Agenda of Governing Body - 25 August 2016

Governing Body

25 August 2016

Housing for Older People: Partnership for the management and operation of the Housing for Older people service and adoption of the High Level Project Plan

File No.: CP2016/17597

Purpose

1. To approve entering into a partnership with The Selwyn Foundation (Selwyn) for the management and operation of Auckland Council’s Housing for Older People (HfOP) service, to endorse the HfOP High Level Project Plan (HLPP) and delegate responsibility and authority to implement the HLPP to Development Auckland Limited (Panuku).

Executive summary

2. Auckland Council is committed to providing housing services for older people and has identified a number of drivers for change in the manner in which these services are provided and improved.

3. Council has previously resolved to establish a partnership to deliver HfOP services, has agreed a series of objectives for HfOP services, and has been working with Selwyn to progress business planning for the partnership.

4. Following statutory consultation, the council has resolved to amend the 2015-2025 Long-term Plan to enable the partnership proposal to proceed.

5. This report recommends that the council establish a limited partnership (Joint Venture) between the Auckland Council and Selwyn, with Auckland Council holding 49 per cent and Selwyn holding 51 per cent interests. The Joint Venture will register as a Class 1 landlord and become a Community Housing Provider eligible to receive Income Related Rent Subsidy (IRRS) funding.

6. The housing assets will be leased to the Joint Venture for an initial period of 25 years at a peppercorn rent with Auckland Council retaining ownership of the HfOP portfolio land, subject to any proposed redevelopment and rationalisation of the portfolio.

7. A series of contractual arrangements will be finalised for establishment of the Joint Venture and the new HfOP service and further management arrangements will be established to govern and control the future development and growth of the HfOP portfolio.

8. Financial provision will be made in the 2017/18 Annual Plan and the 2018-2028 Long-term Plan for the transfer of budgeted funds to the Joint Venture for capital renewals and the establishment of a $20m development funding facility to be administered by Panuku to support development and growth of the HfOP portfolio.

9. It is expected that the Joint Venture will be operational on or about March 2017, although some services and contracts may continue to be provided by Auckland Council for an interim period after this.

10. Council has set objectives to maintain at least the current level of HfOP housing and to increase the total number of HfOP units, subject to the availability of additional funding. Council has also set objectives to improve the quality of the current stock, and through intensification, seek opportunities to assist in the growth of social housing. Redevelopment of the HfOP portfolio and the disposal of unsuitable assets will provide better balance to the portfolio to meet housing needs and lower the average age of the HfOP stock which will contribute to improving operational viability.

Recommendation/s

That the Governing Body:

a) approve Auckland Council entering into an agreement to register a limited partnership between Auckland Council and Selwyn (Joint Venture) for the leasing, management and operation of properties owned by Auckland Council for the purposes of housing of older people, currently being those properties listed in Attachment C to the agenda report (Housing for Older People Portfolio) in accordance with the Housing for Older People Partnering Policy.

b) agree, further to the Consultation Document adopted by the Governing Body on 25 May 2016 and the further approval on 28 July 2016, to:

i) Auckland Council entering into a lease and management agreement in respect of the Housing for Older People Portfolio with the Joint Venture for an initial term of 25 years plus three rights of renewal of 25 years each (Lease and Management Agreement);

ii) the Joint Venture reinvesting any operating surpluses that may arise back into the elderly/social housing portfolio managed by the Joint Venture; and

iii) an initial transition period for the staged transition of Auckland Council’s management and operation of the Housing for Older People Portfolio to the Joint Venture.

c) agree to make appropriate financial provision in the 2017/2018 Annual Plan and the 2018-2028 Long-term Plan for the:

i) entering into a funding agreement for the transfer of budgeted capital renewal funding to the Joint Venture for the period up to the financial year 2024/2025 (Funding Agreement); and

ii) the establishment of a $20 million development funding facility to be administered by Development Auckland Limited (Panuku) to support development of both the Housing for Older People Portfolio, the potential development sites at 21-33 Henderson Valley Road and 81A Godley Road and any additional Housing for Older People development sites, until proceeds can be realised to enable the repayment of the facility and any associated interest.

d) delegate authority to Auckland Council’s Chief Executive to execute the following documentation on behalf of Auckland Council:

i) the Joint Venture Agreement;

ii) the Management Agreement;

iii) the Lease;

iv) the Funding Agreement; and

v) all ancillary documentation necessary to give effect to the proposed relationship between Auckland Council, The Selwyn Foundation and the Joint Venture.

e) delegate authority to Auckland Council’s Chief Executive to, during the initial transition period, appoint Auckland Council and/or Development Auckland Limited (Panuku) staff as interim directors of the Joint Venture, and to commence the process to appoint two independent directors of the Joint Venture in accordance with Auckland Council’s policy

f) delegate authority to Development Auckland Limited (Panuku) to act on behalf of Auckland Council in all respects in relation to the Management Agreement and the Lease.

g) endorse:

i) the Housing for Older People High Level Project Plan (Attachment E of the agenda report).

ii) Development Auckland Limited (Panuku) as Auckland Council’s lead agency for any development opportunities of the Housing for Older People Portfolio.

h) grant authority to Development Auckland Limited (Panuku), for the purposes of better meeting the needs of older people, to dispose of parts of the Housing for Older People Portfolio (for the avoidance of doubt, being the properties listed at Attachment C to the agenda report and including any properties added to the Housing for Older People Portfolio in the future), consistent with achieving the aims set out in the Housing for Older People High Level Project Plan, subject to:

i) the satisfactory conclusion of any required statutory processes;

ii) maintaining at least 1452 units in the Housing for Older People Development Portfolio (acknowledging that there may be periods where this figure may temporarily fall due to periods of development); and

iii) the ring fencing of funds that are the output of any development activity and/or realisation of property, for Development Auckland Limited (Panuku) to reinvest into the Housing for Older People Development Portfolio including any new acquisitions to be added to this portfolio.

Comments

11. Council is committed to providing housing services for older people in Auckland and has identified a number of drivers for change in the manner in which these services are provided and improved -

· To improve the quality of housing – opportunities to access expertise and additional, non-ratepayer funding which can be used to deliver more fit for purpose housing for older people.

· To improve tenant satisfaction that has declined below target levels – better quality of housing, external expertise to improve existing services and to grow further services to older people.

12. In June 2015, the council agreed to seek suitable partners for the delivery of HfOP services and approved a set of objectives to guide the proposed partnership (Attachment A).

13. In December 2015, following a two stage contestable procurement process, the council endorsed Selwyn as the preferred HfOP partner and agreed to enter into a Memorandum of Understanding to progress business planning for the partnership.

14. The case for entering into a partnership arrangement was assessed against three major options that have been considered as part of a statutory consultation process for the amendment of council’s 2015-2025 Long-term Plan (LTP) to adopt a new policy regarding HfOP -

· Status Quo

· Sell or gift portfolio to a Community Housing Provider (CHP)

· Partnering proposal.

15. These were assessed against criteria including service level impact, rates impact, debt impact, fit with council HfOP objectives, and advantages and disadvantages, all of which resulted in the decision by council in July 2016 to adopt a policy which will enable the partnering proposal to proceed.

16. It is recommended that the council enter into an agreement to register a limited partnership with Selwyn for the leasing, management and operation of properties owned by Auckland Council for the purposes of housing of older people.

Partnership Proposal

17. The proposed business arrangements between the Auckland Council and Selwyn involve the establishment of a limited partnership (Joint Venture), with Auckland Council holding 49 per cent and Selwyn holding 51per cent interests.

18. The Joint Venture will register as a Class 1 landlord and become a Community Housing Provider eligible to receive Income Related Rent Subsidy (IRRS) funding. This means it cannot be a council controlled organisation. Governance will be via a general partner (limited company) board with Selwyn appointing three directors and Auckland Council two directors.

19. Auckland Council will retain ownership of the HfOP portfolio land subject to any proposed redevelopment and rationalisation of the portfolio consistent with the HLPP. The housing assets will be leased to the Joint Venture for an initial period of 25 years at a peppercorn rent with three rights of renewal of 25 years each, subject to performance criteria.

20. The Joint Venture will retain all tenant management and rental income with surplus operating income, which will be reinvested in social housing together with funds generated from redevelopment and rationalisation of the portfolio. The Joint Venture will be responsible for all opex and renewals.

21. Following approval from the Governing Body, a series of contractual arrangements will be finalised for establishment of the Joint Venture and the new HfOP service including:

· Joint Venture Limited Partnership (Parties: Council – Selwyn)

· Management Agreement (Parties: Council –Joint Venture)

· Lease Agreement (Parties: Council –Joint Venture)

· Selwyn Services Agreement (Parties: Joint Venture – Selwyn)

· Selwyn Loan Agreement (Parties: Joint Venture – Selwyn)

· Funding Agreement (Parties: Council –Joint Venture).

22. Panuku is seeking delegation from Auckland Council to administer the Lease and Management Agreement.

23. Further management arrangements to govern and control the future development and growth of the HfOP portfolio will be contained within the Management Agreement including:

· Development Committee (Parties: Panuku - Joint Venture).

24. The proposed arrangements are illustrated in Attachment B.

25. It is recommended that the council provide authority to Auckland Council’s Chief Executive to execute the required documentation on behalf of Auckland Council.

26. It is also recommended that Auckland Council agrees to make appropriate financial provision in the 2017/18 Annual Plan and the 2018-2028 Long-term Plan for the transfer of budgeted funds to the Joint Venture for capital renewals and the establishment of a $20m development funding facility to be administered by Panuku to support development and growth of the HfOP portfolio.

Strategic Business Case

27. The Strategic Business Case (Attachment D) has been prepared following the completion of a Business Plan for the Joint Venture which demonstrates that there is a compelling case for change, that the proposal optimises value for money, and is commercially viable, affordable and achievable.

28. The Strategic Business Case indicates that:

· The proposed lease of the Auckland Council assets to the Joint Venture at a peppercorn rent over a period of up to 100 years, together with the Income Related Rent Subsidy (IRRS) revenue, provides the ability for the Joint Venture to build a sustainable operating business. The business could ultimately have the ability over time to acquire further assets for social housing for older people and wider social needs but the first priority for the Joint Venture will be to adequately maintain the current portfolio.

· The three year business plan for the Joint Venture including balance sheet and profit and loss statement (P&L) demonstrates that the business is viable. The financial projections assess the longer-term viability particularly as the funding provided by Auckland Council for the renewals expenditure will be reviewed after nine years.

· The opportunity presented via the Joint Venture to access IRRS for existing stock (spot contracts from MSD) provides the ability for the Joint Venture to improve the level of service and build financial reserves for future years. The Joint Venture will also benefit from access to Selwyn’s broad range of services, systems and expertise as an existing, experienced provider of services to older people which should also contribute to performance and viability.

· Access to longer term IRRS contract places from the MSD (up to 25 years) will enable the development of new HfOP units under the Development Committee between the Joint Venture and Panuku. The disposal of no longer fit for purpose assets will provide better balance to the portfolio (locational need) and lower the average age of units which will contribute to improving operational viability, portfolio quality and improved tenant satisfaction.

· The ability to achieve affordable benefits to improve the current level of service is enhanced by access to external funds (including IRRS), the operational expertise of the Joint Venture, the access to Selwyn’s broader services and the development capability of Panuku. All this will contribute to the affordability and quality of services provided by the Joint Venture and the capacity of Panuku to deliver a more fit for purpose, balanced portfolio over time.

· The objectives and aspirations of Auckland Council in the provision of services to older people, the decline in the physical stock and the need to address poor tenant satisfaction ratings, may require an injection of additional ratepayer funding in future to both maintain/improve the existing built stock, and to increase the number of HfOP units.

· The operations of the Joint Venture will utilise a combination of contracted and in-house services that optimise the value of both to the business. In some instances service arrangements will be made with Selwyn to provide support services.

· The Joint Venture will have the governance and access to management expertise and experience to provide oversight and to deliver the requisite services. Auckland Council will appoint independent Directors to the Joint Venture Board in accordance with existing policy. The Joint Venture Board will be required to report to Auckland Council twice yearly on agreed key performance indicators (KPIs).

· The Joint Venture and Panuku will continue to work in partnership with government, philanthropic, mana whenua and third sector providers to maximise access to operational and capital subsidies/funds and broader housing opportunities that serve the needs of older people.

Key risks

29. An initial assessment has identified risks relating to the establishment of the Joint Venture, its business operation and the development of the portfolio. The strategic business case includes a risk allocation table which apportions risk between the Auckland Council, Panuku, Joint Venture and Selwyn.

30. A risk register for the Joint Venture has also been prepared for the Joint Venture and is included in the Business Plan.

31. The identified substantive risks include failure to agree on substantive terms for the partnership with Selwyn, the rejection of the Joint Venture as a Class 1 landlord by the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment (MBIE), changes to IRRS policy by government, impact of the development program on the Joint Venture rental income and tenant satisfaction, and project delivery delays and market values impacting feasibility of development and sustainability of the Joint Venture.

Governance and Performance Monitoring

32. The delivery of housing services to older people remains a core business of Auckland Council and oversight of the Joint Venture will be the responsibility of the Auckland Council via the two independent directors of the Joint Venture who will be appointed in line with the Auckland Council Appointment and Remuneration Policy for Board Members of Council Organisations.

33. The CCO Governance and External Partnerships team will oversee the Joint Venture business interest including its twice yearly reporting on performance against its KPIs.

34. The KPIs to be reported to Council are –

· Tenant satisfaction - Overall tenant satisfaction score is higher than or equal to 80 per cent (of tenants who respond to the annual survey) after nine years of operation.

· Minimum occupancy rates - No less than 95 per cent of the units capable of being occupied are occupied.

· Maintenance standards – 100 per cent of dwellings meet the required standard for accommodation pursuant to CHP registration and IRRS requirements by 30 June 2020.

· Minimum number of units - 1,412 existing HfOP units maintained by the Joint Venture

· Ongoing CHP registration - Joint Venture holds CHP registration at all times during the term of the Management Agreement and Lease.

· Time from vacancy to being fit for purpose (in case of capital renewals).

· Number of properties in capital works (also as a percentage of total portfolio).

· Percentage of tenants satisfied with refurbishment product.

35. Panuku will manage future development/growth of the HfOP portfolio together with the Lease and Management Agreement. Oversight of Panuku by the Auckland Council will occur through the normal accountability reporting under Panuku’s Statement of Intent.

Operations

36. The Business Plan confirms that the Joint Venture will adopt policies and operational practice which will be equivalent to or improve on current practice:

· Rental policy – on transfer to the Joint Venture, current tenants’ rent will continue to be set in accordance with Auckland Council’s rent policy. Existing tenants will have access to the Accommodation Supplement. Government policy under the IRRS is for eligible tenants to pay 25 per cent net income.

· Staffing - The Joint Venture operational structure will deliver the levels of service required of a Community Housing Provider, meeting MBIE/MSD service compliance criteria, and be able to deliver on Auckland Council’s continued interest and objectives.

· Asset management - The development of the asset management plan will be consistent with the recognised CAM (The NZ Treasury Capital Asset Management Initiative) and IIMM (NAMS International Infrastructure Management Manual) approaches.

· Tenancy management - The practices and processes agreed for tenancy management will support and then enhance Auckland Council’s current level of service.

Transition

37. It is expected that the Joint Venture will be operational on or about March 2017, although some services and contracts may continue to be provided by Auckland Council for an interim period after this. The transition of HfOP services from the Auckland Council to the Joint Venture will be overseen by an Auckland Council project team managed by Arts, Community and Events.

38. The transition will involve the transfer of existing systems, data and various operating procedures and contracts for service. Consultation is underway with existing staff affected by the proposal who may also transfer from the Auckland Council to the Joint Venture.

39. It is recommended that authority be given to Auckland Council’s Chief Executive to, during the initial transition period, appoint Auckland Council and/or Panuku staff as interim directors of the Joint Venture. This is inconsistent with Auckland Council policy but it is not anticipated that the Joint Venture will be trading during the period and is necessary in this instance to enable the Joint Venture to be registered as a CHP.

40. It is also recommended that the process to appoint two independent directors of the Joint Venture be commenced in accordance with Auckland Council policy.

Portfolio Development and Growth

41. Auckland Council has set objectives to maintain at least the current level of HfOP housing and to increase the total number of HfOP units subject to the availability of additional funding. Auckland Council has also set objectives to improve the quality of the current stock, and through intensification, seek opportunities to assist in the growth of social housing.

42. Redevelopment of the HfOP portfolio and the disposal of unsuitable assets will provide better balance to the portfolio to meet housing needs and lower the average age of the HfOP stock which will contribute to improving operational viability.

43. The ability to deliver a more fit for purpose, balanced portfolio over time and achieve affordable benefits to the current HfOP service is dependent on access to external funds (such as the IRRS) and improved portfolio management via the expertise of Panuku and Selwyn.

44. Panuku will be responsible for the development and growth of the HfOP portfolio under delegated authority, including all development decisions and executing the necessary transactions to rationalise the portfolio consistent with the HLPP and objectives agreed with Auckland Council.

45. As part of the Management Agreement, an HfOP Development Committee (DevCom) will be established to assess all HfOP development proposals. The DevCom will comprise two senior executives from each of the Joint Venture and Panuku, with the Joint Venture members specifying housing stock suitable for securing IRRS and agreeing to lease developed housing on Auckland Council land but having no voting rights.

46. Following adoption of the HfOP High Level Project Plan (HLPP) by the Auckland Council, Panuku will prepare a detailed High Level Development Plan (HLDP) for the HfOP portfolio and submit business cases to the DevCom for endorsement and the Panuku Board for approval.

47. The purpose of the HLDP will be to set the development pipeline for the next five years. The HLDP will identify opportunities within the HfOP and wider Auckland Council portfolio to enable the development and growth of the portfolio, in quantity and quality, consistent with the HfOP objectives of Auckland Council. The HLDP will be regularly reviewed and updated by Panuku, with input from the Joint Venture .

48. The business cases will detail the development proposition, viability, funding sources and the development procurement process, including the roles of Panuku, the Joint Venture and Selwyn in the procurement process.

49. Auckland Council will provide a development funding facility of $20m as a loan facility to enable development of the HfOP portfolio until funds are released from the sales of property for reinvestment in the portfolio. The facility will need to be repaid from asset sales and will include an interest cost which will be capitalised.

HfOP High Level Project Plan

50. The HfOP HLPP (Attachment E) aims to –

· Contribute to the establishment of the terms of the agreement with Selwyn, particularly in relation to the Auckland Council objective of growing and improving the portfolio and the role/relationship between the parties, including Panuku, to deliver on this objective.

· Provide an overall description of the HfOP growth/development project including the specific properties involved and anticipated high level outcomes or benefits.

· Outline the initial High Level Development Plan (HLDP) that will indicate the development pipeline over the next five years together with the indicative high-level financial and funding implications. The Joint Venture will have the mandate to manage any HfOP stock arising from the development.

51. The HfOP HLPP proposes a set of principles to guide the growth and development of the HfOP portfolio. These are to –

· Maintain at least the current level of provision by Auckland Council and permanently protect the number of accessible and affordable rental options.

· Rebalance the portfolio to improve the quality, location and design of the current Auckland Council stock, better matching need with provision and improving fit for purpose

· Grow the portfolio through intensification to enable additional social/affordable housing and to provide opportunities for ageing in place and creating balanced/mixed communities

· Materially contribute to Auckland Plan strategies, such as intensification and housing, by significantly increasing the number of housing units across the portfolio, catering to older people, mixed tenure and with a bias towards more affordable options.

· Ensure units are available to accommodate tenants affected by repurposing. Tenants affected by capital works will be relocated to the nearest units possible.

· Ensure that future development maximises access to IRRS opportunities.

· Seek potential partnerships with the Crown, CHP’s, Iwi and developers to procure delivery of additional housing on a risk-managed approach.

· Maximise opportunities to access sites and unlock value from the Auckland Council portfolio towards investment in fit for purpose HfOP, social and affordable housing stock.

· Adopt a measured approach to implementation of any new model that minimises disruption to tenants.

· Secure the mandate for Panuku to be able to rebalance the portfolio to ensure certainty for the Joint Venture.

52. The business planning phase has included an asset review and preparation of a portfolio growth and development strategy consistent with the established objectives for HfOP. This process, included in the HLPP, has comprehensively reviewed, assessed and categorised the existing HfOP portfolio into groups of assets to inform the initial HLDP:

· Core assets - properties that are fit for purpose without early development potential, and which form the stable part of the portfolio for the Joint Ventrue to manage and refurbish as part of its renewal programme; and

· Other assets - properties that are either (1) fit for purpose and with early development potential or (2) those that are wholly or partially not fit purpose and identified for potential whole or partial sale, with proceeds to be reinvested into core assets.

53. The categorisation of HfOP sites has been based on a set of criteria in relation to the neighbourhood, site, building and unit to determine fit for purpose. Most of the properties considered not fit for purpose have poor access to key services, have unit sizes less than 40sqm, scored poorly in the last Property Quality Statement survey, have not been fully refurbished, have a small land area and low intensification potential, and within an area of lower deprivation and lower density of older people.

54. The methodology and criteria of the review are detailed in the HLPP.

55. The HLPP sets out the long, medium, and short-term strategy for the development of the HfOP portfolio.

56. The short-term strategy is to maximise the use of vacant sites currently planned for HfOP such as the former Wilsher site, Henderson, and 81A Godley Road, Green Bay, to provide new units without the requirement to demolish existing stock. Other HfOP sites such as Greenslade and Piringa Courts in Northcote or other vacant Council land such as 20 Barrowcliffe Place, Manukau, which form part of other Panuku priority location projects, will be considered for redevelopment.

57. The medium to long term strategy is to develop sites identified for intensification. In the long-term the portfolio will grow consistent with projected need. Future need is expected to remain high in Central Auckland and the outlying local board areas of Rodney, Hibiscus & Bays, Upper Harbour, Henderson-Massey, Howick, Manurewa, Papakura and Franklin.

58. The ongoing review of the HfOP portfolio will be a responsibility of the Joint Venture which, together with Panuku, will recommend further development and disposal sites to enable the portfolio to be rebalanced to better meet need through new provision.

59. It is recommended that council provide direct responsibility and delegated authority for further development and growth of the portfolio to Panuku, including executing the necessary transactions to rationalise the HfOP portfolio consistent with the objectives agreed with Council and the HLPP principles. Panuku will report to Auckland Council on progress as part of its SOI reporting process together with any other updates on material matters.

60. Panuku will have exclusive authority to make any and all development decisions however all proposals will be consistent with the HLPP, the initial draft HLDP and subject to the approval by the Panuku Board of business cases.

HfOP Design Brief

61. An HfOP-specific design brief has been prepared for Panuku, Auckland Council and Selwyn and for reference by the Joint Venture, development partners, and consultants, to outline best-practice design principles and standards for the development of new housing on existing and new HfOP sites. The document is included at Attachment F.

62. Key requirements of the design brief include:

· compliance to statutory and regulatory requirements of the Housing Restructuring and Tenancy Matters (Community Housing Provider) Regulations 2014, the Building Act 2004, the Building Regulations 1992, and the Residential Tenancies Act 1986

· adoption of CPTED (Crime Prevention through Environmental Design), IPTED (Injury Prevention through Environmental Design), Māori, Pasifika, sustainable, universal, and urban design principles

· ensuring connectivity, circulation, safety and comfort within the building and site, and access to community facilities

· tenant parking ratio of no less than 1 every three units

· up to 20 per cent provision for couple units

· design for apartment buildings with a maximum of 10 units per floor, a double-loaded corridor and a communal landing area

· design for a maximum of 40 residents per block with car parking, outdoor area, and communal space (except for villages of less than 15 apartments)

· units follow best-practice layout for accessibility and finishing with a secure scooter parking close to the front door; and

· average size of new units, circa 45 m².

63. These criteria will be applied to each development to the extent practicable.

Peer Review

64. Crest Consultancy has undertaken an independent Peer Review of the HfOP partnering proposal for the HFOP Steering Group comprising Panuku and Council executives.

65. The Peer Review has found that:

· the RFP and business planning process has been undertaken in accordance with the various resolutions and delegations of council to date

· a robust process has been followed complete with a wide range of external advice obtained

· a suitable governance and project management framework has been applied and the foundations and structure have been put in place for a potentially successful partnership

· the partnership proposal aligns with the ten key objectives ratified by the Auckland Development Committee in June 2015

· there are significant benefits over the longer term with the new partnership structure in being able to access the IRRS

· the HLPP for development and the DevCom structure has the potential to achieve the key required objectives

· developing a strong, transparent long term partnership focusing on the key objectives and the strengths both parties bring to the table is important

· a robust and rigorous process has been undertaken to establish the proposed partnership’s agreement terms.

66. The Peer Review recommends areas for further attention:

· a detailed, clear and comprehensive transition plan is developed which would include not only the operational nature of the portfolio, technology, people, and a quality data transfer but also to ensure a proactive communication strategy with all key stakeholders is undertaken.

· that clear delegation and authority is provided to Panuku to manage the development programme within defined objectives noting the complexity of projects, risks and the long term nature of development projects, as well as the success of this partnership will be dependent on Council’s ability to perform in this area.

· that experienced and dedicated resources be appointed within the Council to monitor the performance of the Joint Venture, and ensure key objectives are achieved.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

67. The local boards were briefed on the outcomes sought for the HfOP portfolio following decisions by Auckland Council in June 2015 and a further workshop was held with Local boards on 30 November 2015.

68. The feedback was generally positive and board members saw benefits for their local communities through the development of a partnership.

69. Local boards were also invited to submit to the LTP statutory consultation conducted in June 2016. Local board feedback was broadly positive to the partnership proposal.

70. Local boards will continue to be engaged and consulted where individual villages within their areas are considered as part of the HLPP and development plan.

Māori impact statement

71. HfOP business planning has demonstrated an ongoing commitment to active and productive engagement and development of a working relationship with Māori, including Mana Whenua iwi and hapū and Māori residents and ratepayers.

72. The Joint Venture will have a role in giving effect to outcomes directed by the council’s Māori Responsiveness Framework. This includes recognition and protection of Māori rights and interests within Tāmaki Makaurau and contributing to the needs and aspirations of Māori.

73. Panuku established a Mana Whenua Governance Group comprising of four senior representatives of mana whenua, plus senior representatives of Panuku and the preferred partner. The Group has recommended that the Joint Venture Board membership includes the necessary understanding of mana whenua responsibilities and council commitments to Māori.

74. It has further recommended that the Joint Venture establish a mana whenua advisory panel to be an expert reference in the needs analysis that is planned by the Joint Venture, advise the Joint Venture on service improvements and the role of Māori providers and advise DevCom and Panuku in relation to development of the HfOP portfolio that specifically respond to the needs of Māori.

Implementation

75. The transition of the existing HfOP service to the Joint Venture will be managed by council. The preparation of necessary agreements between Auckland Council, Panuku and Selwyn will be managed by Panuku with authority for the Auckland Council Chief Executive to execute the documentation. Panuku will be Auckland Council’s lead agency for the implementation of the HfOP High Level Project Plan with authority for the development and growth of the HfOP portfolio.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Council HfOP Objectives June 2015	21
b View	Proposed HfOP Parnership Structure	23
c View	HfOP Portfolio	25
d View	HfOP Strategic Business Case	31
e View	HfOP HLPP version for Council	57
f View	HfOP Design Brief	81

Signatories

Author

Kat Teirney - Manager Community Occupancy

Authorisers

Graham Bodman - General Manager Arts, Community and Events

Stephen Town - Chief Executive

Governing Body

25 August 2016

Achievements of the Disability Advisory Panel, Ethnic Peoples Advisory Panel and Pacific Peoples Advisory Panel in the 2013-2016 term

File No.: CP2016/16558

Purpose

1. To note the achievements of the Disability Advisory Panel, Ethnic Peoples Advisory Panel and Pacific Peoples Advisory Panel during the 2013-2016 term.

Executive summary

2. Auckland Council’s demographic advisory panels are one of the mechanisms through which the council engages with Auckland’s diverse communities. Following the completion of the panels’ first term in November 2013, the council re-established the Disability Advisory Panel, Ethnic Peoples Advisory Panel and Pacific Peoples Advisory Panel on 19 December 2013, for them to provide strategic and engagement advice to the council.

3. The Disability Advisory Panel has helped the council better understand the major challenges faced by people with disabilities, and offered advice on council plans, including the Disability Operation Action Plan.

4. The Ethnic Peoples Advisory Panel has helped the council find effective ways of engaging with ethnic communities. The panel’s guidance on council’s approach to ethnic communities has informed the development of Auckland Council’s engagement guidelines for ethnic communities.

5. The Pacific Peoples Advisory Panel has focused its advice on council priorities and major initiatives of the Auckland Plan. The Panel has also continued to provide strategic advice on council events and activities for Pacific communities, including the Pasifika Festival.

6. Staff will provide a report on the achievements of the Seniors Advisory Panel, Rainbow Communities Advisory Panel and Youth Advisory Panel to the Governing Body on 29 September 2016.

7. The chairs of the Disability Advisory Panel, Ethnic Peoples Advisory Panel and Pacific Peoples Advisory Panel will present to the meeting.

Recommendation/s

That the Governing Body:

a) note the achievements of the Disability Advisory Panel, Ethnic Peoples Advisory Panel and Pacific Peoples Advisory Panel over the 2013-2016 term.

Comments

Background

8. Auckland Council’s demographic advisory panels are one of the mechanisms that exist to help council engage with Auckland’s diverse communities. The panels enable the council to ensure that the views and needs of Auckland’s diverse communities inform its decision-making. The panels:

· review and comment on the content of council’s strategies, policies, plans, bylaws and projects

· advise the council on ways to communicate and engage effectively with diverse communities

· bring to the attention of the council any matters that the panels consider to be of particular importance for or concern to their communities.

9. Auckland Council established four demographic advisory panels in its first term. The Ethnic Peoples Advisory Panel and Pacific Peoples Advisory Panel were established by legislation. The Disability Strategic Advisory Group and Foundation Youth Advisory Panel were created on the initiative of the mayor. The panels’ first term ended in November 2013.

10. On 19 December 2013, the Governing Body resolved to continue the four advisory panels, and added a Seniors Advisory Panel (GB/2013/160). The Governing Body established a Rainbow Communities Advisory Panel in September 2015 (GB/2015/24). The Mayor appointed the advisory panel members based on their community networks, governance experience and understanding of their communities.

11. The Governing Body approved the panels’ terms of reference on 19 December 2013. These define the objectives and scope of the panels’ work, and are provided as Attachment A.

12. Over the past three years the demographic advisory panels have met every six weeks, and have developed their own work programmes with a particular focus on areas of importance to their respective communities. The advisory panels have provided advice on the council’s priorities and key agenda items, including the Long-term Plan and the Significance and Engagement Policy.

13. The term of the six demographic advisory panels ends on 8 September 2016.

Disability Advisory Panel achievements

14. Since the beginning of the 2013-2016 term of council, the Disability Advisory Panel membership has captured a wide range of disability perspectives. Clive Lansink has been the chair since February 2015, providing leadership and direction for the panel with support from Liaison Councillor Sharon Stewart. Two new members, Gerard Martin and Ursula Thynne, joined the panel in September 2015.

15. Current Disability Advisory Panel members are:

· Clive Lansink (Chair)

· John Herring (Deputy Chair)

· Colleen Brown

· Dan Buckingham

· Jade Farrar

· David Hughes

· Nicola Keyworth

· Don McKenzie

· Susan Sherrard

· Gerard Martin

· Ursula Thynne.

16. The focus of the Disability Advisory Panel has been consistent with the advisory panels’ terms of reference. The panel’s work programme has primarily focused on the major challenges that Auckland Council should address in relation to disabled people. The panel’s achievements are outlined below.

Disability Operational Action Plan

17. The panel helped progress a comprehensive disability strategy for Auckland Council. Several discussions between council staff and the panel led to the development of a Disability Operational Action Plan in 2016. Auckland Council’s Community Empowerment Unit is implementing and monitoring the plan. The Disability Operational Action Plan is an important document that outlines the council’s commitment to helping people with disabilities, including:

· creating accessible buildings, places and spaces

· knowledge, communications and engagement

· events and services

· our workplace.

18. Several council departments and Council-Controlled Organisations have been involved in developing the plan, and committed to a number of actions to ensure its implementation. The panel continues its advisory role on the implementation of the plan.

Housing workshop

19. Accessible housing is an important issue for people with disabilities, and the Disability Advisory Panel and the Seniors Advisory Panel jointly organised a workshop on the issue on 16 October 2015. The primary purpose of the workshop was to encourage Panuku Development Auckland to consider accessible housing for people with disabilities and older adults. One of the workshop outcomes included the commitment of Panuku Development Auckland to the Disability Operational Action Plan.

Transport

20. In the last two years the panel has advised the council on issues relating to accessible, user friendly and safe public transport. Auckland Transport has committed to several actions in the Disability Operational Action Plan, including reviewing and strengthening the Auckland Transport Disability Policy and its Code of Practice.

Universal Design Manual

21. The panel has supported the principles of the Universal Design Manual. The Auckland Design Office staff have regularly sought the panel’s views, which influenced many aspects of the Universal Design Manual.

General advice

22. In addition to panel’s work programme, the Disability Advisory Panel has given advice on many council initiatives, including:

· Empowered communities approach

· Community facilities network plan

· Public open space policy

· Sport and recreation strategic action plan

· Submission on the building code disability access review

· Inclusive engagement guidelines

· Family and sexual violence strategic action plan

· Civil defence and emergency management plans

· Sports facility network and golf investment plans

· Waitematā Local Board accessibility plan

· World masters games.

Ethnic Peoples Advisory Panel achievements

23. Since the beginning of its second term in June 2014, the Ethnic Peoples Advisory Panel has advised on more than 30 council strategies and initiatives. In 2015 the panel elected Dave Tomu as chair and Anita Keestra as deputy chair following the departure of the inaugural chair.

24. Two new members, Mabel Msopero and Pratima Nand, joined the panel in September 2015. The current members of the Ethnic Peoples Advisory Panel are:

· Dave Tomu, Chair

· Anita Keestra, Deputy Chair

· Asoka Basnayake

· Naoe Hashimoto

· Yee Yang Lee

· Angela Lim

· Wong Liu Shueng

· Christian Dee Yao

· Mabel Msopero

· Pratima Nand.

Work programme

25. The panel designed its work programme reflecting on the issues of importance to ethnic people and their communities, with guidance from Liaison Councillor Denise Krum. It discussed its priorities with the Mayor and held a strategic session to ensure the purpose and outcomes of their advice were clearly aligned with council objectives.

26. On 7 August 2014, the Regional Strategy and Policy Committee approved the work programme of the Ethnic Peoples Advisory Panel with the following focus areas:

· engagement with diverse communities

· community policies

· community development

· children and young people.

27. Since the approval of its work programme, the panel has advised on council initiatives and priorities as highlighted below.

Strategies, plans and policies

28. The Ethnic Peoples Advisory Panel advised on various council strategies and policies, including the Local Approved Product Policy, Community Grants Policy and the Long-term Plan 2015-2025. The panel was a sounding board for the council’s approach to diverse communities and guided policy-makers to develop relevant processes for engaging with ethnic communities.

29. The panel focused on the Significance and Engagement Policy and engagement guidelines for ethnic communities. The policy and guidelines now contain the underlying principles of the council’s bespoke engagement with ethnic people in Auckland. The panel also recommended to the Chief Executive that Auckland Council develop an ethnic engagement strategy.

30. The panel provided in-depth advice on the Long-term Plan and supported the consultation process with ethnic communities through the ‘Have your say’ events. Chair Dave Tomu presented the panel’s recommendations on the Long-term Plan at a Budget Committee workshop in April 2015.

Language support for newcomers

31. The panel focused on more accessible council services for newcomers. Auckland is considered one of the most diverse city in the world. Many public sector agencies in Auckland are facing increasing needs for multi-lingual support. The panel consistently recommended that the council offer more culturally-appropriate and language-friendly services.

2016 Local Government Elections

32. The panel advised on how to encourage ethnic people participation in the 2016 local government elections. Its advice included:

· more effective use of technology to improve language-friendly information

· ensuring that information on elections and electoral processes for potential candidates be available earlier

· promoting civic learning for young migrants.

Help for refugees

33. The panel encouraged the council to develop a stock-take of initiatives for the refugee resettlement sector. Subsequently, staff generated a report identifying a range of council support for refugees. The report helped the council refine its approach to refugee issues and engage more effectively with refugee communities. The panel also supported council’s involvement in the development of the Auckland Refugee Resettlement Strategy and continued to attend annual World Refugee Day events in Auckland.

Community summit and public events

34. The panel participated in and presented at several community events. The panel chair presented at the 2015 Diversity Forum, which was attended by more than 400 people, and highlighted the panel’s support for harmonious race relations in Auckland.

35. On 30 April 2016, the panel co-hosted the Ethnic Engagement Forum in partnership with AUT University and the New Zealand Federation of Multicultural Councils. The forum focused on ethnic communities’ engagement with Māori and the way ethnic communities are represented in the media. More than 100 community participants shared their views and recommended more cross-cultural dialogues between ethnic peoples and Māori.

Profiling council initiatives

36. The panel guided the council’s long-term engagement with migrants, refugees and international students. The panel’s feedback and advice helped profile council programmes and initiatives through various ethnic communications channels.

Pacific Peoples Advisory Panel achievements

37. The Pacific Peoples Advisory Panel provided strategic advice on the needs of Pacific communities and strengthening Pacific voices in the council’s initiatives and activities. The panel had stable membership and was supported by Liaison Councillor Arthur Anae. The current Pacific Peoples Advisory Panel members are:

· Aiolupotea Sina Aiolupotea-Aiono (Chair)

· Sefita Hao'uli (Deputy Chair)

· Apulu Reece Autagavaia

· Tunumafono Ava Fa’amoe

· Rev Tevita Finau

· Tevita Funaki

· Afa'ese Manoa

· Ofeina Manuel-Barbarich

· Richard Pamatatau

· Samuelu Sefuiva

· Leilani Tamu.

Work programme

38. The panel designed its work programme based on Pacific peoples’ views and priorities addressed in the Auckland Plan. The panel’s work programme includes strategic advice and engagement guidance on:

· the Southern Initiative

· the Significance and Engagement Policy

· social issues including housing and family violence

· arts and culture

· economic development including events for Pacific peoples.

39. Each panel member took a portfolio to offer ongoing support and feedback on specific council initiatives related to Pacific communities. The panel also formed sub-groups to directly engage with relevant staff for additional advice outside their six-weekly meetings. The panel’s major achievements are outlined below.

Strategies, plans and policies

40. The panel’s advice on council strategies and plans enabled council to better capture the voices of Pacific communities in the planning stage. Panel members’ expertise in the arts and culture sector informed the draft Arts and Culture Strategic Action Plan and enhanced council’s approach to Pacific peoples culture.

41. The panel offered advice on bylaws, including set net control in Shakespeare Regional Park and Omaha beaches. The panel supported the council’s focused engagement with residents and Pacific community stakeholders. The panel also shared their analysis of bylaw options and delivered recommendations.

The Southern Initiative

42. The Southern Initiative (TSI) is an Auckland Plan priority. The panel offered ongoing advice on TSI programmes. Panel member Tunumafono Ava Fa’amoe was invited to join the TSI Steering Group to provide ongoing advice on the direction and approach of the TSI to Pacific communities.

Housing in Auckland

43. Housing has been of significant interest to the panel as Pacific peoples are affected by unaffordable housing and under-supply of emergency housing. The panel highlighted the need for an in-depth analysis of Pacific peoples’ access to home ownership, and offered their views on action plans and timelines to improve housing for those most in need.

Pacific Services Strategy

44. The panel had significant input into the draft Auckland Council Libraries Pacific Services Strategy. Their advice included ways to attract more Pacific youth to access library services. The Libraries Department continues to seek panel’s advice to shape the final strategy.

Empowered communities approach

45. The panel constantly asked the council for a bespoke approach to Pacific communities, and advised on the importance of the council’s continued engagement and communication with Pacific communities through the empowered communities approach initiative. The panel also shared its views on the new structure and direction of Auckland Council’s community empowerment unit.

Engagement with external stakeholders

46. The panel engaged with external stakeholders to better understand government and community initiatives for Pacific people. These external stakeholders included:

· Matua Shane Jones, Ambassador for Pacific Economic Development

· Pasifika Injury Prevention Aukilani

· Settlement Unit of Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment

· Smokefree Pacific sector representatives.

Supporting elected members

47. The panel supported elected members in official meetings with foreign delegations and in Pacific events. These include:

· council’s official meeting with the delegation of newly-elected Cook Island Members of Parliament

· Pacific Heads of Mission visit to Auckland Council

· Pasifika Festival.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

48. In the 2013-2016 term, members from eight local boards sought panels’ advice on effective engagement with various communities. Local board members also shared their approaches to diverse communities in their local board areas for feedback from the panels.

49. Local board members have asked for more clarity over the panels’ functions, and for structural engagement mechanisms between advisory panels and local boards. These aspects will be considered when the incoming Mayor and Governing Body decide on a future model of advisory panels for the next term.

Māori impact statement

50. Advisory panels’ work programmes are based on the Auckland Plan, which supports Māori aspirations through recognition of Te Tiriti O Waitangi.

51. The Ethnic Peoples Advisory Panel hosted the Ethnic Engagement Forum 2016 and invited people to discuss effective engagement between Māori and ethnic communities. The panel recommended that the council organise more engagement opportunities between Māori and ethnic people.

52. The Pacific Peoples Advisory Panel met with a member of the Independent Māori Statutory Board to learn about its initiatives and priorities. The panel discussed how to effectively strengthen ties between the Independent Māori Statutory Board and the panel in the future.

Implementation

53. The Governing Body will receive another end-of-term report on the achievements of the Seniors Advisory Panel, Rainbow Communities Advisory Panel and Youth Advisory Panel on 29 September 2016.

54. The Demographic Advisory Panels’ term ends on 8 September 2016, one month prior to the 2016 local government elections. The incoming Mayor and Governing Body will consider a future form of council’s engagement with diverse communities for the 2016-2019 term of council.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Terms of Reference for six Demographic Advisory Panels	113

Signatories

Author

Austin Kim - Principal Advisor Panels

Authorisers

Marguerite Delbet - Manager Democracy Services

Phil Wilson - Governance Director

Stephen Town - Chief Executive

Governing Body

25 August 2016

WWI Centenary Memorial, Auckland Domain: Project Update and Funding Proposal

File No.: CP2016/17133

Purpose

1. To provide an update on the WWI Centenary Memorial Project and to seek support for a capital fundraising campaign to help fund the project.

Executive summary

2. In May 2015, Auckland Council agreed to contribute $1 million toward a WWI Centenary Memorial to be developed at Auckland Domain. At the end of 2015, five designers were asked to submit proposals for a WWI Centenary Memorial in accordance with a carefully developed design brief. These designs were made available for public viewing and comment.

3. On 18 February 2016, the Governing Body endorsed the design “Te Takuahi – The Hearth”. The Governing Body also asked the WWI Centenary Memorial Working Party (Working Party) to refine the design to explore the option of a suitable and subtle way of connecting the feature, adjacent to Domain Drive, with the Auckland War Memorial Museum. Due to the cost and time associated with designing a connection this option has not been fully resolved at this point in time.

4. The WWI Centenary Memorial (Memorial) project is estimated to cost $3 million. The current projected cost, not including the suitable and subtle connection with the Auckland War Memorial Museum, is $2.575 million. Any additional costs, over and above Council’s $1 million contribution, are to be sourced from non-rate funding sources including the New Zealand Lottery Grant Board (NZ Lotteries).

5. In July 2016, NZ Lotteries granted $655,000 toward the project. There is currently a budget of $1,655,000 (when NZ Lotteries funding is combined with Council budget) and a budget shortfall of $920,000 to complete “Te Takuahi – The Hearth”, as currently scoped. It is a requirement of NZ Lotteries that the project is either fully funded or re-scoped before the $655,000 can be uplifted.

6. In order for the project to be developed in time for the anniversary of the end of WWI the funds need to be sourced before June 2017. It is recommended that the Governing Body endorse a capital fundraising campaign, and the associated establishment of a trust, to focus on raising the funds needed to complete “Te Takuahi – The Hearth”, Auckland’s WWI Centenary Memorial in Auckland Domain.

7. The Working Party has met on four occasions since the February 2016 meeting of the Governing Body. However, at the time of writing this report the Working Party had not been able to meet to conclude its deliberations. It is meeting on the 23 August 2016 and its feedback will be tabled at the Governing Body meeting.

Recommendations

That the Governing Body:

a) approve a capital fundraising campaign, to commence from October 2016 and to be completed by June 2017, to raise the remaining funds required for “Te Takuahi – The Hearth”, a WWI Centenary Memorial designed by Wraight Athfield Landscape + Architecture

b) request that the capital fundraising campaign be based on the strong and compelling design for “Te Takuahi – The Hearth” publicised in February 2016, while making it clear that this design may be refined, in accordance with the brief and if funding is available, to include the option of a suitable and subtle way of connecting the feature with the Auckland War Memorial Museum

c) delegate to the Chief Executive the authority to scope and establish a new trust that will enable the collection of new revenue sources from Auckland Domain and philanthropic donations for the benefit of Auckland Domain including, in the first instance, the funding of the WWI Centenary Memorial

Comments

Background

8. At its 24 September 2014 meeting, the Governing Body resolved to (GB/2014/107):

b) endorse the First World War Political Steering Group’s recommendation to appoint a working party of the political steering group to scope the feasibility of a First World War Centenary Memorial.

9. As part of the development of the Long Term Plan, the Auckland Council agreed to contribute $1 million toward a WWI Centenary Memorial to be developed at Auckland Domain.

10. A design brief for a WWI Centenary Memorial project was agreed by the Working Party and endorsed by the WWI Commemoration Political Steering Group (Steering Group) on 20 July 2015. Then, in late 2015, Auckland Council called for expressions of interest to design the feature memorial. Five design teams were shortlisted. Concept proposals were submitted in December 2015. All five concepts were displayed at the Auckland War Memorial Museum; in the media; and, on Auckland Council’s website. Public comment was invited.

11. The design: “Te Takuahi – The Hearth”, by Wraight Athfield, was endorsed by the Working Party on 5February 2016 and by the Steering Group on 17 February 2016.

12. On 18 February 2016, the Governing Body resolved to (GB/2016/13):

b) endorse the recommendation of the WWI Centenary Memorial Working Party to select the concept design Te Takuahi – The Hearth, for development at Auckland Domain, subject to the remaining funds being sought from NZ Lotteries or other non-rate funding sources.

c) ask that the WWI Centenary Memorial Working Party work with the consortium, Wraight Athfield Landscape + Architecture, in association with Ross Hemera, AECOM, Dunning Thornton and eCubed Building Workshop, to continue to refine the design in accordance with the brief. This refinement shall include the option of exploring a suitable and subtle way of connecting the feature, adjacent to Domain Drive, with the Auckland War Memorial Museum, while being careful to protect and retain the open grass area in front of the cenotaph.

d) note that the WWI Centenary Memorial Working Party will continue to work with engaged stakeholders, iwi, Heritage NZ, Auckland War Memorial Museum as well as keep the WWI Commemoration Political Steering Group, the Auckland Domain Committee and public informed of progress and the final developed concept.

13. Since the 18 February 2016 Governing Body meeting the Working Party has met on 12 April, 9 May, 13 June and 20 June to discuss options for funding the project and refining the design. They are due to meet again on the 23 August 2016 and their feedback will be tabled at the Governing Body meeting.

Project Funding

14. “Te Takuahi – The Hearth”, as currently drafted, is expected to cost $2.575 million, an amount verified by independent quantity surveyors.

15. Auckland Council’s budget of $1 million was spread over three years. In the current financial year, $230,000 operational budget is available and $600,000 capital budget is available in 2017/18. The allocation was made on the basis that a further $2 million of capital funding would come from fundraising, including NZ Lotteries and other non-rate sources.

16. Auckland Council applied for just under $2 million from the NZ Lotteries in February 2016. In June 2016 NZ Lotteries granted $655,000 toward the project. The amount of this grant is significant relative to other WWI Commemorations in New Zealand that are funded by NZ Lotteries.

17. A summary of the project funding situation is:

Income

New Zealand Lottery Grant Board	$655,000
Auckland Council LTP Funding	$1,000,000
Total	$1,655,000

Expenses

Design and Build	$2,135,066*
Other expenses	$444,000**
Total	$2,575,066

*Amounts provided by Wraight Athfield for design and build and verified by independent quantity surveyor.

**This amount includes spend to date on project management; engineering, archaeological, resource planning, ecological, quality assurance and other specialist services as well as communications and engagement.

18. The funding required to complete the design, as currently drafted, is $920,066. This has been rounded to $920,000 to simplify reporting and the funding target.

19. With support from the Strategic Partnerships team at Auckland Council, investigation into the feasibility of a capital fundraising campaign for this project is underway.

20. Initial work indicates the following potential funding sources:

· capital campaign - which would involve attracting a small number of grant agency or philanthropic partners

· public subscription – this will provide an important means of providing an opportunity for personal connection and community involvement in the project

· generating alternative revenue from Auckland Domain – several new income sources can be obtained with more active management of existing facilities without compromising the values or current use of Auckland Domain

21. Public donations, philanthropic donors and many grant agencies will only give money to a charitable trust i.e. they will not give money to Auckland Council. A charitable trust structure will therefore need to be used. This provides donors with reassurance that the funds are protected for the intended purpose. An existing trust or a new trust entity could be used. However an initial review of three - four existing trusts, with a connection to the project or Auckland Domain, indicates that their focus is not well aligned with the outcomes sought for this memorial.

Refinement of the design

22. The Working Party met with Wraight Athfield on 9 May 2016. At its last meeting, on 20 June 2016, the Working Party requested that “officers come back to the WWI Centenary Memorial Working Party with options in regard to a WWI Memorial.” This is due to occur on 23 August 2016. The options provided in this report will be considered by the Working Party at its forthcoming meeting.

23. Wraight Athfield has confirmed that they can look at options to add a suitable and subtle connection. They have indicated that refining the design would involve further technical investigation and engagement with some key stakeholders. It is estimated that this design work would take at least three months. Costs would be dependent on the scope of the design brief and level of engagement needed.

Options

24. There are three broad options to consider at this time:

Option 1 - Proceed with the agreed concept

In proceeding with the agreed concept, a capital fundraising campaign would be initiated to raise the $920,000 that is needed for the approved design.

The option of a suitable and subtle connection to the Museum can continue to be considered, should adequate funding for additional design work and construction costs be raised. This would be acknowledged in discussion with donors. This component would be resolved, with the designer, at a later point, once the funding is more certain and subject to available funding sources.

Advantages

· Momentum of the project is maintained

· Provides the public with a clear and compelling vision of what is to be delivered

· Ensures sufficient time is available to raise funds and deliver the project on time

· No further costs associated with adding to the design are incurred prior to more certainty of funding being obtained

Disadvantages

· Reputational risk for Auckland Council if the capital campaign is not successful

· The options for connecting to the cenotaph will be limited to those options that can be achieved while retaining the current design

· Lack of certainty at this time about the nature of a suitable and subtle connection with the museum i.e. funding is being sought for a design which may be augmented later. Note: the risk of basing the fundraising on the current design can be managed by way of including clear messages to donors to ensure an understanding of the timeframe, scope and process for refining the design. Donors can also be engaged in any additional design.

Option 2 - Amend the design before raising remaining funds

Look at options for a suitable and subtle connection to the Museum (estimate 3 months, costs dependent on process and level of engagement).

Commence a capital funding campaign in the New Year.

Advantages

· A suitable and subtle connection is agreed before the project proceeds

· Provides the public with a clear and compelling vision of what is to be delivered

Disadvantages

· Reputational risk for Auckland Council if the capital campaign is not successful

· Design will be completed during an election period

· The cost of the additional design will be lost if the funding is not achieved

· The funding window will be short i.e. commencing late January (after the holidays) and completed by June 2017. This will limit funding options and the value that is raised

Option 3 - Do nothing

Do not proceed with a capital fundraising campaign and therefore halt the project

Advantages

· Halting the project at this point would realise a saving of $831,000 in the 2017-19 financial years

· Avoid the risk of a capital campaign not being successful

· Positive reaction from those members of the public that did not support the memorial project

Disadvantages

· Costs spent to date ($169,000) would be lost and present a reputational risk due to the perception of wasting funds

· If the project is halted Auckland would no longer have a project that provides a significant commemoration on the anniversary of WWI

· Negative reaction from those people that are already engaged in the project

25. Options 1 and 2 note the reputational risk for Auckland Council if the capital campaign is not successful. The risk of not obtaining the funds required will need to be built into any campaign so donors are aware of the options and risks. Any capital fundraising campaign would need to consider the following options:

· Commit to return funds to donors if the campaign is unsuccessful

· If funding is close to the target, but still insufficient, look at the option of reducing the scale of the design without greatly affecting the intent or import. The design, as currently drafted, covers a significant area of land and there is some potential to down scale the design. This downscaling will be limited as savings can only be realised through reducing the volume of material costs but this is not the greatest component of the project costs and there is a need to ensure the overall effect of the design is not lost.

· Redirect unclaimed funds to another significant project in Auckland Domain.

26. Proceeding with the agreed concept (Optoin 1) is the preferred option as it presents the least risk at this point of time and provides a clear pathway for delivering the project on time. It is therefore recommended that Council proceed with “Te Takuaki – The Hearth” design as drafted, and investigate the option of a suitable and subtle connection with the Auckland War Memorial Museum as part of the detailed design phase, subject to available funding.

27. Given the amount of funding required, the likely funding sources and the ongoing potential revenue available from Auckland Domain (e.g. hire of the Wintergardens after hours or the hire of the old depot buildings for events and concessionaire activity) a trust for the benefit of Auckland Domain is recommended.

Timeline

28. It is the intent to deliver the WWI Centenary Memorial to coincide with the centenary of the end of WWI being November 2018. If the recommendation to proceed with the agreed concept is supported the high level timeframe is:

Fully scope and design a capital fund raising campaign Obtain resource consent for current design (essential for some donors)	August – October 2016
Capital campaign	October 2016 – June 2017
Detailed Design, Consenting and Tendering	April 2017 – January 2018
Construct on site (summer only)	January – May 2018
Opening	Mid-late 2018 (date to be confirmed)

Consideration

Local board views and implications

29. The Steering Group has been at the heart of this project from the outset. Membership of this Steering Group includes representation from local boards and through this local boards provide input and keep up to date on WWI activities and projects.

30. The Auckland Domain Committee has received regular update reports on this project. The WWI Centenary Memorial is included in the recently adopted Auckland Domain Master Plan, which was the subject of public input. Three members of the Auckland Domain Committee are also members of the Waitemata Local Board.

Māori impact statement

31. Mana whenua have been engaged throughout the development of this project. An initial email seeking interest in the project was sent out to all iwi on 16 July 2015. A copy of the high level design brief was included. The following iwi expressed an interest in the project:

· Ngāti Whātua o Ōrākei

· Ngāti Maru

· Ngai Tai Ki Tāmaki

· Te Akitai

· Ngati Te Ata Waiohua

· Ngāti Tamatera confirmed they would be represented by Ngati Maru

· Ngāti Whātua o Kaipara deferred to Ngāti Whātua o Ōrākei.

32. A site meeting to discuss the project was held on 11 August 2015 (and coincided with a site visit to discuss the Auckland Domain Masterplan). A subsequent hui was held on 27 October 2015.

33. Mana whenua will be engaged prior to resource consent and a commitment has been made to commission cultural impact assessments that address all future projects identified in the Auckland Domain Master Plan.

Implementation

34. If the recommendations of this report are supported then the implementation of the capital fundraising campaign will need to be delegated to staff as preparation and initiation of this will need to occur over the election period.

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Signatories

Author

Jane Aickin - Paeurungi Te Waka Tai-ranga-whenua

Authorisers

Ian Maxwell - Director Community Services

Stephen Town - Chief Executive

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