater will require engagement with, and approval from, Pukaki Marae. In particular, the proposed work will prevent further erosion near the urupā.

45. Several projects funded as part of the 2014/2015 environment work programme provided Maori with opportunities to participate in the care of the natural environment. Te Kura Kaupapa Maori ō Māngere is one of the schools involved in the Wai Care programme funded by the board. Other projects involving Maori include the water sensitive design programme with Te Puea Marae and the involvement of Makaurau Marae representatives in the design and delivery of the IPPP.

Implementation

46. Weed control and planting projects often require ongoing funding in future years. Council’s local and sports parks department has advised that there is limited funding in future years for maintenance of new planting.

47. As projects proposed as part of the environment work programme will be undertaken on local parks, staff will continue to collaborate with the local parks department in delivering any agreed projects. Some projects will be delivered by local parks but reported through the environment portfolio.

48. There are no further implementation issues arising from this report. Regular reporting on project delivery will be through the quarterly report from the Infrastructure and Environmental Services department, or as required.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	2014/2015 Manukau Harbour Forum work programme - Report Back on Achievements	59
b View	Stream Monitoring Results	73
c View	2014/2015 Wai Care Programme - Report Back	91
d View	Map - Location of proposed Otahuhu Industry Pollution Prevention Programme	95
e View	Regional Waste Minimisation Education Programme	97

Signatories

Authors

Emma Joyce - Relationship Advisor

Theresa Pearce – Enviromental Programmes Advisor

Authorisers

John Dragicevich - Manager Infrastructure and Environmental Services

Carol McKenzie-Rex - Relationship Manager

Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

21 October 2015

Mangere-Otahuhu Local Grants Round One 2015/2016

File No.: CP2015/21247

Purpose

1. The purpose of this report is to present applications received for round one of the Mangere-Otahuhu Local Board Quick Response Grants 2015/2016. The local board is required to fund, part-fund or decline these applications.

Executive Summary

2. The Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board has set a total community grants budget of $137,000 and $122,000 local events budget for the 2015/2016 financial year. To date a total of $15,659 has been allocated to the community grants budget, leaving a total of $121,341 and a total of $93,300 has been allocated to the local events budget, leaving a total of $28,700.

3. Thirty five applications were received in this round, with a total requested of $317,281.71.

Recommendation/s

That the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board:

a) Consider the applications listed in Table One below and agree to fund, part-fund or decline each application in this round.

Applicant	Project Focus	Project		Requested		Eligible/Ineligible
Chinese New Settlers Services Trust	Arts and culture	Towards the rent, marketing, coaching and coordination of the Little Kungfu programme		$3,000.00		Eligible
Te kura Kaupapa Maori a Rohe o Mangere	Arts and culture	Towards transport for a trip to Wellington for the kapa haka competition		$2,000.00		Ineligible
Massive Company Trust	Arts and culture	Towards the publicity and digital marketing costs for the production		$10,000.00		Eligible
Justin Haiu	Arts and culture	Towards the devising, rehearsal process and performances of the production		$5,360.00		Eligible
PHAB Association Auckland	Arts and culture	Towards youth worker wages		$10,000.00		Eligible
Sutton Park Neighbourhood Support Group (NSG)	Community	Towards hireage of activities, stage, toilets, prizes, marquees and food stall				Ineligible
KidsCan Charitable Trust	Community	Towards purchasing headlice treatment		$5,000.00		Eligible
Royal New Zealand Coastguard Boating Education Limited	Community	Towards equipment, training and certificates to set up the safe boating programmes		$8,444.47		Eligible
Mangere East ACCESS Trust	Community	Towards costs for the children's entry fees, transport and resources for the school holiday programme		$7,380.00		Eligible
Accelerating Aotearoa Incorporated	Community	Towards wages for the "Innovation Space" operations manager, administration and office expenses, social media and website development costs		$40,000.00		Eligible
Akoteu Fakaili Mo'ui ECE Trust	Community	Towards the playground upgrade and development for drop curtain roller/gear box.		$11,333.19		Eligible
Life Education Trust South East Auckland trading as Life Education Counties Manukau	Community	Towards delivery costs of the Life Education programme		$15,000.00		Eligible
Otahuhu Town Hall Community Centre - School Holiday Programme	Community	Towards transportation, food, first aid, sports equipment and miscellaneous costs		$5,000.00		Ineligible
South Auckland Tongan SDA Community	Community	Towards purchasing equipment for the brass band		$30,000.00		Eligible
KoNa Programmes Limited	Community	Towards running the zero waste workshops in community centres		$3,000.00		Eligible
Dance Therapy NZ	Community	Towards the Dance Therapy programme costs for terms one and two in 2016		$3,731.00		Eligible
Auckland Young Womens Christian Association T/A YWCA Auckland	Community	Towards delivering two Safe for Life workshops in the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board area		$1,600.00		Eligible
Bhartiya Samaj Charitable Trust	Community	Towards the elder support programme		$5,000.00		Eligible
The Retreat NZ	Community	Towards the salary for a consultant with experience in conducting a localised outreach programme		$2,592.00		Eligible
Maa Shakti Charitable Trust	Events	Towards venue hire, marquees, food stalls, fireworks, PA system, lights, video shooting, trophies, food, refreshments, advertising and publicity, printing and stage performances for the family fun event		$25,000.00		Eligible
Mangere Community Hub	Events	Towards staging, audio, sound system, lighting for the Love and Light Christmas event.		$10,000.00		Eligible
Otahuhu Mainstreet & Commercial Association Inc	Events	Towards advertising of the Otahuhu Health Expo		$2,000.00		Eligible
Mangere Town Centre	Events	Towards the sound system, production and artist fees for the New Zealand Music month event		$5,000.00		Eligible
Hindu Heritage Research Foundation(NZ)	Events	Towards the truck stage and waste management for the Family fun day		$3,814.00		Eligible
Special Olympics Mangere	Sport and recreation	Towards accommodation and transport for the North island Basketball event		$927.00		Eligible
Counties Manukau Sports Foundation	Sport and recreation	Towards the delivery of five initiatives		$87,000.00		Eligible
Muller Pacific	Sport and recreation	Towards equipment hire, uniforms and trophies for a sporting event		$2,000.00		Eligible
Urban EcoLiving Charitable Trust Urban Eco	Environment	Towards operating costs for delivering the Tread Lightly Caravan		$3,859.00		Eligible
Children’s Autism Foundation	Community	Towards delivering community support programmes		$2,229.15		Eligible
Community Impact Trust	Community		Towards purchase of cleaning equipment		$1,500.00	Eligible
Auckland City Mission	Community		Towards preparation and delivery of food parcels		$10,000.00	Ineligible
Mind over Manner	Community		Towards the delivery of workshops for families		$5,864.40	Eligible
Autism New Zealand Incorporated – Auckland branch	Community		Towards general operating costs		$2,000.00	Eligible
LifeKidz Trust	Community		Towards school holiday programme		$5,0000.00	Eligible
Shakti Asian Women’s Centre Inc	Community		Towards training for community advocates prorgamme		$1,585.00	Eligible
Total					$317,281.71.

Comments

4. The implementation of the new Community Grants Policy commenced on 1 July 2015. The policy supports each local board to adopt a grants programme for 2015/2016 and the Mangere-Otahuhu Local Board adopted its grants programme on 15 April 2015 (see Attachment A).

5. The local board grants programme sets out:

· local board priorities

· lower priorities for funding

· exclusions

· grant types, the number of grant rounds and when these will open and close

· any additional accountability requirements.

6. The Mangere-Otahuhu Local Board will operate two local grants rounds for this financial year. The first local grants round closed on 31 August 2015.

7. The new community grant programmes have been extensively advertised through the new council grant webpage, local board webpages, local board e-newsletters and Facebook pages, council publications, radio, local newspapers and community networks. Staff have also conducted a series of public workshops in local board areas, which have been attended by approximately 1000 people across the Auckland region.

8. For the 2015/2016 financial year, the Mangere-Otahuhu Local Board set a total community budget of $137,000 and a local events budget of $122,000, as below:

2015/2016 Annual Budget	Fund Type	Grants paid	Balance
$137,000	Local Community Grants	$15,659	$121,341
$122,000	Local Events Fund	$93,300	$28,700

9. For the 2015/2016 financial year, the Mangere-Otahuhu Local Board set a total community grants budget of $137,000.00. It is recommended that the board consider allocating up to 25% of this in this grant round, which is $34,250.

10. Thirty-five applications were received for this quick response round, requesting a total of $317,281.71.

Consideration

Local Board views and implications

11. Local boards are responsible for the decision-making and allocation of local board community grants. The Mangere-Otahuhu Local Board is required to fund, part-fund or decline these grant applications against the local board priorities identified in the local board grant programme.

12. The board is requested to note that section 50 of the Community Grants Policy states “We will also provide feedback to unsuccessful grant applicants about why they have been declined, so they will know what they can do to increase their chances of success next time.”

13. A one-page summary of each application has been supplied to members under separate cover.

Māori impact statement

14. The provision of community grants provides opportunities for all Aucklanders to undertake projects, programmes, activities that benefit a wider range of individuals and groups, including Maori. As a guide for decision-making, in the allocation of community grants, the new community grants policy supports the principle of delivering positive outcomes for Maori. Two organisations applying in this round have identified as Maori and 16 have indicated their project targets Maori or Maori outcomes.

Implementation

15. The allocation of grants to community groups is within the adopted Long Term Plan 2015-2025 and local board agreements.

16. Following the Mangere-Otahuhu Local Board allocating funding for round one of the local grants, Commercial and Finance staff will notify the applicants of the local board’s decision.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Mangere-Otahuhu Grants Programme	105

Signatories

Authors

Tamarisk Sutherland - Environmetnal Funding coordinator

Authorisers

Marion Davies - Community Grants Operations Manager

Jennifer Rose - Operations Support Manager

Carol McKenzie-Rex - Relationship Manager

Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

21 October 2015

1. Introduction

In March 2015, the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board gave approval to undertake a needs and options analysis for arts and culture in Ōtāhuhu, and also to investigate future options for 12 High Street Ōtāhuhu for local community purposes that complement the adjacent Ōtāhuhu Town Hall and Community Centre (OTHCC). This study, while intended to be a general community-wide investigation was prompted because the library was soon to move to the recreation precinct, leaving vacant a large part of the downstairs space at 12 High Street. This space would then be considered to be ‘non-service’ by Council unless required for some other community needs.

Any decision about the future of 12 High Street would also affect several other tenants using the building:

· The OTHCC who manage the downstairs space at the back of the former library space

· Three community lease tenants who lease part of the upstairs floor

The project involved two parts:

Part 1 – general needs analysis of current and future arts, cultural and community needs

Part 2 – based on the findings of Part 1, consider and analyse options to address identified needs, particularly the potential use of 12 High Street, and including both facility and non-facility options

The objectives of the project are to:

· identify current and future arts, cultural and community activities and needs in the Ōtāhuhu area

· understand the extent to which existing facilities meet current and future activities/ needs

· identify opportunities for maximising use of current facilities and consider the potential for 12 High Street to address current and future needs

· analyse options for addressing identified needs and make recommendations

· provide the local board with information on needs in the Ōtāhuhu community to assist its future planning and decision making and to support a business case for community use of 12 High Street if this recommendation emerges from the study.

The study was focused on four Census Area Units as shown in Figure 1.

Figure 1 – Area of Study

2. Methodology

The principal approach to the study was to engage face-to-face with the community as far as possible, and to supplement that by phone calls, an on-line survey, analysis of census data, web-based research, and a review of relevant council documents, studies and recent community submissions.

Community engagement during July involved the following:

· 18 face-to-face interviews, and several follow-up phone discussions

· 7 phone interviews and 2 short discussions

· 5 focus groups

· OTHCC management committee meeting

· 10 to 15 minute on-site surveys in Ōtāhuhu with 14 locals

· 43 responses to an online survey

· 6 facility site visits

In total this community engagement sought the views of people who either live or work in Ōtāhuhu, including representatives from the arts and culture sector, youth, primary and secondary schools, religious and affiliated groups, iwi, Maori, senior citizens, recent migrants, people with disabilities, police, community service groups, and the business sector, as well as key stakeholders such as managers of council facilities, community lessees and local politicians. Follow-up discussions and site visits were undertaken to investigate the main community spaces and activities available in Ōtāhuhu.

A letter was emailed to 12 mana whenua groups inviting their participation in the study either in person, through a hui, by phone, or the online survey. Te Akitai Waiohua Iwi Authority responded to the online survey and also expressed an interest in participating in any other matters in terms of the research and providing feedback where appropriate. Ngai Tai ki Tamaki said they would prefer a face-to-face meeting once the community input had been analysed.

Note: It was not possible to comprehensively cover all communities of interest. However by talking with community leaders, key organisations and stakeholders in relation to the particular objectives of this study, the most relevant needs and issues have been identified. The most difficult groups to engage with were Asian/ South-east Asian and recent migrants with English as a second language.

3. Ōtāhuhu Community

3.1 Sociodemographic Characteristics – 2013 Census

Ōtāhuhu is an ethnically diverse community. The population is largely made up of Indian, Samoan and Tongan with about 2500 of each (refer Figure 2), followed by nearly 2200 NZ European and 1800 Maori. In all, nearly 50% identify with Pacific Island ethnicity and 30% Asian/ Southeast Asian. There are also a high number of languages spoken other than English. Ninety percent speak English, 4.6% speak Maori, 14.6% Samoan and 40% some other language.

Figure 2. Main Ethnicities of Ōtāhuhu Residents – 2013 Census

There is high religious affiliation, with only 14.9% saying they had none, compared to 37.8% for the Auckland Region (see Figure 3). 57.6% are Christian (compared to 47.6% for region) and 11.7% Hindu (compared to 4.7% for the region). As well,6.7% about 800 residents are Muslim and 3.4% or about 400 are Buddhist. This suggests that places of worship are important to Ōtāhuhu residents. However it seems that many attend their places of worship elsewhere, and likewise many attendees at Ōtāhuhu venues live elsewhere. For example Pacific people tend to attend the church preferred by the wider extended family, which may or may not be in Ōtāhuhu. Also, Ōtāhuhu has the largest Muslim Mosque in Auckland, a Hindu temple, a Sikh temple, and 3 Buddhist places of worship, likely attracting many worshippers from outside the area.

Figure 3. Religions of Ōtāhuhu Residents (%) compared to Auckland Region – 2013 Census

The population is relatively young, with 25% under 15 years old (compared to 20.9% for the region), and only 7.5% aged 65+ years (compared to 11.5% for the region - Figure 4). However the aged population is growing in absolute numbers as is the case across wider Auckland. Household size is relatively large, with 4, 5 and 6 children being common.

Figure 4. 2013 Census - Age of Residents in Broad Groupings

	Ōtāhuhu 4-CAU	Ōtāhuhu 4-CAU (%)	Auckland Region (%)	Percentage Point Difference
Under 15 years	3375	25.0	20.9	4.0
15–64 Years	9120	67.4	67.5	0.0
65 years and Over	1017	7.5	11.5	-4.0
Total people	13524

Ōtāhuhu has a Department of Health socioeconomic deprivation rating of decile 10^{^[2]} which means that the area is amongst the most deprived 10% of areas in New Zealand. There are low incomes, high dependency on government benefits and pensions, low home ownership and low education levels compared to the Auckland region (Figure 5). For example 55% of families have a total income of $50,000 or less, compared to 31% for the Auckland region. The population is highly transitory, with 50% having lived elsewhere in New Zealand or overseas five years previously.

Figure 5. Ōtāhuhu Comparison with Auckland Region

2013 Census Residents 15yrs+	Ōtāhuhu (%)	Auckland (%)	% Point Difference
Families earning $50k or less	55	31	14	Family incomes are low
Do not own usual residence	80.4	56.6		Low home ownership
Residents on a government benefit^{^[3]}	35.6	29	6.6	High dependency on government benefits and pensions
Residents with no income	14	10	4	High dependency on government benefits and pensions
Residents with no qualifications	31	16.8	14.2	Education levels are low
Residents with bachelor degree or Level 7 qualification	7	17	10	Education levels are low

The most common industry occupations for residents are in manufacturing (17.4%), followed by retail (10.2%), and then 8% to 9% each in the categories of transport, postal & warehousing; health care & social assistance; and construction. 69% of those with jobs work more than 40 hours a week.

3.2 Growth and Trends

Ōtāhuhu is an Auckland regional priority for development and growth. It is part of the Southern Initiative outlined in the Auckland Plan (March 2012), a long-term programme of ‘co-ordinated investment and actions to bring about transformational social, economic, and physical change’.

It is also part of the Ōtāhuhu-Middlemore spatial priority area, one of the ten priority geographic areas across Auckland Region (Figure 6). This means there is a focus on targeting council investment via the Long Term Plan 2015-25 to enable multiple outcomes, including more homes, connected communities, improved recreation, more jobs and greater mobility. The council’s focus in this geographic spatial priority area is to leverage off the library/pool development and new rail/bus interchange at Ōtāhuhu and to work with large landowners to identify opportunities for jobs and local employment (see Long Term Plan Section 1.3).

Ōtāhuhu is also a Strategic Housing Area (SHA), allowing for fast-track consenting processes to support more rapid residential growth across Ōtāhuhu and into Middlemore. There is significant opportunity for developers to increase the availability of affordable housing, especially around the town centre and areas zoned ‘mixed use’ and ‘terrace housing and apartment buildings’ (e.g. along Church Street), where buildings can be four storeys high. The latter zone has no density limits applying. About 2/3 of the population live to the east of Atkinson Road in Ōtāhuhu North, Fairburn or Ōtāhuhu East census area units, and the other third in Ōtāhuhu West, which also includes the town centre. There is significant opportunity for accommodation and population growth on both sides of Atkinson Road.

Ōtāhuhu is easily accessible by private vehicle from the southern motorway (SH1), and by public transport via train or bus. Being centrally located between the Auckland CBD and the Bombay Hills to the south, it is conveniently placed for organisations that serve a much wider catchment than Ōtāhuhu.

Between the 2011 and 2014 Government Valuations (GVs) the % change in residential property prices was 36% which was just above the Auckland average of 33%. However Quotable Value (QV) figures released at the beginning of May 2015 showed that Ōtāhuhu was one of the top ten Auckland suburbs in terms of escalation of property prices. A QV spokesperson said that values in the top ten suburbs rose 13.8% in the six months from November to April, and 19.2% year-on-year. This escalation in property values together with Ōtāhuhu’s highly transient population, very low socioeconomic level, and very low levels of owner occupiers suggests the area is highly likely to gentrify in the foreseeable future^{^[4]}.

Figure 6. Special Housing Area – Otahuhu Coast Strategic Area

4.0 Ōtāhuhu- Strategic Directions

The key Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board and Auckland Council plans are consistent in expressing aspirations for the area related to:

· Valuing and celebrating diversity, and supporting the community’s sense of identity and people’s sense of belonging

· Enabling a connected community where people can participate, interact and get involved.

The Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Area Plan 2013 outlines how the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu area is envisaged to change over the next 30 years. It sets out the key moves, desired outcomes and supporting actions to assist in achieving the vision for Auckland and Māngere-Ōtāhuhu, as set out in The Auckland Plan and by the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board within their local board plan. The Plan includes six key moves. Moves 1 and 6 are of particular relevance to this study:

Move 1 – Revitalise and enhance Māngere-Ōtāhuhu’s centres: … and Ōtāhuhu.

Move 6 – Recognise the kaitiaki role of Mana Whenua while conserving, supporting and celebrating Māngere-Ōtāhuhu’s rich heritage resources and its distinctive Pasifika, European, Asian and multicultural identity.

It expresses the following aspiration:

· Economic and Community Development Outcome 4: Māngere-Ōtāhuhu residents and visitors have access to safe, high-quality social infrastructure that meets their needs in education, arts and culture, healthcare and social services.

In order to support this outcome the plan identifies:

· an action to ‘work with partners to provide for a mix of social infrastructure...that meets the needs of the local community’

· an aspirational project (unfunded)for the ‘provision of new social infrastructure and multiuse of existing facilities (advocate)’.

The Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board Plan 2014 sets the direction on the most important outcomes it wants to achieve in the area for the next three years and beyond.

It has the following relevant outcomes:

· Māngere-Ōtāhuhu is the heart of Maori and Pasifika arts and culture – Our cultural diversity and distinct Maori and Pasifika identities are reflected in and enhance the everyday life of our community. We celebrate, showcase and share our many cultures and attract visitors to the area.

· A range of facilities to meet diverse needs –Our community spaces are first class and can be used in many different ways .They are popular community gathering places, and encourage people to take part in local activities

· A place where communities thrive and belong – Our communities live in safe and healthy neighbourhoods. We come together to celebrate our cultures. We are active and involved in local matters.

The Ōtāhuhu Town Centre Framework 2015 provides a framework for actions which support these aspirations. In particular, it articulates the following relevant strategic objectives:

· ‘Strengthening the Place - To strengthen the character and identity of Ōtāhuhu’s precincts recognising distinctiveness encourages visitors and investment.’ The Framework envisages a Community Mixed-Use Precinct, which includes the recreation precinct, and the area where the OTHCC and 12 High Street are located.

· ‘Celebrating Culture – to integrate and ensure the celebration of culture in the public realm to create a sense of place and recapture those aspects of our cultural history that are embedded in the land and in the cloak of its people.’

The Ōtāhuhu Linkages Design Framework 2014 found that Ōtāhuhu has a strong community presence, and that the OTHCC needs greater integration with Main Street and other community facilities from a public realm design point of view.

Auckland’s Arts and Culture Strategic Action Plan 2014 includes a draft delivery plan to create a culturally rich and creative Auckland. While the whole plan has relevance as a framework that supports the brief of this study, Goal three is of particular relevance:

‘Goal Three: a network of vibrant arts and culture organisations and facilities meets Auckland’s diverse needs.’

It refers amongst other statements to ‘meanwhile’ leases of council owned buildings, enabling temporary/pop up arts and culture spaces, the need to investigate gaps in future provision to meet demographic growth, specific sector, community or audience needs, marae as regional cultural hubs, championing Auckland’s unique arts and culture, and encouraging arts and creative practitioner networks to connect, collaborate and share best practice.

Auckland Council’s Community Facilities Network Plan 2015 provides a road map for how the council will invest in community facilities over the next 10 to 20 years. It covers arts and culture facilities, community centres, libraries, pools and leisure facilities and ‘venues for hire’. The plan outlines a holistic approach to the planning and provision of community facilities, in order to achieve a network of community facilities that are:

‘Vibrant and welcoming places at the heart of

where and how people connect and participate.’

The approach taken (objectives) to achieve this vision is:

· integrate and coordinate planning across all types of facilities

· maintain, improve and optimise existing community facilities

· develop fit-for-purpose, integrated and connected community facilities

· leverage and support partnerships.’

The plan includes the following relevant action for Ōtāhuhu as a network priority, and a catalyst or opportunity:

‘Investigate future options for the library space which will become vacant in 2015, and consider how this will complement the adjacent Ōtāhuhu Community Centre. This will be conducted as part of a wider Ōtāhuhu community needs assessment.’

5. Community Venues and Usage in Ōtāhuhu

5.1 Ōtāhuhu Town Hall and Community Centre (OTHCC)

Usage

The Ōtāhuhu Town Hall and Community Centre (OTHCC) Incorporated hold a ‘License to Manage and Operate Premises at Ōtāhuhu Town Hall Community Centre at 10 High Street Ōtāhuhu’, and have a Funding Agreement with Auckland Council which provides an annual grant for the operation of the centre. The centre is available for hire, and OTHCC also run activities. It has an area of 576 square metres, which is about a mid-range size for a community centre, though somewhat smaller than community centres in some other high social need areas, such as Wesley and Oranga.

There is quite a strong focus on children and youth activity, such as after school programmes, and they also run activities for senior citizens. There are several community art activities such as clay art and flax weaving. They are working on strengthening partnerships with Mānukau Institute of Technology to introduce a ‘preparation for work skills’ programme, and with local businesses in relation to developing internships, and being informed about vacancies.

There doesn’t appear to be any recent surveys^{^[5]} about the sociodemographic characteristics of the users, but discussion with the OTHCC manager indicates that the majority of users are Pacific Island, there’s a good representation of Maori, about 5% are Indian and Chinese, and a few are Pakeha/European.

Hirer group representatives at a consultation workshop suggest that between 50% and 70% of members live locally. They are happy with their current arrangements, and are satisfied with the facility. They expressed a sense of community, and belonging at the OTHCC:

’the staff are friendly and understand our needs’

‘they have a good understanding of the spiritual and cultural needs of the community’

They said that even if some of the same physical activities are offered at the OTHCC as at the leisure centre they are not the same. They cater for a different audience, those who are not fit enough to keep up with the classes at the leisure centre. They suit those who are less physically able, and also parents who have pre-schoolers with them.

Statistics^{^[6]} for the six months ended June 2015 show average hours of use per week for each space in the OTHCC as follows:

Room	Av hrs per week	Comments based on Calendar of use for July 2015
Main Hall (former Ōtāhuhu Borough Council town hall)	34.05	Generally used between 5 and 8 hours a day from 9am until about 9pm, occasionally later in the weekend
Lower Conference (behind former library on 12 High St)	23.57	Used for a large part of most week days between 10am and 6pm (mainly for a play group, and after school programme); used mainly by church groups, in the weekend, especially earlier and later in the day (before 11am and after 4pm).
Conference (beside OTHCC entrance)	16.42	Quite often has some capacity for additional use
Casual use – room unspecified	14.10

The average number of people visits per week from January to June 2015 was about 1830 or 7926 a month or about 95,000 a year. Note that this includes repeat visits by the same people, such as children enrolled in the daily OSCAR programmes. This level of usage compares well with other community centres.

Needs/ Aspirations

The OTHCC Management Committee want more space so they can better meet the needs of the local community. At present, top priority are private hire groups that bring in revenue, and council-led activities such as workshops, local board meetings and public consultations.

When the hall is required for these uses, management tries to accommodate existing users (the regular centre-led groups) in one of the two smaller conference rooms, if that is possible. The second priority is the play group and Out-of-School-Care Programme, most of which happens in the lower conference room. The school holiday programme is run largely in the hall, and most other activities have to be cancelled during those periods. Third priority is the centre-led activity programmes to cater for other community needs. Extra space would make it easier for the OTHCC to meet these community needs, such as for community art activities. The researcher was told that the OTHCC has capacity issues during late afternoon/ early evening, the most popular time for centre-led activities and a perusal of the July 2015 calendar seems to confirm this. There may be some capacity in some of their spaces at non-peak periods. In 2011, the OTHCC Management Committee put in a submission for use of the library space when it became available.

5.2 Ōtāhuhu Recreation Precinct

The library and leisure centre operating on the Ōtāhuhu Recreation Precinct have developed a charter which expresses their joint vision and intention to work together to provide a hub of activities for the whole community. The charter identifies the principles by which they will work together and manage the precinct. Libraries are defined as ‘connecting Auckland’s diverse communities and individuals with opportunities for reading, browsing, relaxing, access to information, lifelong learning and democratic participation, based on the library resources ... Libraries spaces are changing to become multipurpose community facilities that contribute to place-making and community connection’^{^[7]}. Leisure facilities ‘provide a range of indoor sport, recreation and fitness activities.... This includes casual play, programmes, fitness and local events.’^{^[8]}

5.2.1 Ōtāhuhu Leisure Centre

The Recreation Centre is managed by Community Leisure Management (CLM) on a contract for service. The facility is 9 years old and receives about 75,000 to 80,000 visits a year, mostly in the stadium. Their users fairly closely match the ethnic makeup of Ōtāhuhu. All the activities are health and fitness-oriented, mostly sports activities. About 60% of fitness centre members are from Ōtāhuhu. They tend to cater for more active people, and the younger age groups, with less than 3% being 65 years of age or above. They have ongoing relationships with most of the schools in the area. There is the opportunity to hold some activities of an arts and culture nature, particularly as the stadium has a sprung floor, so is suitable for dance activities such as Bollywood and salsa. The Ōtāhuhu Schools Cultural Festival was held in the stadium in March 2015. With the opening of the new pool and fitness studio, use of the previous fitness studio is open for reconsideration. CLM management are intending to use it for After School Care, and it could also be used for meetings, and other activities of a group nature. It has a small stage, a kitchenette, and a wall of mirrors. The space can be split in two, and has a capacity of 80 to 100 people.

5.2.2 Ōtāhuhu Library

The new library is about 900 square metres in area, compared to the library space at 12 High Street of 653 square metres. As well as the main library shelving space area, the new facility on the recreation precinct has the following separate spaces (Figure 7):

· a small bookable meeting room for about 8 people, with external after hours exit

· a ground floor lounge which will be used for Wriggle and Rhyme, class visits (up to 40 primary school children seated on the ground) and community meeting space

· a middle lounge which will likely be used as a quiet reading space

· a top lounge, unclear what its use will be as yet

· a homework centre seating twenty.

The library intends to have more youth activities at the precinct:

· a homework centre for primary and intermediate school years 5 to 8

· ‘maker space’ activities for all age groups including

- robotics programme

- craft activities

· meeting room/ study space for high school students

· teenage evenings – games and quiz nights (in conjunction with the Leisure Centre).

Figure 7. Plan of New Library at Toia Ōtāhuhu Recreation Precinct

Homework Centre with ‘maker space’ activities

Bookable meeting room

Lounges

5.3 Council Building at 12 - 14 High Street

The Ōtāhuhu library operated from the ground floor of this building until the end of July when it moved to its new building on the recreation precinct in Mason Avenue. Downstairs behind the former library space is a room with a kitchenette which can cater for up to 80 people (lower conference room). This is managed by the OTHCC largely for a preschool programme, after school care, and church groups.

Part of the first floor is currently leased to 3 groups (and see section 6.5) and the rest has not been tenanted since Mauri Ora Trust left in July 2014 when they lost their government funding. There is also the former Ōtāhuhu Borough Council chamber upstairs which is periodically used by the existing tenants, the OTHCC and council.

South Auckland Budgeting Services (South Auckland Income Planning Services Inc.) -

5 year lease to 30/9/16 with one more right of renewal taking them to 30/9/21 if granted. They serve beneficiaries and wage earners, and have been operating for over 30 years. They are one of three budgeting groups in Ōtāhuhu. They are funded by Lottery, Ministry of Social Development, COGS and Auckland Council. They provide budget planning and advice, and also operate a food, clothing and household goods ‘bank’. These goods are stored in a currently untenanted portion of the upper floor of the building. They are open Monday to Friday from 8.30am to 4.30pm.

Ōtāhuhu Historical Society Inc. - 5 year lease to 30/9/16 with one more right of renewal taking them to 30/9/21 if granted. They were formed in 1976, but had no home until 1991 when they were allocated 3 rooms on the first floor of 12 High Street. These rooms are used for storing office records, files and displaying memorabilia, photographs and other items of historical interest. They are open weekly on Wednesday from 10am to 2pm, and are prepared to open at other times by appointment.

LIA Trust (Lalotoa/Aotearoa Community and Social Services Trust) – Their first 5-year term expired in 31/10/14. They have applied for a renewal to 31/10/19, but a decision is on hold until a decision is made about the future of 12 High Street. The final renewal if granted would take them to final expiry on 31/10/24 if granted. They provide a social service counselling and advice service, primarily to Pacific Island families. They were formed in 1996, and currently operate Monday to Friday from 9am to 4pm.

5.4 Other Council-owned Lease Premises

There are 12 other community lease premises in Ōtāhuhu as follows:

· 5 sports clubs

· 1 kindergarten

· 1 Plunket

· 1 ambulance station

· 1 Sea Scouts

· 1 Pipe band club (Sturgess Park) – also used by an Assembly of God group

· 1 Seniors group – Ōtāhuhu Senior Citizens have a lease-in-perpetuity (see section 6.4.4)

· Ōtāhuhu Business Association

These premises are largely used by the lessee only, apart from mostly one-off, occasional hires, and there is considerable reluctance to share. The Dorothy Clements Centre for Senior Citizens is used for only one morning a week (for housie).

In addition Council owns a building at 7 Piki Thompson Way which is currently managed through a temporary commercial lease to Te Roopu Taurima o Manukau Trust. It is earmarked for sale at some undetermined future date. This trust currently hires their facility out to a soccer club in the evening, to a church group in the weekend, and also to a Zumba group on Sunday.

5.5 Other Venues for Community Use

There are 4 secondary schools, one intermediate school, and 4 primary schools in Ōtāhuhu. Ōtāhuhu College has a sporting pavilion which they sometimes hire out to organisations they know will look after the venue. There is a room upstairs that can hold 100 people, while downstairs are changing rooms and showers for use by the college sports groups. It is well–used by the college which has priority, and occasionally it is hired out for activities such as community workshops, training and professional development, church services and an art exhibition. The college are very careful who they hire to because they have had some experiences which have proved costly for the college in cleaning up and repairing damage to property.

There are quite a few halls associated with religious, sporting and education organisations in Ōtāhuhu, but there is limited access to them by other groups apart from trusted long-term contacts. Organisations are very circumspect about who they hire to. The main reasons given are:

· the spaces ‘get trashed’, and are not left in the same tidy state

· the issue of needing to be at the venue at inconvenient (to the venue manager) times to open and lock up the venue; security of other buildings on the property

· concern for safety of school pupils in school grounds.

Also see section 6.4.4 and 6.4.8.

There is very little opportunity to rent/ lease vacant shops in the town centre as these rarely become available.

5.6 Comparison with Council Provision Elsewhere

The Community Facility Strategic Asset Management Plan shows that Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board has a high provision of facilities per 1000 people for both art facilities and community centres. However, all of these facilities are in Māngere, apart from the OTHCC. With an area of 576 square metres, the OTHCC facility nearly meets the desirable size of a large community centre (600 square metres or more^{^[9]}), but it also serves the purpose of a ‘Venue for hire’, and quite a large part of its operation is hiring out its spaces to community groups. A report to the former Auckland City Council in 2007^{^[10]} noted that ‘the OTHCC could be enlarged with more meeting, community and office spaces, however the relative need for more space needs further investigation.’ It is not large compared to other community centre facilities in high need areas.

It should be noted that two new hire spaces have just become available at the recreation precinct with the opening of the new library and aquatic facility in August 2015.

Ōtāhuhu does not have any arts facilities. The nearest are Māngere Arts Centre (Nga Tohu o Uenuku) at the Māngere Town Centre, which is a destination facility with specialised amenities, with programmes targeted to the wider sub-region, and focused more towards the professional arts; and Fresh Gallery in the Otara Town Centre, which is a professional art space, promoting exhibitions that relate to its local context, and focuses on professional and emerging artists.

The upstairs floor of 12 High Street is the only community services lease premise in Ōtāhuhu that Council supports by leasing spaces within it to various (more than one) community groups. Many suburbs have more than one such premise for lease.

6. Findings – Arts, Culture and Community Needs and Issues

6.1 Arts, Culture and Community – its meaning and importance for this community

A range of people from different interest groups expressed the comment that for this community ‘art is culture’, and ‘this community is arts and culture’. It was also common for people to comment that art and cultural activities are a way of expressing identity, who they are as a people. Overseas research^{^[11]}suggests that ‘immigrants’ participation in culturally meaningful activities assists them in maintaining their cultural identity as well as acculturating to the host society.’ Arts and culture is also seen to ‘have untapped economic potential’, as expressed in the local board plan.

Of the 43 people who responded to the online survey, 86% said that it is very important for community, arts and cultural offerings to be available in their local area. In terms of why this is important, the top four reasons, all with at least 2/3 of responses were to do with feeling connected, sharing, or belonging:

Figure 8. Reasons for Importance of Arts, Culture and Community

Impt of opps2B Bar Graph (2).jpg

6.2 Arts, Culture and Community Activity Patterns– results of online survey

The Respondents

There were 43 responses to the online survey. 49% of respondents live in Ōtāhuhu, with another 19% living in Māngere/Favona. Nearly half of respondents said that they have lived in the current area for 15+ years. This is of note given that the Ōtāhuhu community is a highly transient one, and only 11.6% lived in their current residence 15+ years ago according to the 2013 Census. All but five of the 43 respondents were between the ages of 25 and 64; 70% were female. In terms of ethnicity, 44% identified with NZ European/Pakeha, 26% with Maori, 19% with Samoan, 16% with Tongan and 14% with Fijian. 63% per cent said they work full-time (30 hours a week or more). Note that the 2013 Census showed that 40% of residents 15 years and over work full-time. In conclusion, the respondents don’t match the demographics of this community. It is likely that they are the more articulate, active members of the community, those who take more of an interest, and active role in community activities.

The Activities

Nearly two/thirds of the respondents said that they had attended a performance/concert during the last year, and just over half had attended an exhibition, while 44% had participated in a workshop, class, course or education programme related to community, arts or cultural activities or events in Ōtāhuhu. In terms of venues used, the most common was at an Auckland Council community facility. The next most common was at a ‘community place of worship’, a school or ‘another public venue’. There was an occasional occurrence of attending an arts, culture or community activity at a private home or garage.

Figure 9. Venues for arts and culture participation

Who participate with

Respondents were most likely to attend an arts, culture or community activity with a friend(s) or relative(s), and with at least one other person, rather than alone.

Mode of Travel

Private vehicle use was by far the most popular form of transport with over 3/4 of respondents saying they often or always use a private vehicle to get to an activity. Of the public transport options, the bus is the most popular with 17% saying they often or always use it.

Figure 10. Mode of Travel to Arts, Culture, Community Activity

Factors influencing participation

When asked how important different factors were in people’s decision to attend an activity, the factors that respondents said are important or very important are:

· quality of the programme (88%)

· time of the day or night (86%)

· safety of the venue (79%)

· cost of the event or activity (73%)

· standard of the venue (72%)

Figure 11. Factors Influencing Participation

Additional comments were made noting the importance of activities being wheel-chair accessible, and also that they reflect the needs and interests of the local community, i.e. have a ‘local flavour’.

Key themes of the general comments were as follows:

· Cultural diversity: needs to showcase this, highlight that Ōtāhuhu is a multicultural township, an opportunity to be a hub for Pasifika arts and culture with the right facilities and personnel

· Arts, culture and community activities: an outlet for community expression, a way of bringing the entire community together, not just one age/ cultural group. No identity politics.

· Support for the former library space to be used for community, arts and culture

· Facility to be run locally, with staff and leadership who live and invest in the local community

· Activity and space needs mentioned were: art gallery, workshops, art-making, learning, performance, meeting spaces, training opportunities, youth focus activities, cultural/ historical repository

· Affordability

· Betterment of youth

· More events to bring residents together

· A multipurpose venue to house community events, services and local history collections.

6.3 On-site Surveys^{^[12]}

Fourteen on-site interviews were undertaken in the library and in Criterion Square. Amongst these respondents, there was little participation in arts, culture or community activities, other than activities undertaken in relation to school (e.g. Polyfest), or the general community-wide events like Family Fun Day. Somewhere to display art and craft, and an art and craft market was mentioned, as was more activities to constructively engage teenagers’ energy, and more community events.

6.4 Community Groups and Sectors

6.4.1 Arts and Culture Sector

At a forum of the Ōtāhuhu Steering Group in 2012, the forum participants expressed the following needs and issues related to arts and culture:

· need for more arts and culture activities in Ōtāhuhu, and an arts space

· showcase Ōtāhuhu artists: ‘bring home the artists who have gone out to other areas to exhibit’

· better networking amongst the art sector (teachers, musicians, culture-based groups such as the Niuean Arts Group, faith-based art/ culture groups, youth, language groups/ classes, history, marae groups, contemporary and traditional cultural activities)

· acknowledge the history of Maori in the art of Ōtāhuhu

· an Ōtāhuhu Arts Event that could be a catalyst for future direction

· an Ōtāhuhu Arts and Culture subcommittee to address these issues, and advocate.

A ‘Community Art Space in Ōtāhuhu Scoping Study’ was commissioned by the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board early in 2013, which identified the following expressed needs:

· access to affordable, flexible art making spaces that are central

· storage and spaces for developing and making work

· separate spaces to exhibit and perform

· gathering place for interaction, research and collaboration

· space that offers opportunities to run events and programmes for young people and marginalised groups.

The needs of the professional and established arts sector (both practitioners and audiences) looking to engage in high-end arts and cultural experiences are provided for at the Māngere Arts Centre. However, there is nowhere within the local board area that provides spaces to meet the above needs^{^[13]}.

The Ōtāhuhu Arts and Culture Subcommittee of the Ōtāhuhu Steering Group (registered as a charitable trust in December 2010) consists of professionals working in the arts sector. Most members live locally and are active in the local community. They are interested to find a space as a community art hub, and expressed the following issues and needs:

· networking opportunities: somewhere where people can come together, rather than working in silos.

‘All live here together, but are walking in parallel.

Need a space which allows all those streams to come together’.

Need a space where everyone feels connected. There is a lot of arts and cultural activity happening by groups in their own churches, or by individuals in their own homes or garages, but no visibility of these activities in the wider community.

· need opportunities to interact in a safe and respectful way, to ‘see in through little windows’ to see other cultural spaces. There are many and diverse cultures living and working side by side, but nowhere to safely interact, and learn about each other’s cultures. This could be not just about today’s cultures, but also about the past, and the importance of Ōtāhuhu in terms of NZ history. It could be a creative space for intergenerational happenings, for discussions, conversations and learning about each other.

· somewhere where children and youth can learn skills from the older generation before the skills disappear (e.g. Niuean weaving), or simply where they can nurture their creative talents (e.g. drama and music).

· a need for information-sharing, so that different sections of the community know what other sections are doing. This seems to be an issue for a range of communities of interests, and maybe could be addressed through a website, at least for part of the community.

· a place to showcase our arts and culture – a lot of art and culture happens, but there are few places to exhibit. It is possible to exhibit in the town hall, but that is only for one session/day at a time, because of all the other uses of the space.

Case example: In October 2014 Craig Horne, a local photographer, held an exhibition entitled ‘Ōtāhuhu– Global Suburb’ showcasing the cultural diversity of Ōtāhuhu. All his photos were taken within 2 km of the town centre. He searched for a space where different cultures would feel comfortable to attend, and where he could hold his exhibition for a two week period. However, he could not find any suitable venue within this locality. Finally, he identified the former borough council chambers upstairs at 12 High Street, above the library. This was not very visible nor accessible, however it was the only available and affordable space that was suitable.

· a critical forum for input and support, to bounce ideas; also somewhere where artists can share skills, mentor and run teaching workshops

· currently Muslims (and other minority groups) are not well-linked with Council art programmes. Art for Muslims embraces calligraphy, collage, mosaics, poetry, recitation, visual art and architecture/ design. A community arts venue would help raise interest and visibility of their art forms. Muslim creative expression comes out in food and clothing. Ways of engaging with Muslim artists could be:

- food: an ‘open kitchen’ with demonstrations and sharing of food

- workshops around clothing and craft

- digital design suite

· tap into the potential of businesses in the local community, e.g. perhaps connect a ‘cultural trail’ in the town centre

· many cultural groups don’t promote themselves, so unless you are part of their network, their activity is not visible to the general public. There is nowhere that highlights the SE Asian cultures (mainly Indians).

Several submissions to the Local Board Plan 2014 also raised similar needs and issues. Also note that arts needs has been identified for other sections of the community, particularly children and youth (see below).

6.4.2 Children

There seems to be a lot of opportunity for children to participate in arts and culture within their school environment. The Ōtāhuhu primary schools have a biennial cultural festival, (last one held at the recreation centre), and a biennial music festival, held at Ōtāhuhu College, but coordinated by a primary school. Some of the schools also take part in the annual Auckland Primary Principals Association Music Festival at the Auckland Town Hall. These events and quite a range of other activities such as visiting performance groups, school clubs, and targeted tutoring or after-school extension activities, provide a focus for arts and cultural activities for children in at least some primary schools.

The main needs are for children to be safe, and their talents (musical, dramatic, oral or whatever) nurtured. Schools try to do this within their area of jurisdiction, and some offer extension activities outside of school hours, although these need to be free as most families cannot afford to pay. A couple of the school respondents expressed how worthwhile it would be if there was an opportunity for some of their talented students to show/ exhibit their art work in a public place.

Some children are exposed to some music through their churches, such as in the choirs. One former principal commented about a gap between the grandparents, and the children, and there being many solo parent families, and a lack of positive role models. Also, there is a highly transitory population, and some children move schools often during the year, so have little stability in their schooling or family life.

6.4.3 Youth

The Ōtāhuhu Steering Group held a forum in 2012, one section of which focused on youth. This identified the need for a drop-in centre, an outreach programme (from the OTHCC), involving all the local schools, and also those not in the school system, and more collaboration between agencies on youth issues. The Ōtāhuhu Steering Group formed a Youth Steering Group (now called Ōtāhuhu Youth Panel).

The Ōtāhuhu Youth Panel is a keen advocacy group and an active participant in community activities and events. They have a Vision and Mission, and an activation programme which has four strands:

· Art – a mural project, artists in residence and an art market

· Sports – have a go sport and fitness days, and urban games in parks

· Youth in Community – a youth event, connecting with faith-based youth, youth-initiated programmes/classes, youth space, partnering with youth service providers and the OTHCC to help develop the space

· Sustainable garden projects.

The group noted that a critical element in the success of suggested projects/ programmes is the inclusion of young people in all aspects of the design and delivery, and the enhancement of youth leadership and decision-making.

The key needs expressed by the focus group with the Ōtāhuhu Youth Panel (July 2015) were:

· a youth space, run by youth for youth

· a safe homework space^{^[14]} where they could interact and engage with each other, and study together; where there would be someone to help them with their homework and to encourage them to help each other

· free after school programmes for secondary school students

· a space that could offer support, activities and programmes to take youth mind off alcohol, drugs, suicide and other challenges they face.

A focus group held with students at the Pacific Advance Senior School provided another direct youth voice. The key needs expressed by them were:

· role models/ youth leaders

· access to different positive experiences that they haven’t tried before

· caring yet tight supervision – a safe place to be

· quiet place for study, and tutoring

· youth activities like dance studio, music, sport

· opportunities to discover their potential.

‘It would be a place to hang out, to have fun with different programmes and activities, to study, a ‘home for the homeless’, a place to ‘keep kids off the street and out of trouble’.

Secondary Schools: There are a lot of opportunities for interested students to take part in arts and cultural activities at their secondary schools, such as through Polyfest, school drama productions, school bands and other activities, although each school has a slightly different emphasis, reflecting their school community and school priorities. There is also a degree of school student involvement in community service activities and community events.

Issues/ needs expressed by the representatives of the secondary schools:

· keeping young people busy with meaningful activities

· safety and security if the former library space is left vacant for very long

· concern not to fuel rivalry between different cultural groups and schools

· ‘This is one of the few high Polynesian communities that doesn’t have an arts centre’

· greater communications between different parts of the community so everyone knows of planned community events/ happenings

· future use of 12 High Street – no liquor outlets or other such activities. Suggestions:

- display space for art work, or anything expressing the positive side of Ōtāhuhu

- space to display and sell arts and cultural products

- an opportunity to bring different cultural groups together, cross-cultural engagement and understanding

- place where volunteers can provide opportunities for young people to develop their musical, artistic, dramatic, oral talents

- place for people not inclined to sport

- if it doesn’t happen at the library, provide adult classes where volunteers upskill people in computers, second language classes

- Get different agencies to run programmes for school age kids to learn new skills. Give kids a taste of different work experiences to help bridge them from school to beyond, and help them decide what next in the way of training or a path to employment.^{^[15]}

- a larger space than the OTHCC for community meetings

- needs a full-time community service coordinator.

Other views in relation to youth:

The need to provide opportunities for young people who were not into sport and physical activity or library activities was also expressed by the police, the business association and others interviewed. There are many examples of issues such as vandalism against empty properties, youth ‘gang’ behaviour in public places such as the bus terminal, graffiti around the town centre, and public safety concerns when young people gather (such as outside the former library for wifi access after closing hours).

The neighbourhood police representative was interviewed. He suggested that if the building at 12 High Street is retained, it needs to be turned into something well-used and useful, such as activities for 13 to 17 year olds, so there is less hanging around on the streets, where some become victims, and others are led into trouble. It would need to be well-supervised, open/visible, fully secured, kept clean and tidy, and with some strict management rules and regulations. It was suggested that ZEAL Youth centre in Henderson could be a helpful model.

A senior spokesperson of ZEAL, a not-for-profit organisation for youth with national headquarters and a youth facility at Henderson, said that unstructured programmes (drop-in) for youth, which is the reality at many youth centres, does not work. The ZEAL model is based on want, not need (i.e. providing positive motivation, rather than working from a deficit model), is about entering into relationship with young people through local champions and change-makers, and using creativity as a tool in developing a sense of belonging amongst young people at their centres.

Submissions to the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Draft Local Board Plan 2014 also supported a youth space in Ōtāhuhu. ‘Our young generation needs to be a priority, they are our future’.

6.4.4 Seniors

Discussions were undertaken with people associated with four seniors groups in Ōtāhuhu:

· Ōtāhuhu Senior Citizens group based at the Dorothy Clements Centre (9 Princes Street) have about 30 members, and are keen for more, as their membership is declining; they run housie at their hall one morning a week. They have a lease-in-perpetuity at their hall which holds about 100 people, and has a kitchen/ server. The facility is not available for hire.

· Treasuring Older Adults (TOA) Pacific Inc. have a Time Out programme that caters for about 50 people a day, four days a week , and would be happy for more space to cater for a growing number of older people and their carers. They have the use of a hall in the Millennium Building (where they lease an office) on the corner of Princes Street and Great South Road opposite the Police Station. They also run a simple, but very limited computer skills session for seniors.

· Residents of the Housing NZ pensioner village in High Street have access to good facilities at the complex, including a hall and kitchen servery and a couple of meeting or activity rooms. The main activities held about once a week in the hall, are cards, housie and line dancing. The hall is mainly used by residents although senior citizens living outside the complex may join these activities. It may be available for hire to quiet, orderly groups that will not disturb the residents.

· The Ōtāhuhu Historic Society (many members are aged 70+), are currently based in three rooms upstairs at 12 High Street, and would like more space for their growing collection of memorabilia.

· The Sikh Women’s Association run some senior citizen activities as part of their support programme for migrant families experiencing domestic violence.

There are also some activities for seniors provided at the OTHCC. In summary, there is no obvious need for more activities for seniors other than perhaps instruction on basic computer skills and activities for carers of seniors (often people in their 50s and 60s) during their ‘time out’ (TOA Pacific). There is significant potential for greater sharing of spaces between the various seniors groups, as venues like the Dorothy Clements Centre are significantly underutilised.

6.4.5 Iwi and Maori

Submissions to the draft Local Board Plan 2014 noted that there is no centre for Maori culture or Maori aspirations despite Ōtāhuhu having a significant Maori history. One interviewee suggested that tangata whenua need a marae in Ōtāhuhu, and also noted that the Maori wardens haven’t had a ‘home’ since they had to leave 7 Piki Thompson Way in 2014, and should be accommodated at 12 High Street. The closest marae [to Ōtāhuhu] are located around the Māngere area where there are 4 mana whenua marae, 2 education marae, 1 community marae, 1 church marae, 1 Taurahere marae; and Otara where there is 1 mana whenua marae, 1 church marae and 1 education marae. The closest is Pukaki Marae (Te Akitai Waiohua Iwi Authority) on Pukaki Road, Māngere.

6.4.6 Recent Migrants, including English as Second Language Speakers

This interest group was difficult to engage with. Representatives (with good English) were invited to a focus group but did not attend. One migrant tutor during a phone interview indicated that as well as language difficulties, people were hard to communicate with because they work long hours. Their main concerns are making a living and obtaining New Zealand citizenship. At the OTHCC it was found that once one recent migrant with better English got involved, she brought in other migrants from her networks.

A submission to the draft Local Board Plan 2014 by the Auckland Regional Migrants Services suggests that promoting volunteering to migrant communities, and encouraging service provider organisations to include volunteers from culturally diverse backgrounds, could assist community engagement with these communities, and that this will help improve community belonging, participation and safety.

6.4.7 People with Disabilities

There are several disability groups with an interest or presence in Ōtāhuhu that the researcher is aware of. One of these groups has expressed a need for community lease space:

· Tufuga Arts Trust – people with mental health disabilities, are seeking a lease space in Ōtāhuhu (see section 6.5)

· Te Roopu Taurima o Manukau Trust – a commercial lease (temporary) at 7 Piki Thompson Way. This trust provides a northern North Island Kaupapa Maori service that supports people of all ethnicities with intellectual disabilities, and it manages Te Rito Community Lifestyle Centre on this site.

· Mt Richmond Special Education School – a day school for students with intellectual disabilities; designed to cater for students of all ages from a developmental level through to transition to work and adult life. They have well-established Ministry of Education facilities in Albion Road, Ōtāhuhu.

6.4.8 Religious and Social Service Groups

A mapping database developed by council officers show at least 30 church or religious groups in Ōtāhuhu, mainly Christian groups, but also Buddhist, Muslim, Hindu and Sikh. Only some of these groups own their own facilities, some lease commercial property, and several of the Christian groups hire space at the OTHCC.

Some of them have affiliated community service groups, such as the Anglican Trust for Women and Children (family, early education and social work services, 10 Beatty Street), Ōtāhuhu Corps (Salvation Army social welfare service, 99 Church Street), Fonua Ola (social service provider, predominantly for Pacific peoples, head office at 32 Station Road), Fatimah Foundation (Muslim Women’s group, supporting families at risk, 87 Station Road, see section 5.5), Sikh Women’s Association (focused on supporting migrant families experiencing family violence, (Millennium Building, 214 Great South Road)^{^[16]}, St Vincent de Paul (47 Station Road), and Christians Against Poverty (national headquarters, 13 Princes Street, see section 5.5). Of these, the Fatimah Foundation have unsatisfactory accommodation, and Christians Against Poverty are outgrowing their office space.

The Holy Trinity Anglican Church on Mason Avenue owns a substantial site in the town centre adjacent to the recreation precinct. It has several facilities for non-devotional activities, which are mostly used by members of their congregation or a partner Tongan church group. They are seeking to redevelop a large part of their site and partner with a developer to build affordable accommodation for approximately 150 people (negotiations still in progress). They will build a new church hall to accommodate about 250 people, which will also be used as a centre for this new community.

6.4.9 Business

A main concern of the Ōtāhuhu Business Association is the need to address youth boredom, and its consequent issues. They spend over a third of their annual budget on security issues such as removing tags, shoplifting, breaches of liquor bans and burglaries. They expressed the need for spaces for community groups, a concern about 12 High Street being left vacant, the need for youth space and teaching space for life skills and art activities, and the need for staffing and tight management at 12 High Street if community space is provided.

6.5 Groups Seeking Community Lease Space

6.5.1 Current Lessees

The following three groups are current lessees on the first floor of 12 High Street (also see section 5.3), and all three would like extra space for their activities:

South Auckland Budgeting Services (South Auckland Income Planning Services Inc.) - They are one of three budgeting groups in Ōtāhuhu, and have been operating for over 30 years. They receive referrals primarily from the local WINZ office (58% in the last six months) which is a five minute walk away, but also from finance companies, Housing NZ, social services, and others. There has been a significant increase in client numbers over the last 3 years compared to previously because of changes in government policy making it compulsory to have a budget report from an accredited budgeting service to be eligible for financial assistance. In the period to 30 June 2014, they had 1107 still active clients, and another 404 clients where services had been completed. Their total client reach was 2427 family and dependents. They occupy two offices and a meeting room, have two paid workers, and a group of volunteers. Because of the increases in clients, they want more space.

Ōtāhuhu Historical Society Inc. - They have about a hundred members, many over 70 years of age. They hold many photos recording the history of Ōtāhuhu and surrounding area, quite a lot of club memorabilia, especially of Ōtāhuhu sports clubs that have closed, also minute books, honour boards, and many other records, and period items, evoking the earlier period of Ōtāhuhu’s history. They open one morning a week for two hours, and will also open by arrangement e.g. for school groups. They want more space, especially for storage.

LIA Trust (Lalotoa/Aotearoa Community and Social Services Trust) – They provide support to families and individuals particularly in the Pacific Island community, through social support work such as counselling, budgeting, anger management, violence deterrence, and access to Justice Services. They largely serve the Pacific community in the Counties-Manukau area, however their services extend throughout Auckland. They would like additional private space for confidential interviews as they only have one interview room, and sometimes have more than one client at the same time. They are not prepared to share such a space, even with a booking system in place, because of privacy issues, and because they cannot predict beforehand how long an interview session will take, depending on the need of the client. They are also not prepared to share administration/ office space.

6.5.2 Other groups

There are 24 community groups on the Council waiting list for community leases that have specifically expressed an interest in being located in Ōtāhuhu. Of these the Fatimah Foundation and the Ōtāhuhu Maori Wardens were displaced in 2014 from council premises at 7 Piki Thompson Way, where they shared space.

Fatimah Foundation – a registered charitable trust since 2009, with a focus on the Muslim community, and particularly women and families in vulnerable circumstances such as facing domestic violence, mental health, financial stress; also assist with cultural and religious support, connecting with government social services. They require an administration office, and a private space for interviewing, counselling and meetings, and a storage area for food bank and other goods they collect for distribution. After six months of searching for new accommodation, they have found an old shop (March 2015), which is inadequate because it doesn’t have privacy. Currently they are open 11am to 3pm Wednesday to Saturday, and appointments at other times subject to volunteer availability.

Ōtāhuhu Maori Wardens

The Ōtāhuhu Maori wardens’ original Ōtāhuhu operation closed in 1988 after many of its members died or moved away. Ōtāhuhu has had wardens visiting from other Manukau branches since 2005 as part of Project Walk Through. Supported by police, the project involves wardens walking through local pubs – which is what their "core job” was under founding legislation. They shared space at 7 Piki Thompson Way with the Fatimah Foundation for a while, but have been looking for another affordable venue in Ōtāhuhu since being displaced from there. As they don’t have the funds to pay a commercial rent, they operate from home. They have 15 warranted wardens.

There seems to be general support that their presence in the community is of benefit, particularly in relation to youth at risk of offending. They need a small room (as a base) with tea-making facilities, somewhere central in Ōtāhuhu. They would be interested in locating at 12 High Street.

Other groups that have expressed a specific interest in being located at 12 High Street are:

Tufuga Arts Trust – a registered charitable trust since 2004. The stated purpose is to enable social inclusion for people living with a mental illness to be able to express themselves using art. They work with a diverse range of cultures, mainly adults living with a mental illness. They have been operating their programmes from community premises in Papatoetoe, Otara and Māngere which they hire on a weekly basis. This is difficult, as they cannot establish a firm location to build their programme and store their art equipment. They need spaces to run art classes, and art therapy, an office, gallery/ exhibition space for recipients of their services, art space for resident artists. They are happy to work with other community groups to hire out space required for meetings and classes. They applied to use Massey Homestead in Māngere in November 2014, but just missed out.

Niu Ola Trust - an incorporated society and registered charity since 2009 and, assisted by volunteers, has worked in the community for five years. Its vision is to enhance the health of future Pacific populations in New Zealand. Its primary activity is promotion of family health and well-being, with a particular focus on women, youth, training and education. The Trust has delivered programs and services to more than an estimated 320 recipients. It offers a wide range of projects such as health promotion, cervical screening, English and after school classes, disability project Pasifikability and career advice. The Trust works collaboratively with a wide range of agencies, such as Well Women and Family Trust, NZ Breast Cancer Foundation and Breast Screening Aoteora. The Trust would use the facility to provide services six days a week, with Sunday used for internal meetings. Because of the nature of their work, providing health clinics and holding confidential records, the Trust does not consider they would be in a position to share the facility with other community groups. Mid 2013, they were considered by the Maungakiekie-Tamaki Local Board for lease of a property at Church Street, Onehunga, but were unsuccessful. They are regular hirers of space at the OTHCC for a music and dance class.

Ōtāhuhu Youth Panel – a subcommittee of Ōtāhuhu Steering Group which is a charitable trust; asking for a youth space run by youth for youth, and are interested in the downstairs former library space.

Ōtāhuhu Arts and Culture Group – a subcommittee of Ōtāhuhu Steering Group which is a charitable trust; are looking for exhibition/gallery space, artist workshop and classes space, and are interested in the downstairs former library space.

Rotary District 9920 (covering Auckland Central, East and South) has approached a local board member to enquire whether the old council chamber room upstairs at 12 High Street could be made available for use by them and the Ōtāhuhu Rotary Club Inc. If given the lease of the space they would be prepared to renovate it to an acceptable standard. The Ōtāhuhu Rotary (35 to 40 members) are looking for somewhere to store historic items of value to them. They are a regular hirer of the OTHCC for their weekly meetings attended by about 25 people.

Ōtāhuhu RSA –have been part of this community for 90 years, serving veterans. They have about 100 members, but their numbers are declining. They no longer have their own building, and meet at the Ōtāhuhu Workingman’s Club. Their president and officers work from home. There is nowhere to display their memorabilia, which is currently packed away in a shed. They would like storage space, and wall space to display their memorabilia.

Akoteu Nasaleti Early Childhood Centre – are governed by a trust under the umbrella of the Tongan Church, Hephzibah in Ōtāhuhu. They are a certified play group with one established day care in Luke Street East, Ōtāhuhu. They are seeking to establish a second day care and are currently trying to obtain funding from the Ministry of Education for a centre that would be licensed for 50 babies and children. They made a verbal inquiry about the future use of 12 High Street to the librarian when he visited to talk about library resources in 2015.

Christians Against Poverty – are a national organisation, operating since 2009, with their head office at 13 Princes Street, with 32 staff. They work with families in local communities to get them out of poverty, debt and joblessness, and will extend to working with addiction next year. They have 80 field staff working around the country. They are looking to purchase a building in Ōtāhuhu to house their head office team, including some meeting and training room space, but would also be interested in a lease. They have been investigating the idea of creating a hub, perhaps with the Māngere Law Centre/ Women’s Refuge, who might be interested in using some common space for a legal advice clinic and a male domestic violence counsellor.

6.6 Community Empowerment

In 2015 Auckland Council developed a new approach to its work in communities with a focus on community empowerment. This is about providing real opportunities for people to participate, and fostering the conditions to support this. Two important principles underpinning this approach are:

· social inclusion and equity

· collaboration – working more effectively together.

Council’s role through local strategic brokers is to enable, facilitate and provide opportunities for communities to drive and own their development. Through this study, the researcher has encountered some underlying issues which will need to be addressed in order to realise the potential of this community empowerment approach and to optimise use of community resources in meeting community needs:

· shortage of local community capability and leadership skills – there are evidently some local leaders and volunteers, for example in the South Auckland Budgeting Service at 12 High Street. However the Citizens Advice Bureau has had difficulty developing a local volunteer base while it has been operating six hours a week at the OTHCC. Also, many of the leaders of community groups and stakeholders involved in this study live outside of Ōtāhuhu (although they all have a strong connection and passion for this community, either through their work, or through having lived or worked there previously).

· there appears to be a breakdown in communication between some key stakeholders. The term ‘silos’ was mentioned in some conversations during the research, meaning that people are not working well across networks. There appear to be some quite tight networks and relationships amongst the many community groups located in and around the town centre, and some clear divisions.

· it was mentioned by a number of respondents from different quarters that there is a need for greater cross-sector communication and networking, and that there is fragmentation of community support organisations. It has been suggested that a hub that was a home for community support organisations would assist. Such a community hub, through accommodating not-for-profit organisations, could provide for such services as counselling (e.g. domestic violence, suicide), budgeting advice, and cross-cultural and faith-based support. The researcher encountered some strong opposition to the idea of sharing office/ administration space and bookable interview/ counselling rooms.

· with relocation of the library, much of the council resources are now located in the recreation precinct, and looked after largely through Auckland Libraries and Community Leisure Management (contract for service). Relative to the recreation precinct, the OTHCC has few resources and less space, although it is fairly well-resourced compared to many community centres. Nevertheless in a tight-knit but fragmented community, acknowledging this reality and being open to working together in a creative way would help realise the potential of all the community’s assets and resources. Both the OTHCC and the recreation precinct managers have a similar vision in so far as they are working to improve the opportunities and lives of the people of Ōtāhuhu, and they each cater to different needs in the community and perhaps to a different section of the community.

7. Summary – Needs Analysis and Key Findings

7.1 Needs and Issues

As a result of the investigations three key needs were identified as follows:

Arts and Culture

Priority Focus

· hub for arts groups, where the local community can get together, share, reach out, engage, support one another, mentor

· a place to ‘create, teach, engage, exhibit’ local arts and culture

· intergenerational space, inter-cultural space, and several activities happening at once to facilitate inter-action, and cross-cultural stimulation; break down boundaries

· a facilitator/ resource to be the ‘glue’ and to activate partnerships, proactive in encouraging, engaging and empowering community groups.

Other attributes

· should complement what is already in the Local Board area and adjacent (i.e. Māngere Arts Centre, Fresh Gallery, Metro Theatre); also complement any art/cultural activities happening at the OTHCC or recreation precinct (leisure centre, library)

· on-site art-making, artists providing role models showing what can be done, a living creative space

· studio space/ a home for artists

· a place that addresses the whole person; an opportunity for young people, and others, to tell stories, develop self and leadership

· possible activities: men’s art group, art as therapy, performance space for young people, place to exhibit the creativity of people with physical and mental disabilities

· amenities: flexible spaces, wet areas, well-appointed kitchen, large flexible, open plan multi-user spaces, affordable casual use or hire

· locational factors: accessible to public transport; access to outdoor performance and leisure space

· a place to pass on traditional cultural and craft skills.

Cultural diversity is a key feature of this community. Arts and culture activities are seen as an outlet for community expression and a way of bringing the whole community together. There is currently no ‘home’ for locally-focused arts and culture in this community.

Youth

Priority focus

· a high level of input from youth in planning, programming and running of the space, balanced with caring, yet firm supervision, and clearly articulated expectations around behaviour and attitudes

· affordable and engaging activities for secondary school students out of school hours e.g. dance, music, performance, tattooing, creative graffiti.

Other attributes

· a coordinator, to be the ‘glue’

· possible activities: parenting programmes for teen dads, driving licence courses for youth, creative art classes, onsite youth worker, OSCAR programme base, youth providers networking, sex education/ family planning, youth run café.

Youth make up a significant proportion of the local community, and have high needs for affordable, fun, and engaging opportunities outside of school hours, as most households do not have the capacity to provide for this sort of activity.

Community Lease Space

Case example: When the Fatimah Foundation lost their accommodation at the former recreation centre at 7 Piki Thompson Way in 2014 they were homeless for six months while they searched for affordable office and interview/counselling space. This proved very difficult. Rents for shops were unaffordable, and there was little available anyway. They looked for land to site a container, but were unsuccessful in this as well. They held a few client interviews at McDonalds fast food meeting room, but this was completely unsuitable for people in distress because of the windows, foot traffic and lack of privacy. Eventually through their Muslim networks they found an old vacant shop on Station Road, and the local board agreed to support them with a year’s rent from March 2015. However there are still privacy concerns as its entrance door is highly visible off a busy road.

There is a shortage of affordable lease space for community groups in Ōtāhuhu. Some groups that had to leave the former recreation centre at Piki Thompson Way still do not have satisfactory accommodation, and there are a number of other established groups that are looking for space. Although on the whole these groups serve a wider catchment than Ōtāhuhu, a large proportion of their members or clientele come from Ōtāhuhu, which is a high needs community in terms of social and community services. The upstairs floor of 12 High Street is the only council premise in Ōtāhuhu available for non-commercial community lease to various (more than one) community groups.

In addition other community needs and issues were identified as follows:

· Community activities such as developing parenting skills, adult and youth transition to work skills, and foundational life skills were also mentioned.

· There may be a shortage of local leadership capability and a need for training to support a community empowerment approach. Most of the community leaders interviewed work in Ōtāhuhu, but do not live there

· There is evident tension and minimal communication between the organisations on the recreation precinct, and the OTHCC, and collaboration is not happening

· Lack of cross-sector communication and networking within the wider community was mentioned a number of times.

7.2 Potential to Address Community Needs in Community Venues

Council Facilities on Recreation Precinct and at OTHCC

It is too early to know exactly how the spaces at the recreation precinct will be used. There is potential for some of these spaces (e.g. former fitness room in the recreation centre, library lounges) to meet some of the needs and desires articulated by community groups and stakeholders. There is a small space at the recreation precinct for a local Citizens Advice Bureau, and it is not yet clear whether or when they will use that space. The OTHCC seek to meet some of these needs (e.g. transition to work skills) but require additional space to be able to do more.

The needs that cannot be met at either the recreation precinct or the OTHCC are:

· space for additional community leases – significant interest from a number of groups

· giving community art ‘a heart’ in the form of a known central networking, creative space where diverse cultures and individual creativity can be shared with each other and the wider community. The need for a creative hub is particularly at the community and emerging practitioner level. The spaces would include at least:

- locally-focused exhibition/ gallery space

- amenities to accommodate creative ‘messy’ activity, including for youth, but not exclusively

Spaces at the recreation precinct could potentially meet some of the community needs at least to some extent such as:

· hands-on practical, clean art/craft activity (spaces for learning and creating)

· youth leadership activities/ training

· cultural and creative performance

· community education (e.g. parenting, school to work transition and life skills)

· cross-cultural understanding, and intercultural engagement and activity.

A few activities that relate to some of these needs already happen at the recreation precinct, however the core business of the venue is for library, recreation and sport activities. Also, some of these activities are included in the OTHCC Strategic Plan 2015-18, but their ability to meet the needs is limited in scope because of lack of space at suitable times.

Other Community Facilities

There could also be scope for better utilisation of some other council facilities (e.g. Dorothy Clements Centre for Senior Citizens) and some community venues at schools and churches, working through the local board-funded arts broker (see section 8.3) or council local strategic broker (see section 6.6) to build trust and relationships for ongoing use.

Community Collaboration

Better cross-sector communication and collaboration would help to realise the full potential of the community resources and facilities in this community. A new role in the council of local strategic broker may be able to facilitate a helpful process of reengagement and collaboration amongst key stakeholders that would allow coordination of activities and programmes across all council facilities. As a fundamental principle, activities on the recreation precinct and at the OTHCC/12 High Street should be coordinated and complement one another, not compete. As well, attitudes that support sharing of spaces would allow more community and social service organisations to benefit from the few council spaces potentially available for community lease.

Community Leadership Training

The OTHCC is part of a pilot community mentoring scheme set up by the council in 2015^{^[17]}. The Ōtāhuhu Youth Panel have run a Survivor Leadership Programme for youth who want to join them. The council local strategic broker is a new resource that could help address this need.

8. Strategic Options – Proposals for 12 High Street

The Community Facilities Network Plan 2015 identifies that in the investigative phase, all potential solutions to meeting community needs must be explored including divestment, partnership, non-asset opportunities and optimisation.

8.1 Divestment

The loss of 12 – 14 High Street would have an immediate impact on the OTHCC because of the loss of the space behind the former library, used for after school care, the Mums and Bubs programme, and church activities. South Auckland Budgeting Services, Lalotoa/ Aotearoa Community and Social Services Trust, and the Ōtāhuhu Historical Society would also lose their offices, which would have a significant impact on the local community, and particularly those people already under stress.

8.2 Partnership

See optimisation below

8.3 Non-asset Opportunities

The Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board have funded an arts broker in their 2015/16 plan to support and deliver community arts programmes. The contractor role is to facilitate art activations in the board area, and strengthen relationships between council, community and artists. While this resource will work across the whole board area, there is lots of potential for activity in Ōtāhuhu town centre and recreation precinct, perhaps linking local businesses and artists so as to activate spaces and tell local stories.

A local strategic broker employed by the council could potentially unlock resources, and develop creative partnerships between the many committed and passionate community organisations in Ōtāhuhu e.g. accessing existing halls and spaces not currently available because of concerns about damage, rubbish and security (see Section 6.6 and 5.5).

8.4 Optimisation

Optimisation is about ‘improving the delivery of community facilities to achieve better financial and community outcomes, for example selling an asset(s) to reinvest in the upgrade or development of new asset(s), changing the purpose and use of an asset or taking advantage of commercial opportunities to generate funding that can be invested into asset(s). ‘^{^[18]}

Development Auckland is proposing an optimisation process that considers the long-term options for the whole site on 10 – 16 High Street, including the corner car park. The community outcomes that must be taken into account as indicated by the current research are:

As a minimum:

· community centre spaces, at least as much as existing

· some increased community lease spaces

· cultural and arts spaces - including a youth focus, but not exclusively.

This could include exploring:

· an option of working with a community organisation to develop a new cultural and arts venue, and/or youth spaces

· the concept of a community hub, with a coordinator to manage shared spaces for meetings, private interviews, and office/administration, as an alternative to having a number of separate leases

· working with private developers to provide purpose-built community facilities as part of a mixed use housing/ commercial development of the site

· development of purpose-built community spaces at another location in Ōtāhuhu.

The intention is that the optimisation process would result in a cost neutral CAPEX development for Auckland Council with the costs of building the community facilities being covered by the profits of a private development partnership. The local board would need to provide for any additional ongoing OPEX budgets (over and above existing).

It is likely to take 3 to 5 years for the optimisation process to be completed. However it is clear from community feedback, and experience, that the building at 12 High Street should not be left vacant while this process is undertaken, therefore a decision needs to be made about how to use it in the interim. In all the options below, the existing tenants upstairs retain their existing spaces, and the OTHCC retains the management of the space they currently use behind the former library space. The local board would be required to cover any CAPEX and OPEX costs. The options considered are:

Option 1. Retain upstairs as lease space for the existing tenants, and perhaps several others; and extend the OTHCC Funding Agreement and Licence to Occupy to manage the downstairs space (figure 12) as arts and cultural spaces, including for youth, but not exclusively.

This would perhaps be the most easily implemented, but there would need to be a publicly transparent process to avoid a perception of ‘capture’ by one part of the community. This would require capital and operational expenditure by the local board, yet to be clearly assessed. A property assessment would identify the costs of refurbishing the building to meet Health and Safety and building consent requirements.

Option 2. Retain upstairs as lease space for the existing tenants, and perhaps several others; and seek an organisation with arts and culture programming expertise to manage the former library space downstairs as arts and cultural spaces, including for youth, through a transparent, contestable Expression of Interest process.This would best address the needs and issues identified in this study, but would require capital and operational expenditure by the local board as in Option 1.

Option 3. Use the entire building (apart from the space currently used by the OTHCC) for community leases, retaining existing lessees.

This option would be less costly than options 1 and 2, but would be unlikely to address art and culture/ youth needs identified.

Option 4. Do nothing - retain upstairs as lease space for the existing tenants, [and perhaps several others], and lease the downstairs on a temporary commercial lease, if possible to a community organisation.

This option would not cost the local board, but would mean that the community would have to ‘make do’ with existing facilities to meet needs, and these would not be addressed in any more than a limited way.

These are interim solutions and there is no guarantee that after the 3-5 year period for completion of the optimisation process, they will still be an option. That is, there should be no expectation from any new user groups that their tenure is guaranteed once the optimization process has been completed. An option for using the building as a ‘Venue for Hire’ was considered but not recommended for consideration because of there being no on-site management presence, and the significant concern expressed by many community groups and the police about the risk and likelihood of vandalism and associated issues. Figures 13 and 14 show these options in more detail.

Figure 12 – Former Library Space at 12 High Street

Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

21 October 2015

For Information: Reports referred to the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

File No.: CP2015/19193

Purpose

1. This report provides a summary of information-only reports and resolutions for circulation to the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board.

2. The Albert-Eden Local Board has referred resolution AE/2015/78 regarding the Notice of Motion – Call for Public Consultation on the Trans Pacific Partnership Agreement (Attachment A), that was considered at the 2 September 2015 meeting.

Resolution number AE/2015/78

MOVED by Member GD Easte, seconded by Member MJ Watson:

That the Albert-Eden Local Board:

a) Receives the Notice of Motion – Call for Public Consultation on the TPPA.

b) Notes that;

i. While the proposed Trans Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPPA) will hopefully generate economic benefits to New Zealand through increased trading opportunities for exporters, there are also significant potential risks to our sovereignty, environment and way of life;

ii. The TPPA negotiations have been conducted over the last eight years without any public disclosure of the contents let alone consultation or adequate debate about its principles or provisions;

iii. The only publicly available information about the detail of the proposed treaty has come about through partial leaks and overseas sources;

iv. Much of this so-called free-trade agreement consists of provisions to protect the interests of multi-national corporations, including investor-state rules that would allow multi-national companies to sue our government for damages in secret extra-legal tribunals if laws or regulations or policies of either local or central government affected their ability to trade or make a profit within New Zealand;

v. The resolution of Auckland Council on 20th December 2012, and in particular clause xii which calls for TPPA negotiations to be conducted with “real public consultation including regular public releases of the text of the agreement and ratification being conditional on a full social, environmental and economic assessment including public submissions;”

vi. The Government has apparently ignored the Council resolution, and similar resolutions from other Councils and numerous other public interest organisations and stubbornly refuses to release any meaningful information about the contents of the treaty.

c) Requests that Auckland Council;

i. Seeks clarification from the Minister of Trade on how their recommendations are being addressed in current negotiations;

ii. Makes available to local boards and Auckland citizens the government’s response and an analysis of the adequacy of undertakings to address Council’s concerns

d) Requests that officers circulate these resolutions and background information to the Mayor and the Governing Body, and all other local boards.

e) Urges the Minister of Trade to urgently release the broad principles and rules of the draft TPPA and provide sufficient information and time for the public to have an informed debate and understanding of the full social, environmental and economic impact.

CARRIED

3. The Unitary Plan Committee has referred the report and resolution UNI/2015/153 regarding the Auckland Unitary Plan Independent Hearing Panel - Update on Progress (Attachment B) that was considered at the 8 September 2015 meeting.

Resolution number UNI/2015/153

MOVED by Chairperson AM Filipaina, seconded by Cr C Darby:

That the Unitary Plan Committee:

a) Receive the report and note the progress of the programme for the hearing of submissions by the Independent Hearings Panel on the Proposed Auckland Unitary Plan

b) Request the report and resolutions be forwarded to local boards, the Independent Maori Statutory Board and advisory panels for their information.

CARRIED

4. The Orākei Local Board has referred the resolution OR/2015/111 regarding the Annual Report 2014-2015, that was considered at the 3 September 2015 meeting.

Resolution number OR/2015/111

MOVED by Chairperson DEC Simpson, seconded by Member TG Churton:

That the Orākei Local Board:

a) notes the monitoring and reporting requirements set out in the Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009 and the local board information proposed for the Auckland Council Annual Report 2014/2015.

b) approves the tabled message from the Chairperson, which provides the Local Board’s comments on Board matters in the 2014/2015 annual report.

c) gives authority to the Chair and Deputy Chair to make typographical changes to the Chairs message before submitting for final publication.

d) does not approve the achievements (performance measures) by activity and the table of Key Capital projects that form part of the local board information for the Auckland Council Annual Report 2014/2015.

e) considers that the annual report template and performance monitoring framework that Auckland Council uses for its Annual Report is flawed, in part because it does not fully reflect the work the Board has been doing.

f) notes that there is insufficient explanation for unmet targets in the Annual Report.

g) notes that as a result of the Annual Report template being flawed, an immediate review of the Annual Report template be requested with input from all local boards.

h) requests that these resolutions be shared with all local boards.

CARRIED

5. The Manurewa Local Board has referred the resolution MR/2015/169 and tabled information (Attachment C), that was considered at the 10 September 2015 meeting.

Resolution number MR/2015/169

MOVED by Chairperson AM Dalton, seconded by Deputy Chairperson SP Brown:

That the Manurewa Local Board

a) receive the verbal portfolio update from:

i. Simeon Brown, Community Service Portfolio Lead regarding:

- Citizens Advice Bureau funding.

b) request a report on what actions have been undertaken by the Council to ensure that Auckland Citizens Advice Bureau (ACAB) is funded, noting the resolution by the Social and Community Development Forum on the 28^th of May 2013 by Cr Casey that requested officers to work with ACAB to secure funding from third parties.

c) request that the tabled information and the above resolutions be forwarded to all other local boards for consideration.

CARRIED

6. The Kaipatiki Local Board has referred the resolution KT/2015/133 regarding the Notice of Motion – Call for Public Consultation on the Trans Pacific Partnership Agreement, that was considered at the 9 September 2015 meeting.

Resolution number KT/2015/133

MOVED by Member G Gillon, seconded by Member J Gillon:

That the Kaipātiki Local Board:

a) receives the report.

b) notes that:

i. while the proposed Trans Pacific Partnership Agreement will hopefully generate economic benefits to New Zealand through increased trading opportunities for exporters, there are also significant potential risks to our sovereignty, environment and way of life;

ii. the Trans Pacific Partnership Agreement negotiations have been conducted over the last eight years without any public disclosure of the contents, let alone consultation or adequate debate about its principles or provisions;

iii. the only publicly available information about the detail of the proposed treaty has come about through partial leaks and overseas sources; and

iv. the resolution RDO/2012/266 of Auckland Council on 20th December 2012, and in particular clause xii which calls for Trans Pacific Partnership Agreement negotiations to be conducted with “real public consultation including regular public releases of the text of the agreement and ratification being conditional on a full social, environmental and economic assessment including public submissions”.

c) requests Auckland Council to:

i. seek clarification from the Ministry of Trade on how its recommendations are being addressed in current negotiations; and

ii. make available to local boards and Auckland citizens Central Government’s response, and an analysis of the adequacy of undertakings to address Auckland Council’s concerns.

d) requests these resolutions and background information be circulated to the Mayor and Governing Body, and all other local boards for their information.

CARRIED

7. The Parks, Recreation and Sport Committee has referred the resolution PAR/2015/61 regarding the Growth Programme (Attachment D), that was considered at the 16 September 2015 meeting.

Resolution number PAR/2015/61

MOVED by Cr RI Clow, seconded by Cr C Darby:

That the Parks, Recreation and Sport Committee:

a) agree to circulate the report to Local Boards for their information.

b) request that, each year, staff report back to the Parks, Recreation and Sport Committee and seek confirmation of the Growth Programme for the following year and receive an update on delivery progress for the prior year.

c) agree that a programme delivery approach be taken when implementing the projects within the Growth Programme, which will involve and require a level of budget re-alignment throughout the year, and that officers be given discretion to deliver the projects within the total budget envelope set for each year.

d) request that where staff are proposing changes to the regionally funded Growth Programme, which need to be dealt with outside of an annual programme review, the impacted Local Boards will be consulted.

e) agree to advise Local Boards that any surplus or underspent project budgets in any one year will be returned from Local Board budgets to the regional Growth Programme fund for re-allocation to the next highest priority regional growth related project.

f) note that the delivery programme includes planning, therefore programmed work in the first year may not reflect on the ground delivery.

CARRIED

8. The Parks, Recreation and Sport Committee has referred the resolution PAR/2015/62 regarding the Sports Field Capacity Development Programme – Annual Report (Attachment E), that was considered at the 16 September 2015 meeting.

Resolution number PAR/2015/62

MOVED by Cr JG Walker, seconded by Cr C Darby:

That the Parks, Recreation and Sport Committee:

a) receive this report.

b) agree circulate the report to Local Boards for their information.

CARRIED

9. The Waitemata Local Board has referred the resolution WTM/2015/130 regarding the Notice of Motion – Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement that was considered at the 16 September 2015 meeting.

Resolution number WTM/2015/130

MOVED by Member VI Tava, seconded by Chairperson S Chambers:

a) That the Waitematā Local Board notes that:

(i) While the proposed Trans Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPPA) will hopefully generate economic benefits to New Zealand through increased trading opportunities for exporters, there are also significant potential risks to our sovereignty, environment and way of life;

(ii) The TPPA negotiations have been conducted over the last eight years without any public disclosure of the contents let alone consultation or adequate debate about its principles or provisions;

(iii) The only publicly available information about the detail of the proposed treaty has come about through partial leaks and overseas sources;

(iv) Much of this agreement goes well beyond its ostensible purpose of free-trade and consists of provisions to protect the interests of multi-national corporations, including investor-state rules that would allow multi-national companies to sue our government for damages in secret tribunals if laws or regulations or policies of either local or central government affected their ability to trade or make a profit within New Zealand;

(v) A resolution was passed by Auckland Council on 20 December 2012, particularly clause (xii) which calls for TPPA negotiations to be conducted with “real public consultation including regular public releases of the text of the agreement and ratification being conditional on a full social, environmental and economic assessment including public submissions;”

(vi) The Government has apparently ignored the Council resolution, and similar resolutions from other Councils and numerous other public interest organisations and refuses to release any meaningful information about the contents of the treaty.

b) That the Waitematā Local Board requests Auckland Council to:

(i) Seek clarification from the Minister of Trade on how their recommendations are being addressed in current negotiations; and

(ii) Make available to Local Boards and Auckland Citizens the government’s response as well as an analysis of the adequacy of undertakings to address Council’s concerns.

c) That this resolution and background information be circulated to the Mayor and Governing Body, and all other Local Boards.

CARRIED

10. The Devonport-Takapuna Local Board has referred resolution DT/2015/205 regarding the Notice of Motion – Call for Public Consultation on the Trans Pacific Partnership Agreement that was considered at the 15 September 2015 meeting.

Resolution number DT/2015/205

MOVED by Deputy Chairperson G Gillon, seconded by Member JRK O'Connor:

That the Devonport-Takapuna Local Board:

a) receive the report.

b) notes that:

(i) while the proposed Trans Pacific Partnership Agreement proposed to hopefully generate economic benefits to New Zealand through increased trading opportunities for exporters, there are also significant potential risks to our sovereignty, environment and way of life;

(ii) the Trans Pacific Partnership Agreement negotiations have been conducted over the last eight years without any public disclosure of the contents let alone consultation or adequate debate about its principles or provisions;

(iii) the only publicly available information about the detail of the proposed treaty has come about through partial leaks and overseas sources;

(iv) much of this so-called free-trade agreement appears to consist of provisions to protect the interests of multi-national corporations, including investor-state rules that appear to allow multi-national companies to sue our government for damages in closed extra-legal tribunals if laws or regulations or policies of either local or central government affect their ability to trade or make a profit within New Zealand;

(v) the Governing Body resolved on 20th December 2012, and in particular clause xii which calls for Trans Pacific Partnership Agreement negotiations to be conducted with “real public consultation including regular public releases of the text of the agreement and ratification being conditional on a full social, environmental and economic assessment including public submissions”; and

(vi) the Government has apparently ignored the Council resolution, and similar resolutions from other Councils and numerous other public interest organisations and thus far refuses to release any meaningful information about the contents of the treaty.

c) requests Governing Body to:

(i) seek clarification from the Minister of Trade on how their recommendations are being addressed in current negotiations; and

(ii) make available to Local Boards and Auckland Citizens the government’s response, and an analysis of the adequacy of undertakings to address Council’s concerns.

d) requests that this resolution and background information be circulated to the Mayor and Governing Body, and all other Local Boards.

CARRIED

11. The Waiheke Local Board has referred resolution WHK/2015/140 regarding the Notice of Motion – Call for Public Consultation on the Trans Pacific Partnership Agreement that was considered at the 15 September 2015 meeting.

Resolution number WHK/2015/140

MOVED by Member SD Brown, seconded by Chairperson PA Walden:

a) That the Waiheke Local Board notes that:

(i) while the proposed Trans Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPPA) will hopefully generate economic benefits to New Zealand through increased trading opportunities for exporters, there are also significant potential risks to our sovereignty, environment and way of life;

(ii) the TPPA negotiations have been conducted over the last eight years without any public disclosure of the contents let alone consultation or adequate debate about its principles or provisions;

(iii) the only publicly available information about the detail of the proposed treaty has come about through partial leaks and overseas sources;

(iv) much of this agreement goes well beyond its ostensible purpose of free-trade and consists of provisions to protect the interests of multi-national corporations, including investor-state rules that would allow multi-national companies to sue our government for damages in secret tribunals if laws or regulations or policies of either local or central government affected their ability to trade or make a profit within New Zealand;

(v) resolution RDO/2012/266 was passed by Auckland Council on 20^th December 2012, particularly clause (xii) which calls for TPPA negotiations to be conducted with “real public consultation including regular public releases of the text of the agreement and ratification being conditional on a full social, environmental and economic assessment including public submissions”;

(vi) the Government has apparently ignored the Council resolution, and similar resolutions from other Councils and numerous other public interest organisations and refuses to release any meaningful information about the contents of the treaty;

(vii) that there is increasing concern from elected members across the political spectrum and in all countries where the TPPA is being negotiated that if ratified it will interfere with their decision-making authority.

b) That the Waiheke Local Board requests Auckland Council to:

(i) seek clarification from the Minister of Trade on how their recommendations are being addressed in current negotiations; and

(ii) make available to Local Boards and Auckland Citizens the government’s response as well as an analysis of the adequacy of undertakings to address Council’s concerns.

c) Requests that the local board’s resolutions and background information be circulated to the Mayor and Governing Body, and all other Local Boards.

CARRIED

12. The Whau Local Board has referred resolution WH/2015/7 regarding the Notice of Motion – Call for Public Consultation on the Trans Pacific Partnership Agreement that was considered at the16 September 2015 meeting.

Resolution number WH/2015/7

MOVED by Chairperson CM Farmer, seconded by Deputy Chairperson S Zhu:

That the Whau Local Board:

a) Notes that:

(i) While the proposed Trans Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPPA) will hopefully generate economic benefits to New Zealand through increased trading opportunities for exporters, there are also significant potential risks to our sovereignty, environment and way of life;

(ii) The TPPA negotiations have been conducted over the last eight years without any public disclosure of the contents let alone consultation or adequate debate about its principles or provisions;

(iii) The only publicly available information about the detail of the proposed treaty has come about through partial leaks and overseas sources;

(iv) Much of this so-called free-trade agreement consists of provisions to protect the interests of multi-national corporations, including investor-state rules that would allow multi-national companies to sue our government for damages in secret extra-legal tribunals if laws or regulations or policies of either local or central government affected their ability to trade or make a profit within New Zealand;

(v) The resolution of Auckland Council on 20th December 2012, and in particular clause xii which calls for TPPA negotiations to be conducted with “real public consultation including regular public releases of the text of the agreement and ratification being conditional on a full social, environmental and economic assessment including public submissions;”

(vi) The Government has apparently ignored the Council resolution, and similar resolutions from other Councils and numerous other public interest organisations and stubbornly refuses to release any meaningful information about the contents of the treaty.

b) Requests Auckland Council to:

(i) Seek clarification from the Minister of Trade on how their recommendations are being addressed in current negotiations;

(ii) Make available to Local Boards and Auckland Citizens the government’s response, and an analysis of the adequacy of undertakings to address Council’s concerns.

c) Requests that these resolutions and background information be circulated to the Mayor and Governing Body, and all other Local Boards.

CARRIED

Recommendation/s

That the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board:

a) note the Albert-Eden Local Board AE/2015/78 resolution regarding the Notice of Motion – Call for Public Consultation on the Trans Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPPA).

b) note the Unitary Plan Committee UNI/2015/153 resolution and report Auckland Unitary Plan Independent Hearing Panel - Update on Progress.

c) note the Orākei Local Board resolution OR/2015/111 Annual Report 2014-2015.

d) note the Manurewa Local Board resolution MR/2015/169 and tabled information regarding Citizens Advice Bureau funding.

e) note the The Kaipatiki Local Board resolution KT/2015/133 regarding the Notice of Motion – Call for Public Consultation on the Trans Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPPA).

f) note the Parks, Recreation and Sport Committee resolution PAR/2015/61 regarding the Growth Programme.

g) note the Parks, Recreation and Sport Committee resolution PAR/2015/62 regarding the Sports Field Capacity Development Programme – Annual Report.

h) note the Waitemata Local Board resolution WTM/2015/130 regarding the Notice of Motion – Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPPA).

i) note the Devonport-Takapuna Local Board resolution DT/2015/205 regarding the Notice of Motion – Call for Public Consultation on the Trans Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPPA)..

j) note the Waiheke Local Board resolution WHK/2015/140 regarding the Notice of Motion – Call for Public Consultation on the Trans Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPPA).

k) note Whau Local Board resolution WH/2015/7 regarding the Notice of Motion – Call for Public Consultation on the Trans Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPPA).

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Notice of Motion - Call For Public Consultation on the TPPA	207
b View	Auckland Unitary Plan Independent Hearing Panel - Update on Progress	211
c View	Resolution by the Social and Community Development Forum on the 28th of May 2013	215
d View	Growth Programme	217
e View	Sports Field Capacity Development Programme - Annual Report	231

Signatories

Authors	Janette McKain - Local Board Democracy Advisor
Authorisers	Carol McKenzie-Rex - Relationship Manager

[1] Funding for that project was re-directed ot the Pukaki Crater work noted below.

[2]NZDep2013 combines census data relating to income, home ownership, employment, qualifications, family structure, housing, access to transport and communications.

[3]NZ Superannuation, Veterans Pension, Unemployment, sickness, domestic purposes, invalids or other government benefits, payments or pensions

[4]This issue was identified in the Ōtāhuhu Liveable Community Plan 2008 (pg 10).

[5]Surveys of community centre users are normally undertaken by Council

[6]Source: OTHCC monthly statistics of number of users, report to Auckland Council

[7]Community Facilities Network Plan August 2015

[8]Community Facilities Network Plan August 2015

[9]Auckland Council Community Facilities Network Plan

[10]Ōtāhuhu Recreation Precinct Stage 2 – Scope of Facilities. Report to Community Development and Equity Committee, Auckland City Council, August 2007. This report recommended that the OTHCC stay in its present location and not be moved to the new recreation precinct.

[11]Kim Dattilo and Heo (2011), quoted in Junhyoung, Kim et al ‘The importance of culturally meaningful activity for health benefits among older Korean immigrants living in the US, International Journal of Qualitative Studies on Health and Wellbeing, Gol 16, June 2015. www.ijqhw.net/index.php/qhw/article/view/27501.

[12]The interviewers found it difficult to engage people or get much useful information related to the objectives of this study.

[13] This 2015 study is the next step in making progress on considering these needs.

[14]The Youth Panel did not believe the homework centre at the new library on the recreation precinct would fulfil this need, particularly in terms of how they prefer to study by engaging with each other, and working together in small groups, rather than alone.

[15]Note that the OTHCC is working with Manukau Institute of Technology to consider some of these needs.

[16]The Sikh Women’s Association, founded 13 years ago, is the only Sikh organisation like this in NZ. They work with all cultures and nationalities, particularly Indians, Malaysians and Indonesians. About 40% of their clients come from Ōtāhuhu. They are owned by a Trust and receive funding from government agencies, the local board, and their own community. As well as their social advocacy, counselling and referral activities, they provide art and craft classes, cultural activities, positive parenting courses, domestic violence prevention training, English classes, youth groups and senior citizen activities as part of their community support programmes.

[17] This community mentoring scheme is funded by council to increase the capability and capacity in governance, financial processes, planning, marketing and reporting frameworks of community committees. Each committee selected receives support and advice through Business Mentors New Zealand for a year.

[18]Definition provided in Community Facilities Network Plan 2015. Further: ‘Optimisation seeks to deliver optimal levels of service by releasing latent strategic and commercial value from underperforming property currently in service, for direct reinvestment into other local service property or activities.’

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

	Option 1	Option 2	Option 3	Option 4	Option 5
Upstairs	Community Leases	Community Leases	Community Leases	Community Leases	Do Nothing
Outcomes Focus	Leases recognise the multicultural nature of Ōtāhuhu and its high level of need
Operational Agreement	Add one or more community leases to existing. Manage expectations – i.e. short to medium term				Renewals for existing leases in limbo pending outcome of optimisation process
Refurbishment	Minimum required to meet health and safety requirements				No refurbishment
Downstairs	Arts & Culture Spaces	Arts & Culture Spaces	Community Lease	Venue for Hire	Commercial Lease
Community Outcomes Focus	Locally-focused arts & culture space/ hub, including youth but not exclusively		Give priority to arts & culture needs	Particularly focus on local arts & culture activities, with some youth activities	None
Management	OTHCC	Community trust or incorporated society with arts & cultural programming expertise	Ideally just one lessee	Council staff do programming/ admin	Commercial lease
Process	Extend OTHCC Funding Agreement	Contestable EOI process – EOI can apply	Process to agree lessee		Development Auckland advertise for lessee
Operational Agreement	Funding Agreement specifies outcomes for A&C spaces; & activities must complement, not compete with Toia		Short term lease. Manage expectations re Optimisation process	Hire, via Council booking system	None
Refurbishment	Minimum required to meet health and safety requirements				None
	Open link with OTHCC (optional unless minimal cost)
New Costs to Local Board (both upstairs & downstairs)	Property assessment of refurbishment needed to meet health and safety requirements - $30k				No property assessment required
Preliminary capex cost estimates (subject to property assessment)	Minimal refurbishment - $200k to $300k estimate				Initial cost of advertising for lessee
Downstairs Local Board annual costs -	Funding agreement - $75k. Made up of Programme costs ($25k), 0.5FTE programmer ($35k), wifi, IS and other staff costs ($15k)	Funding agreement - $85k Wifi, IS & other staff costs ($25k)	No costs	Council operational costs - $75k Made up of costs as for Option 1	No costs to LB

	Option 1	Option 2	Option 3	Option 4	Option 5
Description of Option	Upstairs – Community Leases Downstairs - Arts & Culture Spaces	Upstairs – Community Leases Downstairs - Arts & Culture Spaces	Upstairs – Community Leases Downstairs – community Lease	Upstairs – Community Leases Downstairs – Venue for Hire	Upstairs – Do Nothing Downstairs – Commercial lease
Outcomes – addressing needs identified	Meets need for locally-focused arts and culture hub/ spaces, and youth space but a need to bring in arts & culture expertise. Above integrated with OTHCC. Extra funding to OTHCC gives leverage on the outcomes expected. Addresses need for more community lease space	Meets need for locally-focused arts and culture hub/ spaces, and youth space Opportunity to bring in organisation with arts & culture expertise to address needs/ gaps Addresses need for more community lease space	May not address arts & culture/ youth needs identified Addresses need for more community lease space	Unlikely to address arts & culture/ youth needs identified; particularly spaces as gathering hub for arts and cultural interaction and creative youth activities. Need for another ‘Venue for Hire’ not identified, though may allow for some activities by arts and culture groups. Does not address need for more community lease space	Key needs not met, particularly spaces as known gathering hub for arts and cultural interaction and creative youth activities; shortage of community lease spaces. Community continue to made do; new spaces at recreation precinct may allow for some activities in their hire spaces for those that can afford it.
Process	Simplest and fastest - Extend existing funding agreement with OTHCC Inc.	6-month transparent contestable EOI process	4 to 6 month decision process re leases	Simple to add this venue to existing Council booking system – 1 to 2 months	3 to 4 month decision process re a commercial lease
Contractual	Funding agreement - revised annually		Lease agreement - a longer term commitment that can be difficult for some groups because of funding uncertainties	Hire agreement – applies to the booked period only	Commercial lease agreement
Security	On-site management at least 5 days a week	On-site management may be 5 days a week dependent on outcome of EOI process	Some on-site management, dependent on the lessee hours of opening	No on-site management presence. Maintenance issues may not be reported immediately. High risk of damage to property	On-site presence provided by commercial lessee.
Cost estimates to LB	Minimum refurbishment OPEX - $75k Cost of linking OTHCC	OPEX- $85k	Less costly, lessee covers fitout & operational costs.	Council staff costs & other OPEX- $75k	Minimal costs
Other Risks	Possible (at least ‘perception of’) “capture” by community group as not a public transparent process.	OTHCC & new organisation(s) may have difficulty cooperating		May significantly affect OTHCC viability by competing for hire revenues, along with the two new hire venues at the recreation precinct.
Council Staff Involvement	Council community facilities team to monitor contract and outcomes, working with arts and culture team	Council arts & culture team to monitor	Minimal council involvement via Community Lease team	A relatively high level of council staff oversight and management compared to other options	Development Auckland involvement in commercial lease process

Timeslot	Topic	Presenter	Purpose
12.45 - 1.00pm	Portfolio Clusters	Kenneth Tuai, Rina Tagore	The Board discussed clustering the workshops. Next steps – Cluster Portfolios, Organise Meetings/Diaries, 6 month review.
1.00 - 1.30pm	Youth Connections Draft Report	Rebecca Davis, Jan Francis	The Board had a powerpoint presentation on Youth Connections and discussed the draft report.
1.30 - 2.00pm	Community Facilities Partnership Fund - Future Direction	Martin Devoy, Kim Squire	The Board discussed options to gain better outcomes for the sports /facilities needs in the local area and past funding . Discussion on strategic alternatives for best use of LDI resources.
2.00 - 2.45pm	Otahuhu Arts Culture and Community Needs Assessment	Karen Eisenhut, Rhoda Fowler, Erica Law	The Board discussed the finding of the community research and the options. A formal report will be coming to the October Business Meeting.
2.45 - 3.30pm	Spatial Priority Area - Otahuhu Middlemore	Nicola Mochrie, John Dunshea, John Norman, Leora Hirsh, Rina Tagore	The Board had a powerpoint presentation on the social and economic outcomes and the local board role. Work programmes: · Otahuhu Town Centre · Portage Link · Middlemore Hospital and Station Area The Board discussed a political reference group and meetings will be set up for the Chair and Deputy Chair of the Mangere-Otahuhu and Otara-Papatoetoe Local Boards and the Chair of the Mngke-Tamaki Local Board. Meetings to be held every 6 weeks.
3.30 - 4.15pm	Auckland Transport and Regional Land Transport Plan Workshop Programme	Ben Stallworthy, Jonathan Anyon	The Board had a powerpoint presentation and discussed the RLTP and Auckland Transport work programme which included: · Future Transport Network · Major Projects · Bus Priority improvements · New Southern Network · Safety Initiatives in Mangere-Otahuhu · Renewals Programme

Timeslot	Topic	Presenter	Purpose
1.00 - 1.45pm	Business Improvement Districts (BIDS) policy review and transition to new BID model	Jeremy Pellow, Shirley Samuels	The Board had a powerpoint presentation on the BIDs policy review: - Outline the process to undertake the BID policy review, including details of initial feedback from BIDs - Seek feedback on the proposed themes and options for policy change - Update members on the progress towards transition to the new BID service delivery model on 1 July 2016. A report will come to the board in February/March 2016.
1.45 - 2.15pm	Land Owner and Lease Approval for use of the Old School Reserve by CIDANZ	Sophie Bell, Christine Benson	The Board discussed the LOA and lease application to further develop the site with facilities supporting culture tourism and community innovations. Officers suggested creating a Project Team from council departments to help CIDANZ with assessment, information that is needed and to discuss a feasibility study. A report will come back to the Board in November 2015.
2.15 - 2.45pm	Mayors Capex Fund	Rina Tagore, Kenneth Tuai	The Board discussed the approach and strategy to allocate Mayors Capex Fund. The following projects were discussed: · Mangere East Community Facility · Sculpture Trail along Kiwi Esplanade · Capital works for a dedicated arts and cultural space in Otahuhu · Renovation upgrades to community facilities · Explore options for developing a southern resource recovery centre for waste recycling · Sportsfields upgrades to Mangere Centre (added Sturges Park, Boggust Park and Seaside Park · Improve sports fields and lighting on Centre, Williams and Moyle Parks · Mangere Town Centre Canopy
2.45 - 3.15pm	Portfolio Cluster	Rina Tagore, Kenneth Tuai	Overview of future portfolio meetings that are clustered.
3.15 - 3.45pm	Local Board Engagement and Comms strategy update	Thomas Murray	The Board discussed the progress towards the objectives to the Engagement and Comms Strategy and gave feedback on the Community Fonos.
3.45 - 4.00pm	Title used to refer to local board members	Carol McKenize-Rex	The Board discussed the use of the titles ‘councillor’ and ‘local board member’ have helped to entrench a hierarchical mind-set with respect to the governance model. The suggestion has been made that it would be more appropriate to use the title ‘local councillor’. If this approach were taken, it seems logical that governing body members would then be referred to as ‘regional councillors’.

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