|
Franklin Local
Board
26 April 2016
|
|
Annual Plan
2016/2017
File No.: CP2016/06919
Purpose
1. This report
requests that the Franklin Local Board:
a) makes
decisions on:
i) final
Locally Driven Initiative (LDI) budgets by activity, within funding envelopes
ii) key
advocacy issues
b) provides
any feedback on regional issues, including:
i) the
Uniform Annual General Charge (UAGC)
ii) the
Interim Transport Levy (ITL)
iii) Māori land rates
iv) rates
for farm/lifestyle properties over 50 hectares
c) makes
recommendations to the governing body on other financial matters such as:
i) any new/amended
Business Improvement District (BID) targeted rates
ii) any new/amended
local targeted rate proposals
iii) proposed LDI
capital projects outside local boards’ decision-making responsibility.
Executive
Summary
2. This report seeks input from
local boards on a range of annual plan related matters, including LDI,
advocacy, regional financial policy issues and other rate proposals.
3. Local board views on these
matters will be considered in discussions between the local boards and the
Finance and Performance Committee on 6 and 9 May; and by the governing body
prior to adopting the Annual Plan 2016/2017.
|
Recommendation/s
That the Franklin Local Board:
a) makes
decisions on final 2016/2017 LDI budgets by activity, within funding
envelopes
b) agrees key
advocacy issues
c) provides any
views it may have on regional financial policy issues
d) recommends any
new or amended BID targeted rates
e) recommends any
new or amended local targeted rate proposals
f) recommends
any proposed LDI capital projects, which are outside local boards’
decision-making responsibility
g) recommends $177,000 of 2015/2016 LDI opex to be deferred
|
Comments
LDI
4. Local boards are requested to
agree the level of funding for each group of activity. This funding is further
allocated to specific projects and services detailed in the work programmes.
5. As part of the funding policy,
local boards can resolve to defer those projects that are funded by the LDI
where there was an agreed scope and cost but have not been delivered. The
Local Board may wish to resolve 2015/2016 projects that meet the criteria for
deferral to 2016/2017.
6. Key information of the funding
of each activity and the LDI funded projects that meet the criteria for
deferral is provided in Attachment A.
Advocacy
issues
7. Local boards
resolved on their key advocacy issues in November 2015, for discussions with
the Finance and Performance Committee and consultation. Since then, relevant
council departments and Council Controlled Organisations have provided local
boards with advice on the current position of each advocacy issue, and any next
steps. This information was provided to local boards in April 2016, as part of
a broader information pack, to consider at their workshops, and is also
attached to this report for information (see Attachment B).
8. Local boards
consulted on their local advocacy issues in February and March 2016. The
results from the consultation have been analysed and summarised, and provided
to the local boards. This has been attached to this report for information
(see Attachment C).
9. In light of
this information, the Local Board may now wish to agree any advocacy priorities
for discussion with the Finance and Performance Committee on 6 and 9 May.
Regional
issues
10. Local boards
provided feedback on regional financial policy issues (in November 2015) which
were going for consultation. The results from the consultation have been
analysed and summarised, and provided to local boards (see Attachment C).
11. The Local
Board may wish to provide further feedback on these issues for consideration by
the Finance and Performance Committee.
Local
targeted rate and BID targeted rate proposals
12. Local boards
are required to agree any new BID and local targeted rate proposals (noting
that any new local targeted rates and/or BIDs must have been consulted on
before they can be implemented).
Consideration
Local
Board views and implications
13. Local board
decisions and feedback is being sought in this report.
14. Local boards
play an important role in the development of the annual plan, and provide views
and information at key stages as council continues through the annual plan
process.
Māori
impact statement
15. Many local
board decisions are of importance to and impact on Māori. Local board agreements and the annual plan are important tools
that enable and can demonstrate council’s responsiveness to Māori. Local board plans, which were
developed in 2014 through engagement with the community including Māori, form the basis of local
priorities.There is a need to
continue to build relationships between local boards and iwi, and where
relevant the wider Māori community. Ongoing conversations will assist
local boards and Māori to understand each other’s priorities and issues.
This in turn can influence and encourage Māori participation in council’s
decision-making processes.
Implementation
16. Feedback from
the local boards will be summarised and provided in full to the Finance and
Performance Committee and governing body for consideration and adopting the
Annual Plan 2016/2017.
Attachments
|
No.
|
Title
|
Page
|
|
aView
|
LDI and Deferrals
|
9
|
|
bView
|
Advocacy 2016/17
|
11
|
|
cView
|
Consultation Feedback
|
13
|
Signatories
|
Authors
|
Mark Purdie - Lead Financial Advisor
|
|
Authorisers
|
Angeline Barlow - Relationship Manager
Christine Watson - Manager Financial Advisory Services
- Local Boards
|
|
Franklin Local
Board
26 April 2016
|
|
Annual
Budget 2016/2017 consultation feedback report for Franklin Local Board
1. Purpose
A. This report summarises all feedback received
through the Annual Budget 2016/2017 consultation on Franklin Local Board
proposals. It also summarises feedback on the regional proposals from people or
organisations based in the Franklin local board area.
B. The purpose of this report is to inform the
Franklin Local Board of the views of their local community on the annual
proposals. This will build on the boards understanding of community priorities
and preferences as established in the development of the Franklin Local Board
Plan 2014.
C. The feedback received will inform the Franklin
Local Board decisions on allocation of their local budgets in their local board
agreement for 2016/2017. It will also inform the Franklin Local Board
discussions with the Finance and Performance Committee on 6 and 9 May on
advocacy and local priorities in relation to the regional budgets and
proposals.
2. Executive Summary
Out of the 3,324 submissions received on the Annual
Budget 2016/2017, 222 were submissions from people living in Franklin local
board area or concerning Franklin Local Board local proposals. There were
44,076 individual pieces of feedback on the received, with 3,373 points of
feedback from people living in Franklin or about proposals concerning Franklin
local board area.
A. Franklin Local Board local
proposals consulted on for 2016/2017
1. Work
with the community to develop a greenways plan
2. Strongly
advocate for coastal erosion to be addressed as a regional issue
3. Complete
the process for rural halls to be managed by the community
4. Support
local community organisations and event organisers
5. Support
youth in Franklin and develop options for improving the transition from school
to work
6. Work
with volunteers on projects in our local parks
7. Do you
support bringing forward a kerbside recycling collection for all Franklin
residents, paid for with a targeted rate?
B. Regional proposals consulted on
for 2016/2017
Fixed charge (Uniform Annual general Charge or UAGC)
Responses to what level the UAGC should be at were
evenly split with 42% of respondents supportive of retaining it at the current
level of $397. Another 42%, however supported an increase in the UAGC. 13%
supported a decrease and 4% were unsure what it should be set at.
Interim Transport Levy (ITL)
62% of respondents supported keeping the ITL at the
current level of $114, 24% thought that businesses should pay more.
54% supported keeping the ITL for businesses as a
fixed charge, 35% thought it should be based on the property value of the
business.
Farm and lifestyle rates
26% of respondents were in support of keeping the
differential for farm and lifestyle properties at 80%. 63% were in support of
reducing it to 60%.
Māori land rates
36% supported reducing the rates collected from Maori
land, whilst 54% did not support the reduction.
3. Context
A. This report is being provided to the Franklin
Local Board summarising the local consultation feedback received on the annual
budget. Council received feedback in person at three community engagement
events, through written forms (including those submitted online) and through
social media.
B. Feedback on Franklin Local Board local proposals
and on regional proposals from the Franklin local board area was received
through:
· Written feedback – 49 feedback forms
· In person – Feedback was received
through three Have your say events – held in Pukekohe, Waiuku and Beachlands.
4. Feedback received on the local proposals
In Franklin, the following methods of providing written
feedback were used. Online form was the most popular, followed by the form in
OurAuckland and a posted submission form:
Sources of feedback were from the following sectors:
There were 222 written submissions, and a total of 80
people attended Have Your Say events held in Pukekohe, Waiuku and Beachlands.
A. Key themes across all written feedback received
on local issues
The general response to local board proposals was as
follows:
The main local proposals received the following
written comments:
· introduction of targeted rate for to bring forward a kerbside recycling
collection service (46 in support – 9 other comments)
· complete the process for rural halls to be managed by the community (33
in support – 5 not sure)
· work with volunteers on projects in local parks (32 in support – 2
against)
· support local community organisations and event organisers (32 in support
– 1 against)
· strongly advocate for coastal erosion to be addressed as a regional issue
(31 in support – 3 against)
· work with the community to develop a Greenways Plan (28 in support – 1
against)
· support youth in Franklin and develop options for improving the
transition from school to work (28 in support – 4 against).
B. A summary of key themes from feedback received
through each channel is provided below.
Feedback
received through written submissions
Support for bringing forward rural kerbside recycling
“Please prioritise curb side recycling in rural areas.
Having come back to NZ from a much less "green" country we are so disappointed
that after having curb side recycling for over 20 years we are back to trying
to find a recycling centre and dealing with the mess and hassle of recyclables
building up. Or worse, and more common, we begrudgingly put our recycling in
the rubbish. We can do better Franklin!”
“Most definitely - will reduce landfill immensely!!”
“Pleased that the kerbside recycling service is going
to be brought forward by 8 months in rural Franklin. Support a targeted rate
for those areas receiving the service.”
“Franklin rural recycling needs to be instigated at
the earliest possible time.”
“I strongly support the rural Franklin comingled
recycling proposal and the proposed targeted rate.”
Other comments on kerbside recycling
“I am concerned about kerbside recycling as it may
apply to the rural areas. Forgive me if I am not an expert in this area. I just
wonder how it would work in practical terms. My farm, and I know this applies
to most farms, seems to have a huge amount of waste that would take a great
deal of expense for the Council to remove. I am all in favour of the Council
providing 'kerbside recycling' but who pays and just how practical is it in
rural areas. If some are getting it free, all should get it free.”
“Bring back transfer station in Pukekohe, why change
something for the hell of it.”
Coastal erosion:
“Coastal erosion needs much more attention and
investment.”
Rural halls managed by the community:
“Halls should be managed by the community.”
Support for young people to improve the transition
from school to work:
“More central Government funding should be used for
School to work transition it is not a ratepayer’s responsibility. The council
is funding too many social policies that are a central government mandate.”
Working with volunteers on projects in local parks
“Some of our parks can also be managed by the
community very effectively.”
Waiuku Sports Park development
“Very pleasing to see the Waiuku Sports Park proposal
revisited after having been promised it and some budget for it at least a
decade ago when I attended a public meeting! It would also be nice to see the
pool developed at the sports park as planned at that time also”.
Pukekohe town centre upgrade
“Pukekohe main street was upgraded a few years ago.
Complete waste of $1.4m.”
“The town centre does not require an upgrade just more
cleaning work done - the bricks are dangerous and hard to clean. Grass is
growing between them and making more un-slightly and slippery.”
Community gardens
“I see community gardens in the local board plan but
they are not costed. More resources should go towards this.”
Feedback
received through Have Your Say events
Greenways Plan
“Greenways - would be worrying
if people did not want them - but basic works need to be undertaken before we
consider Greenways.”
Coastal erosion
“Coastal erosion is a major problem - local volunteers
carry out planting and have had issues with procurement not acting in a timely
manner resulting in the loss of plants.”
“Support for coastal erosion as a local board
priority.”
“More help is needed from council to address coastal
erosion and a quicker response from the procurement team.”
Local governance and support
“Franklin Local Board is doing a good job with the
budget allocated to them but they need a bigger budget to be more effective
e.g. coastal erosion.”
“The Franklin Local Board should have evening meetings
in the local area to discuss local issues with the community.”
“Structure planning is needed for the local area
(Beachlands/Maraetai).”
Feedback
received through other community events
Priority outcomes for the Franklin Local Board area
were voted on by attendees at the Clevedon A&P Show in November 2015 and
the Franklin A&P Show in February 2016.
The four priority outcomes for the local board area
were as follows:
Environment
• Parks
• Pest management
• Waterways
• Waste management
Economy
• Local jobs
• Economic development
• Tourism and events
• Business association
Transport
• Roads
• Public transport
• Safety
• Recreational use
Community
• Youth/older people
• Community development
• Events
• Safety
• Libraries
• Heritage
The public were asked to vote on their top priority
outcome for the local board area. The voting results were as follows:
Clevedon A&P Show
Environment 111
Community 52
Transport 46
Economy 31
The environment was the highest priority for people
attending the Clevedon show.
Franklin A&P Show
Transport 202
Environment 146
Community 84
Economy 63
Transport was the highest priority for people
attending the show in Pukekohe.
5. Overview
of feedback received on regional proposals from Franklin local board area
The consultation on the proposed annual budget focused
on four key issues, Uniform Annual General Charge, Interim Transport Levy,
Rural rates and Maori Freehold Land rates. The written feedback received from
the Franklin area on these key consultation topics is summarised below, along
with an overview of any other areas of feedback on regional proposals with a
local impact.
Uniform
Annual General Charge (UAGC)
Auckland’s residents and ratepayers were asked if the
UAGC should be kept at $397 so that rates are spread differently between high
and low value properties, and should it be changed to $350, $450, $550 or $650.
The graphs below give an overview of the responses
from the Franklin local board area.
Question 1a” What is your opinion on the fixed charge
portion of the rates (UAGC)?
Question 1 b: If changed, what should the fixed charge
be?
Interim
Transport Levy (ITL)
People were asked if businesses should pay more than
they currently do toward the ITL (meaning other ratepayers pay less) and should
the levy continue to be a fixed charge for businesses or be based on the size
of the business (meaning small businesses pay less than large ones).
The graphs below give an overview of the responses
from the Franklin area.
Question 2a: What is your opinion on the ITL amount
paid by businesses versus the amount paid by all other ratepayers?
Question 2b: What is your opinion on the amount
businesses pay in relation to their property value?
Farm
and Lifestyle rates
Auckland’s residents and ratepayers were asked to
provide their thoughts on the rates paid by farm/lifestyle properties (over 50
hectares) reducing to 60 per cent from 80 per cent of the urban residential
rate (meaning all other ratepayers pay more).
The graphs below give an overview of the responses
from the Franklin area.
Question 3: What is your opinion on the rates paid by
farm/lifestyle properties over 50 hectares?
Māori
Freehold Land rates
People were asked if they supported reducing rates for
some Māori land to reflect restrictions on its use.
The graph below gives an overview of the responses
from the Franklin area.
Question 4: What is your opinion on reducing the rates
collected from Māori land to reflect restrictions on its use?
Feedback
on other regional proposals with a local impact
Feedback was received from the Franklin Local Board
area on other regional proposals. The
graph below shows the areas covered by this feedback.
6. Feedback on other local topics
Feedback was provided by individuals on a wide range
of individual topics, however no key themes were identified within the
feedback.
