I hereby give notice that an ordinary meeting of the Puketāpapa Local Board will be held on:
Date: Time: Meeting Room: Venue:
|
Thursday, 16 March 2017 4.00pm Lynfield
Meeting Room |
Puketāpapa Local Board
OPEN ADDENDUM AGENDA
|
MEMBERSHIP
Chairperson |
Harry Doig |
|
Deputy Chairperson |
Julie Fairey |
|
Members |
Anne-Marie Coury |
|
|
David Holm |
|
|
Shail Kaushal |
|
|
Ella Kumar, JP |
|
(Quorum 3 members)
|
|
Brenda Railey Democracy Advisor
13 March 2017
Contact Telephone: 021 820 781 Email: brenda.railey@aucklandcouncil.govt.nz Website: www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz
|
Puketāpapa Local Board 16 March 2017 |
|
ITEM TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE
25 Project 17: Auckland Council Maintenance Contracts 5
26 Reinstatement of the Manukau Harbour Forum 85
27 Draft Air Quality Bylaw and Statement of Proposal 91
28 2016 Elections - Highlights and Issues 159
PUBLIC EXCLUDED
Procedural motion to exclude the public 173
25 Project 17: Auckland Council Maintenance Contracts
e. Supplier Specific Information 173
h. Contract Information 173
Puketāpapa Local Board 16 March 2017 |
|
Project 17: Auckland Council Maintenance Contracts
File No.: CP2017/02985
Purpose
1. The purpose of this report is to seek feedback from local boards on maintenance contracts for parks, buildings and open space, prior to Finance & Performance Committee approval on 28 March 2017.
Executive summary
2. Auckland Council manages over 5,000 sites across the region including parks, buildings and open space. Existing Auckland Council maintenance contracts for these sites expire on 30 June 2017.
3. Project 17 was setup to procure and implement new maintenance contracts due to take effect 1 July 2017. This includes Full Facilities, Arboriculture and Ecological services across the Auckland Council region.
4. Over the last twelve months, Community Facilities has engaged with elected members through both formal and informal processes, to shape up the direction of this project and seek feedback on maintenance requirements and service levels. Refer to Attachment A for the Political Engagement Timeline.
5. Elected member feedback, including local priorities, informed the Request for Proposal document which was the basis of negotiation with suppliers. Refer to Attachment B for this local board’s resolutions dated September 2016.
6. This report outlines the following documents which will form part of final maintenance contracts and standard service levels:
· Attachment C Standard and Enhanced Assets
· Attachment D Full Facilities Contract Service Specifications
· Attachment E Supplier Specific Information (CONFIDENTIAL)
· Attachment F Contractor Performance Balanced Scorecard
· Attachment G Tupuna Maunga Values Specifications
· Attachment H Contract Information (CONFIDENTIAL)
7. Community Facilities seek feedback from local boards on Attachments C, D and E, prior to Finance and Performance Committee approval on 28 March 2017
That the Puketāpapa Local Board: a) provide feedback on: · Standard and Enhanced Assets (Attachment C) · Full Facilities Contract Service Specifications (Attachment D) · Supplier Specific Information (Attachment E) (CONFIDENTIAL) b) note that the local board will have the opportunity to meet successful suppliers in April and May to discuss and refine local service level variations. |
Comments
Process
8. Over the last twelve months, Community Facilities has engaged with elected members through both formal and informal processes, to shape up the direction of this project and seek feedback on maintenance requirements and service levels. Refer to Attachment A for the Political Engagement Timeline.
9. An open, competitive tender process seeking proposals for the supply of full facilities, arboriculture and ecological maintenance services of council assets was conducted as follows:
· On 10 August 2016, an Expression of Interest was published to identify market interest in providing maintenance services for buildings, parks and open spaces to Auckland Council. 36 Expressions of Interest were received.
· Formal feedback from local boards on the project approach and proposed service specifications was received in September 2016.
· Feedback was also sought from local boards on the list of assets in their area, used as the basis of asset data in the Request for Proposal.
· Refer to Attachment B for this local board’s resolutions.
· Feedback was used to inform the Request for Proposal document which was released on 28 October 2016 and submissions closed 9 January 2017.
· Submissions were assessed and scored by an evaluation team against weighted criteria including methodology, resources and capability, innovation and SMART procurement, and price.
· Negotiations are now underway with shortlisted suppliers, due for completion 10 March.
· Recommended contracts for five areas across the region, including pricing and baseline service levels, will be presented to the Finance & Performance Committee on 28 March 2017 for final approval.
10. Community Facilities seek feedback from local boards on Attachments C, D and E, prior to Finance and Performance Committee approval on 28 March 2017.
Approach
11. Following a review last year of management and maintenance processes of council’s assets, this project has adopted an improved approach to maintenance services, to:
· focus on the whole-of-life cycle of assets;
· deliver more services without compromising quality;
· encourage and incentivise contractors to be accountable for the assets and develop ownership at all levels of their service delivery;
· provide a contractual framework that enables contractors to employ innovate ideas and methods without compromising on quality delivery; and
· implement five new contract areas (called Tahi, Rua, Toru, Whā, Rima) to allow for better economies of scale. The local boards represented within each area are:
Contract Area |
||||
Tahi |
Rua |
Toru |
Whā |
Rima |
Devonport-Takapuna Hibiscus & Bays Kaipātiki Upper Harbour |
Albert-Eden Great Barrier Puketāpapa Waiheke Whau |
Henderson-Massey Rodney Waitākere Ranges |
Howick Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Orākei Waitematā |
Franklin Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Manurewa Ōtara-Papatoetoe Papakura |
12. A key change is that contracts will have a more outcome-based focus on service levels, as opposed to predictive or frequency based maintenance schedules (unless where necessary). This ensures service standards are consistently maintained and managed by suppliers.
13. A standard maintenance service level is applied to every asset to ensure it is fit for purpose, in good condition and achieves community outcomes.
14. Where an asset may have specific known demands such as high frequency use, high reputational risk, requires attendance due to its nature (e.g. old, troublesome asset) or is a heritage site, an enhanced level of service may be applied to the asset.
15. An enhanced service level should not be confused with poor performance from a supplier to provide the agreed standard service level.
16. Refer to Attachment C outlining the updated asset list (including those requiring an enhanced service level) for this local board area as at March 2017. Please note that this asset list is continually reviewed to ensure up to date data in alignment to council decisions and asset assessments.
17. Maintenance contracts have been negotiated to cover three core functions across the five areas:
· Full Facilities
· Specialist Arboriculture
· Specialist Ecological
18. Council may immediately terminate (or suspend the supplier’s performance of) the contract in whole or in part, by written notice to the supplier, if a persistent performance breach occurs. Please refer to the Contractor Management section in this report for further details.
19. Refer to Attachment H (confidential) for further information about contract terms and Attachment E (confidential) for supplier specific information.
Standard Service Levels
Full Facilities Contract (FFC)
20. Service specifications determine the criteria and outcomes associated with maintaining an asset or facility, which then sets the foundation of a contract agreement.
21. Refer to Attachment D for the Service Specifications expected across the Auckland region for Full Facilities maintenance work. In summary, these are service level output statements by category:
Full Facilities Category |
Output Statement |
Open Space |
Parks, reserves and roadsides within Auckland are maintained and developed to provide a sustainable, safe, clean and healthy environment while assets are maintained and enhanced to meet the amenity and use needs of council, Auckland residents and visitors. |
Arboriculture
|
Trees (under three metres in height) are maintained to an aesthetically pleasing state which promotes healthy growth with the tree adding to the resident or visitors experience with targeted maintenance activities to achieve healthy and safe trees. |
Locking and Unlocking |
Assets are actively managed to minimise vandalism and anti-social behavior |
Buildings - Maintenance |
All Auckland Council owned and/or operated facilities require on-going Planned and Response Maintenance (compliance and non-compliance) to ensure that all facilities provided for public and Auckland Council staff use are functional, fit-for-purpose, safe and where possible ensure that the building services are optimised to reduce disruption to the facilities operation. |
Buildings
– |
All Auckland Council owned and/or operated buildings that require planned and response cleaning shall be cleaned to a standard that allows all buildings users to utilise a sanitary, hygienic, safe, functional and fit for purpose space for their operation. All litter and debris shall be removed from site and done so in a sustainable manner. |
22. Standard Operating Procedures have been developed to agree minimal functional requirements such as height of grass mowing, mulching thickness, goal post painting etc. These procedures have been developed through expertise knowledge and are operational in nature.
23. Minor Capital Works (low value, low risk) is included in these contracts to ensure appropriate mitigation measures are incorporated when maintaining assets.
24. The baseline service level for specialist sportsfield maintenance ensures sports playing surfaces are managed to provide surfaces and assets that are ‘fit for use’ for the type and level of sport being played and which maximise usage and support organised sporting activities.
25. Specialist sportsfield renovation work includes:
· Fertilisation, application, fertilisers
· Winter Treatment - cambridge rolling, slicing and spiking, solid tine vertidraining, ground breaking , vibramoling
· Summer - vertimowing, dethatching, organic matter removal, leaf collection, scarifying/ dethatching, coring/hollow tine, core harvesting, undersowing/oversowing, sand topdressing, soil topdressing, vibramoling, mole plough, verti-draining, ground probe aeration, weed control, weed control (couch), agrichemical controls on sportsfields, top planing
· Turfing – turf replacement (minor)
· Artificial - cleaning, rubber top-ups, grooming, repair, hygiene
· Supply bulk supply materials - eg sand, soil, seed, agrichemicals, turf (winter and summer species), fertilizer
· Renovation works programme development
· Not that the Full Facilities contract incorporates sports mowing, line marking, goal posts/furniture, soil and/or tissue sample analysis, grass selection, pest and disease detection, minor turf repairs, renovation works programme report, cricket
26. Sportsfield renovations seasonally renovate surfaces back into condition for subsequent sporting code use, including renewal of surfaces that have reached their life span, or reinstating an asset that has been damaged through excessive overuse.
27. Sportsfield renovations are collaboratively implemented to complement maintenance activities in the contract.
28. When asset components are replaced (e.g. turf type), the same style and material type is supplied, unless otherwise directed by Auckland Council.
Arboriculture Specialist Contract
29. The scope of the arboriculture contract covers the management of council owned trees i.e. it’s ‘urban forest and rural surrounds’
30. The arboriculture contract includes, but is not limited to, the following services:
· General administration and communication
· Inspections and programmes
· Pruning
· Reactive works
· Clean-up
· Tree removal
· Planting
· Aftercare maintenance
· Tree asset inventory
31. The arboriculture contract will be managed as a prescriptive measure and value contract, but may shift to output basis through the term of the contract. Work will be managed on both a scheduled and reactive basis.
32. Auckland Council will retain ownership of all chipped bio-mass (foliage, brushwood and wood) resulting from Arboriculture Specialist contracts.
33. It will be expected that the supplier takes a proactive approach in relation to Council’s assets, including those not directly related to the contract’s scope. This will involve reporting any faults or issues, regardless of asset ownership in a timely manner e.g. reporting a vandalised bus shelter (Auckland Transport) next to a street garden.
34. The management of Kauri Dieback and weeds are incorporated into Standard Operating Procedures included in the Arboriculture Specialist contract.
Ecological Specialist Contract
35. The ecological contract provides for the maintenance of Auckland Council’s high value ecology sites, and significant bush and natural areas. The prioritised targeted removal of animal and plant pests from council’s open spaces is a core service within this contract. The overarching objective is to restore and rehabilitate native biodiversity in a sustainable and long term approach.
36. The scope of the ecological contract includes:
· preparing ecological restoration plans that take a long term perspective and provide the optimum cost effective management to reinstate the ecological processes, so the site environmental values are conserved and enhanced.
· assessing, monitoring and controlling pests impacting the ecological processes and or values at each site. This includes but is not limited to plant, animal and invertebrate pests.
· restorative planting of sites
37. The supplier is required to have all vehicles to carry a web based GPS tracking system. This enables reports to be produced on journey length and stay.
38. The ecological contract is supplemented by an Ecological and Environmental Pest Control Standard Operating Procedure which provides guidance to methodologies and site-specific requirements.
39. The supplier is required to report any hazardous dumping to Auckland Council’s Pollution Hot Line immediately.
Other Maintenance Priorities
SMART Procurement
40. The following SMART procurement outcomes are requirements outlined in maintenance contracts:
· Increase capability and capacity – suppliers are required to create sustainable businesses that provide training and development to ensure continued quality delivery of services over the term of the contract.
· Youth employment - contracts should facilitate connecting work-ready youth to local employment by creating local jobs with training and development opportunities.
· Diversity and inclusion - contracts should promote inclusion, reduce discrimination and remove barriers to opportunity and participation, particularly for disadvantaged groups who face barriers to employment e.g. long term unemployed, and people with disabilities.
· Valuing Māori - suppliers are required to work collaboratively with council to achieve better outcomes with Māori, by supporting skill development and labour market participation, and engagement with Māori owned businesses.
· Pacific Auckland - contracts should support further training, development and labour market participation for Pacific youth and communities.
· Local community and economy - contracts should support local business where reasonable/practical, and should meet the social needs of the delivery area.
41. Contracts have retained flexibility to remove assets (by contract variation) to facilitate active participation by the third sector/volunteers to deliver maintenance outcomes.
42. Suppliers (and subcontractors) are required to establish, document, implement, maintain and continually improve an environmental management system. This will capture practices such as an environmental policy, environmental impacts of significance, legal requirements, environmental objectives and targets. At a mimimum the management system will monitor and measure energy conservation, water conservation, waste management and recycling, chemical use, Scope 1 and Scope 2 Greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions.
43. Suppliers are proposed to annually reduce the carbon footprint from year two onwards.
44. The environmental management system must be certified by an accredited third party to the standard of ISO14001, EcoWarranty, Enviro-Mark or an agreed-upon alternative programme. Where the supplier has certified to the Enviro-Mark programme they will commit to attaining the highest level of certification, Enviro-Mark Diamond.
45. Please refer to Attachment E for further supplier specific information.
Weed Management
46. A memorandum from Barry Potter, Director Infrastructure and Environmental Services, was circulated to local board members on 15 November 2016 regarding weed management. A second memorandum was circulated to all elected members on 16 December 2016 providing an update on the implementation of Auckland Council’s Weed Management Policy, particularly with regards to this project.
47. New maintenance contracts have been designed to reflect the objectives of Auckland Council’s Weed Management Policy which includes implementing the following changes:
48. What will change?
o Minimise agrichemical use
§ The new contracts require a reduction in agrichemical usage and this will be closely monitored - a 10% penalty of the monthly invoice to the supplier will be applied if the ‘annual reduction in use of agrichemicals’ KPI is not met.
§ Chemical usage will be reported monthly by suppliers and tracked on a local park by local park basis. Please refer to the Contract Management section in this report for further information on reporting, auditing and KPI’s.
§ Contracts will standardise which type of glysophate will be used across the region by all suppliers.
§ Manual and mechanical weed control methods are currently used in and around children’s playgrounds across the region. Agrichemicals are not used within these spaces. This will continue under new contracts.
§ Mechanical edging will be applied along paving and other hard edges.
o Integrated weed management, ensure best practice and value for money
§ The volume of mulch in gardens and garden beds will be increased to reduce other methods of weed control
§ Change from frequency based maintenance contracts to a focus on environmental outcomes, to encourage suppliers to be more innovative in their approach to weed management and edge control
§ Learnings from innovations will be socialized across all suppliers to promote continuous improvement and best practice methodology
§ Suppliers will be encouraged and rewarded for innovation in weed management at quarterly supplier forums
§ Development of a weed management manual which is currently being reviewed by the Best Practice Reference Group.
§ Establishment of the Best Practice Reference Group made up of external technical experts and community representatives as per the policy action plan.
§ A No-Spray Register will be used by suppliers to ensure consistency in practice and process.
o Empower the community to manage weeds in accordance with the policy
§ Weed control programmes in ecological restoration contracts will be planned and agreed in advance of the works.
§ Targeted weed control, including the use of volunteers, will be enabled to ensure that agrichemical usage is minimized and integrated with other sustainable practices such as replanting with eco-sourced species to prevent weed re-infestation.
§ Contracts include supplier inductions and training on public awareness of vegetation controls, including herbicides and the importance of public education, including signage when spraying.
§ Improved information on council’s website outlining how and why council controls weeds.
49. At the 13 December 2016 Finance and Performance Committee meeting, the following resolutions relating to weed management were approved:
o An addition to recommend to the Environment and Community Committee as follows:
a) Note that significant funding reallocations are not within the scope of the Annual Plan process
b) Endorse glysophate reduction targets within the current budget
c) Express support for the continued implementation of the Weed Management Policy
d) Agree that a political group be appointed by the Mayor, monitors and reviews the implementation of Auckland Council’s Weed Management Policy and practice
e) Recommend that a review and consultation of allocated funding take place through the upcoming Long-term Plan process
o Resolution d) reshapes the weed management political advisory group
Co-Governance
50. As pre-agreed with co-governance partners, suppliers submitted a detailed report and costings on how they would manage and provide specific services to the Tūpuna Maunga Authority and / or Parakai Recreation Reserve in their preferred areas.
51. This report is being socialised with leaders and representatives from co-governance entities with the outcome being determined at the end of March 2017 with either of the following options being the preferred solution:
· Maintain the status quo
· Offer maintenance services to the supplier in the specific area
· Offer maintenance services to only one supplier who would be accountable for all outcomes.
52. Whenua Rangatira (Bastion Point) – no change proposed to current maintenance agreements where iwi are responsible for managing this site
Community Empowerment
53. Local boards expressed strong support to enable community empowerment including volunteers, through these contracts.
54. Contracts have the flexibility to accommodate contract variations such as community empowerment initiatives, however compliance with Health and Safety, legislative obligations, agreed service levels and operating procedures are critical in these cases.
55. Local boards should work with their strategic brokers (within the Arts, Community and Events team) to identify requirements and opportunities, who will then liaise with Community Facilities to agree and implement suitable solutions.
Contract Management
Contractor performance
56. Key Performance Indicators (KPI’s) measure how well the Supplier is doing to meet specifications and outcomes. KPI’s cover five categories:
o quality
o innovation
o management
o Smart procurement and environmental management
o stakeholder, customer and community impact
57. Health and Safety (H&S) is a contractual obligation.
58. KPI’s are measured monthly, bi-monthly, quarterly or annually.
59. Suppliers are required to meet Full Facilities Key Performance Indicators (KPI’s) and Minor Capital Work KPI’s to have their level of direct award for Minor Capital Works increased, as an incentive for good performance.
60. For each category component failed, suppliers must provide an improvement plan to resolve the performance issue.
61. If a supplier continues to fail on a category component beyond the performance resolution improvement plan deadline, council will be entitled to withhold payment of 10% of each month's invoices (excluding minor capex) until the supplier starts meeting the category component target.
62. Suppliers have the right to earn back withheld payments relating to category components if they start meeting required target levels by a timeframe set by council.
63. Attachment F outlines the Contractor Performance Balanced Scorecard that will be monitored and applied across the region.
Auditing
64. Auditing of contractor performance was previously conducted by external parties. However, this function is now being conducted internally by Community Facilities. A team of auditors conduct spot checks onsite targeting 10% of all maintenance work conducted by each supplier.
Response maintenance
65. Response maintenance work will be categorised by urgency and a maximum response time determined. Criteria is still under negotiation and agreement for some suppliers.
66. The supplier will undertake programmed maintenance, responsive maintenance and all other minor contract works (including emergency works on an as needs basis only) on Monday to Sunday, restricting noisy and any activities that may cause a nuisance to between the hours of:
o 7:00am and 6:00pm (52 weeks of the year); and
o 10:00am and 6:00pm (Saturdays and Sundays and statutory holidays).
67. The supplier will provide a call out service 24 hours, 7 days a week, carried out as part of normal duties.
68. Following completion of response maintenance work, the supplier will call the customer (between 8:00am and 6:00pm unless otherwise stated), to inform them that works have been undertaken and check that the customer is satisfied.
69. It is expected that suppliers assist with ‘whole of life’ asset management which requires the supplier to assess and make recommendations on the optimal most cost effective balance of programmed maintenance, responsive maintenance, and renewal of assets across their whole life.
70. Suppliers are required to update a condition assessment grading once a maintenance service has been undertaken, to be included in council’s asset management system, and to notify council of any significant degradation.
Consideration
Local board views and implications
71. Project 17 has engaged with local boards through various channels including:
o Local Board Chairs Procurement Working Group;
o Local Board Chairs Forum presentations;
o memorandums;
o cluster workshops;
o individual local board workshops; and
o business meeting reports.
72. Refer to Attachment A outlining the political engagement timeline.
73. Community Facilities is now seeking feedback from local boards during the final stage of this procurement process, prior to Finance and Performance Committee approval of contracts.
Māori impact statement
74. Auckland Council is committed to meeting its responsibilities under Te Tiriti o Waitangi/the Treaty of Waitangi and its broader statutory obligations to Māori.
75. Māori responsiveness requires the collective effort of everyone. Under the new contracts, suppliers will work collaboratively with council to achieve better outcomes with Māori and for Auckland. This will include:
o Building positive relationships with Māori – effective communication and engagement with Māori, developing resilient relationships with mana whenua;
o Significantly lift Māori social and economic well-being; and
o Building Māori capability and capacity.
76. Through these contracts, opportunities to support local community outcomes and economic development include (but are not limited to):
o Providing employment opportunities, in particular for local people and for youth;
o Increasing capability and capacity (apprenticeships, cadetships or equivalent) in particular for youth;
o Building on community and volunteer networks.
77. The Request for Proposal outlined Tūpuna Maunga Value Specifications as outlined in Attachment G, which suppliers are required to support as part of new maintenance contracts.
Implementation
78. The transition into new contracts will commence once formal approval is agreed by the Finance & Performance Committee.
79. Local boards will have the opportunity to meet new suppliers in April and May 2017 to discuss specific local priorities. Any local service level variations may need to be reflected in contract variations and implementation timelines agreed with the supplier.
80. New maintenance contracts take effect on 1July 2017. Note that there will be approximately six to twelve months to bed in changes, in particularly systems and reporting.
No. |
Title |
Page |
a⇩ |
Political Engagement Timeline |
17 |
b⇩ |
Local Board Resolutions (September 2016) |
19 |
c⇩ |
Standard & Enhanced Assets |
23 |
d⇩ |
FFC Service Specifications |
25 |
e⇩ |
Supplier Specific Information (Under Separate Cover) - Confidential |
|
f⇩ |
Contractor Performance Balanced Scorecard |
77 |
g⇩ |
Tupuna Maunga Values Specifications |
81 |
h⇩ |
Contract Information (Under Separate Cover) - Confidential |
|
Signatories
Authors |
Kate Marsh - Financial Planning Manager - Local Boards |
Authorisers |
Rod Sheridan - General Manager Community Facilities Karen Lyons – General Mangaer Local Board Services Victoria Villaraza - Relationship Manager |
16 March 2017 |
|
Attachment Two - Local Board Resolutions
September 2016
The following are resolutions and/or feedback provided by this local board to inform the Request for Proposal document.
Puketapapa
The Puketāpapa Local Board considered this proposal at a combined workshop with Albert-Eden and Whau Local Boards on 9 August 2016.
A report was then included on the 25 August 2016 Puketāpapa Local Board business meeting agenda. The report sought “local board feedback on proposed maintenance service specifications where they may have an impact on levels of service for local activities, to inform a Request for Proposal to the supplier market (due to be published in early October 2016).”
The board resolved to “delegate authority to the Chair and Deputy Chair to provide the board’s feedback on the proposed service specifications, local outcomes and the overall structure for new Community Facilities maintenance contracts by 23 September 2016.”
The local board feedback is as follows:
Opening comments
Focus on overall outcomes not outputs
· This point can be illustrated through an example. A couple of years ago at Keith Hay Park, Council removed an area of flax that was blocking sightlines at a cycleway junction. The flax came out, and the grass and weeds started to grow. Weeks and months went by with contractors coming in to mow the rest of the park, weed gardens, and conduct other maintenance. But because the de-flaxed area was not on the maintenance schedule, it was left. Eventually when I noticed it, waist high and looking terrible, it was logged and it was dealt with.
· This scenario stems from a tick-box outputs approach. The contactors are paid to do tasks x, y, and z. Nothing else matters. In fact, if they do something else, they are taking away time from doing x, z, and z, and are effectively financially penalised. Council contracts need to work in some overall outcomes to ensure that obvious maintenance tasks that are not on the pre-prepared list get pro-actively dealt with.
· While the board supports the proposed approach for the 2017 Parks and Building Maintenance Contracts, it emphases that the local outcomes should reflect local character, not one generic outcome across the region. In this instance, and for the purposes of this submission ‘local’ refers to the proposed Rua cluster rather that the Puketāpapa Local Board area.
· In the move to more outcomes focussed Parks and Building Maintenance Contracts is supported, the board notes that some prescriptive requirements will remain to ensure that the transition to the new approach is successful over time.
Flexibility for Local Boards
· At the time the last contracts were given out, Local Boards were promised that within overall envelopes they would have some discretion and flexibility. Our understanding was that we would be able to increase a service level in one place and lower it in another if that better met community expectations. In reality this was not possible and we discovered that there was basically no flexibility. Whenever we tried to do this, we were told that the contracted tasks were set across the whole contract area and it was impossible to localise them.
· As an example – after the last contracts were let, Council dropped maintenance at Hillsborough Cemetery. It then fell in to a state of disrepair. We sought to work through our local service levels to see if we could reduce slightly in one area in order to fund work at the Cemetery, but we were told that this was basically impossible. In the end we resolved the issue in another way.
· There need to be built in mechanisms to enable boards to have very clear oversight of the service levels, tasks, and costs, associated with the contracts in our areas. There also needs to be a practical ability to prioritise within this. We understand the potential inefficiencies of boards changing service levels frequently but believe a balance needs to be struck. We believe that the contracts should include provision that overall service levels and allocated tasks within a cluster area will be reviewed by the relevant boards every three years, coinciding with the Local Board Plan revision. At the beginning of each financial year boards should have the discretion to adjust service levels.
Proposed specifications
· The board has been limited in its ability to give specific feedback on the outcomes in asset groups, due to inaccuracies in the list of assets supplied by the department. This has constrained its ability to understand existing levels of service for asset groups and where changes might be needed. Particularly in regard to what enhanced and standard mean, and how to have something categorised as a premier as opposed to neighbourhood park.
· The proposed service specifications outcomes for the 2017 Parks and Building Maintenance Contracts should be reviewed to remove all subjective statements (such as high-quality and visually pleasing) and replaced with definitive statements.
· The board has the following general feedback for asset groups:
o add ‘maintenance of sightlines to ensure Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design Standards (CPTED) are met’
o add’ coordinate maintenance programmes with ad hoc events, when necessary’
o remove reference to toilet cleaning in asset groups (because this has its own asset group classification)
o playground areas, dog exercise areas, sportsparks and other areas that children are likely to visit should be spray free where possible.
· The board has the following specific feedback for asset groups:
o Sportsparks – remove grass clippings
Geographical clusters and term of contracts
· supports the concept of geographic clusters for the 2017 Parks and Building Maintenance Contracts and the makeup of the Rua cluster, with the exception of the Gulf Islands
· requests clarification about the rationale for the proposed term of the 2017 Parks and Building Maintenance Contracts, in particular how this will improve political oversight
· contracts should include provision that overall service levels and allocated tasks within a cluster area will be reviewed by the relevant boards every three years, coinciding with the Local Board Plan revision. At the beginning of each financial year boards should have the discretion to adjust service levels within their board area.
Procurement principles
· considers that providing more opportunities for local suppliers for the 2017 Parks and Building Maintenance Contracts will allow for:
o greater economic opportunities for these local providers
o greater pride and ownership in the work and consequently better standards
o economic development in local areas, including jobs closer to where people live.
· requests that staff ensure that the 2017 Parks and Building Maintenance Contracts provide a sustainable procurement approach as per the Council’s procurement policy which includes ” increased local spend and enhanced local capability where appropriate”. The board considers a sustainable procurement approach would support a Living Wage and equal opportunities for marginalised sectors of the community.
· request that the principle of the Living Wage is embedded in the Smart Procurement Principles document
· requests that staff, when considering the tenders for the 2017 Parks and Building Maintenance Contracts, give greater weight to tenderers who have included a higher proportion of local suppliers from the Rua cluster and will prioritise employment for people within Rua
· requests that staff, as per the Council’s procurement policy, ensure that local suppliers are provided advice and support so they have a full and fair opportunity to compete for the 2017 Parks and Building Maintenance Contracts
· requests that the 2017 Parks and Building Maintenance Contracts have a “local impact assessment” as part of the procurement process as per the Council’s procurement policy and requests that local boards have input at the strategic level on the development of the “local impact assessment”
· supports staff incorporating creative solutions and opportunities to build community empowerment into the 2017 Parks and Building Maintenance Contracts e.g. a local community group could undertake all the maintenance of a local park
· requests that the 2017 Parks and Building Maintenance Contracts be designed to allow for enough flexibility for local boards to make minor changes to levels of service without the need for locally driven initiative funding
· requests that the 2017 Parks and Building Maintenance Contracts be designed to enable local boards to use locally driven initiative funding for major increases to levels of service on an annual basis.
Reporting, advice and ongoing support
· notes that staff have confirmed that there is no intention to reduce existing service levels as part of the 2017 Parks and Building Maintenance Contracts and requests staff to provide options to address any reductions to the affected local boards for consideration within existing asset-based services budgets
· requests that staff provide local boards with timely, relevant and high-quality advice during the annual planning process which will enable local boards to make informed level of service decisions following consultation with the community as part of the annual planning process
· requests quarterly reporting on the performance of contractors against the 2017 Parks and Building Maintenance Contracts as part of the regular local board quarterly reports.
· requests confirmation from staff as to how the new contracts will be managed by Community Facilities and how the local boards will be supported by staff - i.e. which staff will work with locals boards at relevant portfolio, workshop and business meetings.
Note specific questions on the service specifications from the local board
16 March 2017 |
|
Reinstatement of the Manukau Harbour Forum
File No.: CP2017/03295
Purpose
1. This report seeks:
· agreement from the board to re-instate the Manukau Harbour Forum (the Forum) for the 2016/19 term
· nominate a board’s representative and alternate representative to the Forum.
Executive summary
2. The Manukau Harbour Forum is a joint committee of nine local boards bordering the Manukau Harbour. It was initially formed in 2012.
3. The committee ceases to exist at the end of every electoral term and can be reconstituted following agreement of the entities involved.
4. The Forum’s Terms of Reference outlines the purpose of the forum.
5. A review of the Forum will be undertaken in the next twelve months to address future state.
That the Puketāpapa Local Board: a) agree to re-instate the Manukau Harbour Forum joint committee with the Franklin, Mangere-Otahuhu, Manurewa, Otara-Papatoetoe, Papakura, Puketapapa, Whau, and Waitakere Ranges Local Boards for the 2016/19 electoral term. b) appoint one named member and one named alternate member to the Manukau Harbour Forum c) confirm that the chairperson and deputy chairperson of the Manukau Harbour Forum will be elected by a majority of members at the first meeting of each electoral term d) confirm the Terms of Reference for the Manukau Harbour Forum as appended to Agenda reports e) delegate authority to the Manukau Harbour Forum to make decisions within its terms of reference, noting that any significant or controversial decisions will only be made by the forum with the confirmation by resolution of all the member boards that would be affected by the decision and that the local board will reserve the right to hold and promote a different view to that of the forum on any issue that may impact the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board area. f) confirm that any changes to this agreement will be agreed first by the Manukau Harbour Forum then recommended to the nine member boards for their approval, noting that resolutions must be identical g) note that in order for the requirements of this agreement for the Manukau Harbour Forum to be reached, the resolutions of each of the nine member boards made in respect of recommendations a) (b)-(f) above (with the exception of (b) where appointees are to be named) must be identical and that in the absence of identical resolutions by all member boards the Forum will not meet the requirements under clause 30a of Schedule 7 to the Local Government Act 2002
|
6, Nine local boards (Franklin, Mangere-Otahuhu, Manurewa, Maungakiekie-Tamaki, Otara-Papatoetoe, Papakura, Puketapapa, Whau, and Waitakere Ranges Local Boards) together formed the Manukau Harbour Forum with the view to form a means of collective local board advocacy on common issues affecting the Manukau Harbour and the adjacent foreshore.
7. The Manukau Harbour Forum was constituted formally as a joint committee of local boards under standing orders 2.8.1 and 2.8.2 (standing orders 2.8.1 and 2.8.2 enable a local board to appoint a joint committee with another local board or boards). Being a joint committee enables the Forum to conduct business more efficiently, as a local board joint committee can make decisions and provide direction to officers without seeking confirmation and/or ratification from the individual member boards.
8. The Terms of Reference for the Manukau Harbour Forum are presented in Attachment A. They set out the purpose and principles of the Forum.
9. The Forum is made of a member from each of the constituting local boards. The Forum’s first business meeting was held in May 2012.
10. The purpose of the Forum is to champion a sustainable management approach for the Manukau Harbour. Since its formation the Forum has:
· identified issues, such as mangroves, pacific oysters, coastal erosion, stormwater, recreational access/wharves and Maui Dolphin Sanctuary as high priority
· developed a ‘Manukau Harbour Forum Vision and Strategy’, undertaken a comprehensive stocktake of all research pertaining to the Manukau Harbour and catchment, produced a set of maps and a list of stakeholders
· received regular updates on marine monitoring within the Manukau Harbour
· advocated to central government and Auckland Council (e.g. feedback on the Unitary Plan) on issues affecting the Harbour
· identified areas of interest and potential projects that the local boards surrounding the Manukau Harbour could progress jointly and through funding from the member local boards’ budget, adopted a work programme to deliver the forum’s objectives.
11. In accordance with Clause 30(7) of the Local Government Act 2002, the Forum has been automatically dissolved following the 2016 Local Government elections.
12. The purpose of the Manukau Harbour Forum remains current for the 2016/19 electoral term. It is recommended that each constituting local board agrees to re-instate the Manukau Harbour Forum for another term and appoints one member plus an alternate to represent the board on the Forum.
13. During the 2016/19 term of the Forum, it is recommended to undertake a review of the role of the Forum in order to recommend a decision-making structure that will enable the objectives relating to the Manukau Harbour to be addressed effectively.
Consideration
Local board views and implications
14. Local boards have previously agreed, through adoption of the forum’s terms of reference, that the Manukau Harbour is a regional asset and it was appropriate that Local Boards will collectively contribute to strategies and outcomes that enhance the social, economic, environmental and cultural well-being of the harbour. The forum has been seen as an effective mechanism to achieve this.
15. The role of the forum is to champion the sustainable management of the Manukau Harbour and adjacent communities. It developed a vision and strategy in line with this which was adopted in September 2014.
16. The forum has no budget allocated to projects and relies on the member boards to fund projects for its work programme.
Māori impact statement
17. The Manukau Harbour Forum is a joint committee of the local boards and does not have specific Māori representation.
18. The Māori Responsiveness Framework outlines Māori outcomes in relation to Auckland’s environment. The Manukau Harbour Forum recognises and values the special relationship that Mana Whenua have in relation to the Manukau Harbour and that iwi and hapū are key partners to deliver positive environmental outcomes.
19. Workshops of the Manukau Harbour Forum were held on 13 April and 8 June 2015 to discuss the ongoing role of mana whenua in relation to the forum. Some minor changes were made to the forum’s terms of reference as a result of this to reflect the forum’s obligations under Te Tiriti o Waitangi/The Treaty of Waitangi, and its desire to work with mana whenua on an ongoing basis.
20. The forum anticipates receiving further advice and options regarding the formalisation of its relationship
Implementation
21. Local Board Services provide governance advisory and support services to the Forum. Co-ordination and delivery of the work programmes adopted to date are led by Infrastructure and Environmental Services.
22. It is anticipated that the forum will meet three to four times per year and hold workshops as required.
No. |
Title |
Page |
a⇩ |
Manukau Harbour Forum Joint Committee Terms of Reference |
89 |
Signatories
Authors |
Brenda Railey - Democracy Advisor |
Authorisers |
Victoria Villaraza - Relationship Manager |
16 March 2017 |
|
Draft Air Quality Bylaw and Statement of Proposal
File No.: CP2017/03423
Purpose
1. To invite local boards to provide feedback on the draft Air Quality Bylaw for Indoor Domestic Fires.
Executive summary
2. At its 23 February meeting, the Governing Body resolved:
Resolution number GB/2017/15
MOVED by Mayor P Goff, seconded by Cr L Cooper:
That the Governing Body:
a) adopt the statement of proposal (Attachment B of the agenda report), which includes the draft Air Quality Bylaw for Indoor Domestic Fires, for public consultation under section 83 of the Local Government Act 2002.
b) forward the statement of proposal (Attachment B of the agenda report) to local boards for their views.
3. The council publicly notified the draft Air Quality Bylaw for Indoor Domestic Fires on 27 February 2017. The public can make written submissions until 27 March 2017.
4. Local boards are invited to provide feedback on the draft Air Quality Bylaw for Indoor Domestic Fires as follows:
· in writing by 3 April 2017, and/or
· orally at the local board hearings session scheduled for 19 April 2017. Staff request that local boards wishing to attend the hearing please notify the hearings team by 3 April 2017.
5. The original report to the Regulatory Committee is provided in Attachment A.
6. The Statement of Proposal: Draft Air Quality Bylaw for Indoor Domestic Fires is provided in Attachment B.
7. More information, such as the summary proposal and the submission form is also available, on the Shape Auckland website.
That the Puketāpapa Local Board: a) note the opportunity to provide feedback on the draft Air Quality Bylaw for Indoor Domestic Fires b) agree to provide feedback on the draft Air Quality Bylaw for Indoor Domestic Fires in writing and/or by attending the local board hearings session on 19 April 2017.
|
No. |
Title |
Page |
a⇩ |
Report to regulatory Committee - Statement of Proposal: Draft Air Quality Bylaw for Indoor Domestic Fires |
93 |
b⇩ |
Statement of Proposal: Draft Air Quality Bylaw for Indoor Domestic Fires |
107 |
Signatories
Authors |
Jasmin Kaur – Policy Analyst Belinda Hansen – Team Leader Social Policy and Bylaws |
Authorisers |
Michael Sinclair – Manager Social Policy and Bylaws Karen Lyons, General Manager Local Board Services Victoria Villaraza - Relationship Manager |
Puketāpapa Local Board 16 March 2017 |
|
2016 Elections - Highlights and Issues
File No.: CP2017/03598
Purpose
1. To provide local board input into submissions to the Justice and Electoral Select Committee’s “Inquiry into the 2016 local authority elections”.
Executive summary
2. This report has been presented to the Governing Body which has agreed that the report will be presented to all local boards for their feedback on submissions to the Justice and Electoral Select Committee’s “Inquiry into the 2016 local authority elections”. The issues on which submissions might be based are outlined under the heading later in the report “Submission to Justice and Electoral Select Committee on legislative change”. Local board comments will be reported back to the Governing Body, to decide the final form of the submission.
3. Planning for the 2016 elections commenced at the end of 2014. Staff presented a report to the Governing Body in March 2015, which set out the areas of focus for achieving outcomes in terms of voter and candidate experiences and turnout.
4. This report:
(i) describes initiatives taken in the areas of focus
(ii) evaluates the achievement of the outcomes
(iii) notes other activities associated with the election, such as inaugural meetings
(iv) summarises the budget and forecast expenditure
(v) identifies issues for the council to follow up
(vi) proposes submissions to make to Parliament’s Justice and Electoral Select Committee’s “Inquiry into the 2016 local authority elections”
(vii) outlines the timetable for the review of representation arrangements leading up to the 2019 elections.
5. The 2016 elections were successful. Particular highlights were:
(i) a successful marketing campaign based on the ‘showyourlove’ brand
(ii) innovative approaches to engaging with the community, including through social media, websites and the Love Bus
(iii) increased participation in Kids Voting
(iv) personal assistance provided to the visually impaired
(v) increased turnout over 2013
(vi) the elections came within budget.
6. This report is presented to local boards to provide input to a submission to the Select Committee, with the final submission presented back to the Governing Body in May 2017. The submission needs to be lodged by December 2017.
That the Puketāpapa Local Board: a) agree its comments to be reported back to the Governing Body for inclusion in the Auckland Council’s submission to the Justice and Electoral Select Committee’s “Inquiry into the 2016 local authority elections”. |
Comments
Strategic approach
7. A report to the Governing Body in March 2015 set out the strategic approach to the 2016 elections. It identified the following areas of focus:
· communications and community engagement
· candidate awareness
· on-line voting
· optimum use of council resources.
Those areas of focus were to deliver the following outcomes:
· an excellent experience for candidates and voters
· a voter turnout of at least 40 per cent
· a candidate-to-member ratio of three
· user-centric, innovative and transparent local body elections.
8. The following sections describe initiatives taken in these areas of focus and the achievement of the outcomes.
Actions taken in areas of focus
Communications and community engagement
9. Voter participation statistics showed that previous participation rates were low among 18 - 39 year olds and this age group was a key focus for the Election Planning Team.
10. Initiatives included:
· a comprehensive marketing campaign based on the “showyourlove” brand
· advertising – billboards, adshells, bus backs, press, magazine, radio, digital, ethnic radio and newspapers
· heart ballot boxes
· digital bus shelter voting tallies
· targeted social media: videos and articles via VoteAkl social media sites, Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, YouTube
· “Our Auckland” council’s news channel
· Auckland Council channels for posters, such as libraries and service centres
· the Love Bus and community presentations
· showyourlove.co.nz web pages for information about candidates
· Kids Voting programme in schools.
11. The Election Team tested the “showyourlove” brand with audiences. Feedback, particularly from young people, has been very positive. Wellington City Council also developed its own brand, using our ‘love’ concept. Auckland Council and Wellington City Council experienced greater increases over 2013 turnouts than other metropolitan councils.
12. The Love Bus provided a visual reminder of the elections. It stopped at various locations where people gathered, such as at malls, and staff engaged with passers-by.
13. An engagement programme included making presentations to community groups:
· 80 events including: 22 Love Bus events, 11 English for Speakers of Other Languages (ESOL) events, 22 community presentations (total attendance at these presentations was approximately 800), three meetings or informal chats, five5 information stalls
· 10 of these events were run in conjunction with the Electoral Commission
· sessions were facilitated by the deaf community, Disability Network NZ, Tongan and Samoan churches and Korean Youth Leadership Institute independent of council support
· 24 engagement sessions included an interpreter for at least one language; interpreters for eight different languages, including New Zealand sign language, were used
· groups reached included faith communities (Jewish, Muslim), Rainbow communities, Youth, Korean, Chinese, African, Indian, Tongan, Samoan, Sri Lankan, Somalian, Ethiopian, Rwandan, Filipino, West Indian, Burmese, Cambodian and Japanese
· all advisory panels contributed to the elections programme
· engagement activities and events were run in 15 of the 21 local board areas
· approximately 24,000 Aucklanders were reached by engagement activities.
14. The showyourlove.co.nz website provided information about candidates for voters. People often state, when asked in surveys, the reason they do not vote is they lack information about candidates. This website was planned very carefully to ensure that council did not provide any candidate with an electoral advantage. All candidates were given the same opportunity to provide information in addition to the information in their candidate profile statements.
15. A survey conducted after the 2016 elections gauged the effectiveness of these initiatives. The sample size was 1,259 people.
16. Awareness and likelihood of voting:
· awareness of the elections rose from 83 per cent before the campaign to 93 per cent following the campaign
· before the election, 75 per cent intended to vote but after the election only 63 per cent (of the survey sample) actually voted
· of the 35 per cent who did not vote, 56 per cent intended to vote but did not
· reasons given for not voting by the 35 per cent who did not vote include:
o don’t know anything about the candidates (25 per cent)
o don't know enough about the policies (22 per cent)
o did not know when voting finished, missed deadline (18 per cent)
o forgot to vote (18 per cent)
o can't work out who to vote for (16 per cent)
o not interested in politics or politicians (14 per cent)
o didn’t think vote would make a difference (11 per cent)
o couldn’t be bothered voting (11 per cent)
o too much effort to select the candidate (10 per cent)
o had other commitments during that time (10 per cent).
17. Effectiveness of messaging:
· 53 per cent said the ads made them think of their community
· 44 per cent said the ads reminded them of what they love about their city
· 46 per cent said the ads made them more likely to vote.
18. 21 per cent used the web and social media for information about the elections – mostly the Auckland Council website.
19. Of those who intended to vote but did not vote, 25 per cent said on-line or app based voting would encourage them to vote.
20. 74 per cent said they would prefer on-line voting over postal voting with 18 per cent preferring postal voting; those who preferred on-line voting were spread amongst all age groups but were mainly in the younger age groups.
21. The Kids Voting programme was an on-line voting experience for students. Students cannot legally take part in the actual election, but Kids Voting creates awareness of the elections which often flows from the participating students to their families. The Election Team prepared teaching kits class teachers could use to explain how council works. There was a hypothetical referendum question that students voted on using the STV voting system. 11,730 students and 56 schools registered to take part, compared with 8,319 students and 44 schools in 2013. 4,748 students from 41 schools actually voted. The lessons provided to the schools by the Election Team were:
· an introduction to Auckland Council
· an introduction to elections and voting
· a real world on-line referendum case study
· Local boards, wards and local issues
· researching candidates.
Candidate awareness of election information
22. The council’s website provided information for candidates. This included:
· candidate information handbook
· candidate audio booklet
· FAQs
· research material
· how to be nominated
· election timetable
· video explaining Auckland Council
· posters on all Auckland Council channels
· ads in newspapers
· radio
· digital ads.
23. The Election Team focused on on-line content over hard copy booklets. It did not hold candidate information evenings following the experience in 2013 of twenty-eight information evenings gathering only small attendance.
24. Wellington City Council publicised community-based candidate meetings on its website which people apparently found useful. The council could consider this for 2019.
On-line voting
25. Prior to the elections, the Associate Minister of Local Government announced that trials for on-line voting would not take place for the 2016 elections.
26. The community expects to have an on-line option, provided concerns about the security of on-line voting are addressed. In the post-election awareness survey, 74 per cent said they would prefer on-line voting over postal voting.
27. The Finance and Performance Committee resolved in December 2016 to request the Minister of Local Government to explore a pilot trial of an electronic voting system including for by-elections.
Optimum use of council resources
28. Key areas of the council involved in the elections were:
· Democracy Services and Communications and Engagement
· libraries and service centres held election information, received nominations and issued special votes
· communications staff undertook advertising, branding, web content, social media with assistance from the design studio
· bylaws compliance staff enforced the Auckland Transport Elections Signs Bylaw
· Legal Services provided legal advice when required
· Research and Evaluation (RIMU) staff provided advice on demographic data and undertook research for the report on the order of names.
29. Elections planning staff worked closely with the Electoral Commission, Local Government New Zealand (LGNZ) and the Society of Local Government Managers (SOLGM).
30. Council’s election services provider (Independent Election Services Ltd) was based in the central business area, in Anzac Avenue, and was the main central city office. Staff later provided limited services at the Bledisloe service centre in response to demand.
Achievement of outcomes
31. The desired outcomes were:
· an excellent experience for candidates and voters
· a voter turnout of at least 40 per cent
· a candidate-to-member ratio of three
· user-centric, innovative and transparent local body elections.
Candidate experience
32. For the first time, the council conducted an on-line survey of candidates. 150 candidates took part. This feedback shows a positive candidate experience.
33. Key findings were:
· 76 per cent said it was easy, or very easy, to find information
· 88 per cent said that overall they could access the information they needed
· 87 per cent said they used resources on the Auckland Council website
· 83 per cent were aware of the “Love your Auckland – stand for council” campaign
· 80 per cent contributed to their information on the showyourlove.co.nz website
· 50 per cent said this was their first time standing for elected office with Auckland Council and 50 per cent said it was not their first time.
34. The Election Team has noted some candidate issues for following up or improvement:
(i) a couple of candidates were nominated for positions for which they did not intend to stand. In one case a number of candidates on the one ticket arrived at a service centre together, creating increased demand on staff at the last minute. In the future, the Election Team will co-ordinate with ticket campaign managers to help manage the processing of nominations and will provide additional briefings to staff helping at service centres. Legislative change to allow electronic submission of nominations to improve these processes will be sought.
(ii) there was a question whether a Samoan matai title could be used on the nomination form. The legislation prohibits “titles” but does not define “title”. The Electoral Officer, after receiving legal and cultural advice, allowed matai “titles” on the basis they were used more like names than titles. It would be helpful to have legislative guidance on this.
(iii) some candidates expressed concern about the requirement to state in the profile statement whether they lived in the area for which they were standing. The council previously submitted in opposition to this requirement.
Voter experience
35. The awareness survey showed that voters used on-line tools to find out about voting and about candidates.
36. Issues which negatively affected the experience of voters (some outside the control of council):
(i) a small number of voters in one area did not receive voting documents. The Electoral Officer received about 90 applications for special votes from voters in that area.
(ii) voters outside the area during the voting period either could not vote or had to apply for a special vote. An example was a voter who was overseas and who had arranged for a special vote to be posted to them but who could not meet the deadline for posting it back from overseas. An ability to supply the voting documents electronically would assist
(iii) an issue which continues to affect the voter experience is the mixture of different voting systems on the one voting document and different orders of candidate names.
37. Ten staff volunteered to assist blind people with their voting. This was arranged in partnership with the Blind Foundation and the volunteers were trained and made declarations as electoral officials. The volunteers visited voters at their residences and help them mark their voting documents. The Auckland Branch of Blind Citizens NZ wrote an appreciative letter to the mayor and chief executive.
Voter turnout
38. The council aimed for a 40 per cent turnout. The turnout was 38.5 per cent, an increase of 3.7 per cent over the 2013 turnout.
39. Across all of New Zealand, there was a slight increase over 2013:
2010 |
2013 |
2016 |
Change % |
|
National voter turnout % |
49.0 |
41.3 |
42.0 |
+0.7 |
40. Across metropolitan councils, Auckland and Wellington achieved the two highest increases:
Voter turnout % - Metro |
2010 |
2013 |
2016 |
Change % |
Auckland |
51.0 |
34.9 |
38.5 |
+3.7 |
Christchurch City |
52.2 |
42.9 |
38.3 |
-4.6 |
Dunedin City |
53.0 |
43.1 |
45.2 |
+2.1 |
Hamilton City |
37.8 |
38.3 |
33.6 |
-4.7 |
Hutt City Council |
40.4 |
36.6 |
37.8 |
+1.2 |
Nelson City |
52.2 |
52.2 |
52.1 |
-0.1 |
Palmerston North City |
43.2 |
38.7 |
39.1 |
0.4 |
Porirua City |
39.1 |
36.6 |
38.0 |
+1.5 |
Tauranga City |
43.8 |
37.8 |
38.0 |
+0.2 |
Upper Hutt City |
44.3 |
40.8 |
41.0 |
+0.2 |
Wellington City |
40.0 |
41.5 |
45.6 |
+4.1 |
Total |
45.0 |
38.0 |
39.3 |
+1.3 |
Candidate to member ratio
41. The target was three candidates per position.
42. There were 19 candidates for mayor. In 10 out of 13 electoral ward issues for councillors, the ratio of candidates to positions was 3 to 1, or greater.
43. There were 32 local board electoral issues (there are 21 local boards but elections in some local board areas are on a subdivision basis). In 9, the ratio of candidates to positions was 3 to 1 or greater. For a local board that is not divided into subdivisions, it is harder to achieve the ratio because the number of positions is greater.
44. Overall, there were 468 candidates for 170 positions, which is a ratio of 2.8 to 1.
User-centric, innovative and transparent local body elections
45. The key ‘users’ in an election are the candidates and the voters. Feedback shows:
· candidates got the information they needed
· compared to previous elections voters could find out more about candidates, through the “showyourlove” website
46. Assistance was provided to voters who were blind. Blind Citizens NZ communicated its appreciation back to the council.
47. The report details above a number of innovative activities such as the Love Bus and Heart Ballot Boxes.
48. Aspirations to have on-line voting were not met. There is a need to provide a user-friendly option for voters who do not use postal services. Voters who are not in the area during the voting period also have issues. If a voter is overseas, by the time voting documents have been posted to them (if they have a reliable postal address) there is not sufficient time to post them back. The ability to download blank forms, and to scan and email completed forms, should be investigated.
49. For candidates, there is only the one option of paper-based nomination forms. Submitting nominations electronically needs to be investigated.
50. The communications and community awareness programmes were innovative and received positive feedback, as noted above under “Communications and Community Engagement”.
51. Ensuring candidates and voters had sufficient information assisted the transparency of the elections.
Other activities relating to the elections
52. The Executive Leadership Team adopted a staff policy around political neutrality and involvement in the election process outside of work hours. The Governing Body adopted an elected members’ policy dealing with issues such as the use of council resources by incumbent members. The policy required close management of council communications during the sensitive period and a panel met weekly to monitor this.
53. Council staff enforce the Auckland Transport Election Sign Bylaw and dealt with 162 complaints. Earlier in the year there was media coverage about the use of commercial billboards. This will be addressed in a review of the Auckland Transport bylaw.
54. Following each election there are a number of activities arranged for elected members:
(i) induction sessions for members
(ii) refreshing the technology provided to members
(iii) powhiri for all members
(iv) inaugural meetings of the governing body and the local boards at which members make their statutory declarations.
Cost of the election
55. Summary of budget and expenditure:
Budget |
Planned |
Actual (at 31/01/17) |
Forecast |
Comments |
Election Services - IES |
$4,893,000 |
$4,515,500 |
$4,653,490 |
Amount payable to IES as per contract plus a 10 per cent buffer for variable costs to be determined at wash-up in Feb ’17, Whilst costs are currently forecast to arrive over contract amount, these are expected to be within budget (including buffer). |
Communications & Engagement (internal charge) |
$1,221,000 |
$1,160,960 |
$1,221,498 |
Expected to meet budget once final costs are confirmed. |
Staff |
$620,000 |
$659,637 |
$669,637 |
Slight over-spend in staff due to increased programme scope and staff turnover. |
Kids Voting |
$50,000 |
$49,424 |
$49,424 |
Steering Group approved exceeding budget for increased number of participating schools and students. This includes $30,000 for IES for on-line voting capability. |
Community Engagement |
$40,000 |
$27,441 |
$27,441 |
Initial Elections budget had no allocation for Community Engagement hence in 2016 $40k was reallocated from other items. Under-spend here due to final budget being confirmed after a lower cost engagement schedule was already planned. $10k for translations and accessibility was covered by C&E budget. |
Governing Body Inaugural Meeting |
$57,000 |
$49,661 |
$52,697 |
Initial budget had allocated $81,000 for post-election costs of which specifics were not known to Elections team. This was reduced to cover Inaugural Meeting only and then further to fund Community Engagement. In 2013, Inaugural Meeting cost was $57,000. |
Local board inaugural meetings |
$129,300 |
$97,921 |
$129,300 |
The budgets for travel and equipment hireage were not fully utilised. |
Research |
$20,000 |
$6,404 |
$8,700 |
This amount was reduced from $30,000 to fund Community Engagement. |
Pre-election IES, DDB & Buzz |
$0 |
$48,980 |
$48,980 |
Unplanned costs for development of elections strategy were funded by Democracy Services in 2015. |
Miscellaneous |
$0 |
$9,244 |
$9,244 |
Includes judicial recount, costs associated with services at libraries and service centres, other programme-wide costs and office expenses. |
Recoveries - DHBs & LTs |
-$1,500,000 |
-$622,500 |
-$1,517,964 |
Full recoverable amount will be determined at wash-up in February 2017. Current estimates expect to meet planned amount. |
Total |
$5,530,300 |
$6,002,672 |
$5,352,447 |
Overall budget under-spend expected once wash-up is confirmed in February 2017. |
56. The costs of the Howick by-election ($104,000) will be absorbed in the budget if possible.
Issues to progress further
Howick by-election
57. A member of the Howick Local Board resigned at the inaugural meeting of the board. The council held a by-election at a cost of $104,000, which the Finance and Performance Committee has approved as unbudgeted expenditure. The committee considered the council should have the option of appointing to a vacancy that occurs within six months of an election and that the council should have the option of conducting a by-election on-line. The committee resolved:
“That the Finance and Performance Committee:
…
c) agree that the Mayor will write to the Minister of Local Government requesting, among other amendments to the Local Electoral Act 2001 necessary to improve the conduct of local elections, an amendment to section 117 to allow a local authority using the first past the post electoral system to determine by resolution whether to fill an extraordinary vacancy which occurs up to six months after the previous triennial local government election either by appointing the highest polling unsuccessful candidate from the previous triennial local government election, or by holding a by-election.
d) request the Minister of Local Government to explore a pilot-trial of an electronic voting system including by-elections.”
(Resolution number FIN/2016/1)
58. Both of these issues are discussed further in this report.
On-line voting
59. Survey results show the community prefers on-line voting. The government previously established a working party which made recommendations for a staged approach with trials in 2016. The government supported this and set out the requirements to be met for a council to establish a trial. Auckland Council was considered to be too large for a trial and was not eligible. In April 2016 the Associate Minister of Local Government announced the trial would not proceed as requirements had not been met.
60. The government wants local government to lead on-line voting, subject to its requirements being met. LGNZ should co-ordinate the local government sector’s development of on-line voting and Mayor Goff and Councillor Hulse will be pursuing this with the Local Government New Zealand National Council.
Voter participation
61. In order to prepare for the 2019 elections a voter participation project has been established. The main aims of the project are to reduce barriers to participation, encourage diversity and increase awareness and understanding of council and local elections.
62. The planning team for the 2016 elections has now completed its task and has been disbanded, however a position of Senior Advisor, Voter Participation, has been established within Democracy Services to provide continuity between the work that was carried out for the 2016 elections and the engagement that needs to occur for the 2019 elections.
Research on order of names
63. An analysis of the 2010 and 2013 election results was undertaken so that the council could decide whether the order of names on voting documents should be alphabetical or random. Further research will be undertaken and provided to the council when it next makes a decision on the order of names.
Review of Auckland Transport Election Signs Bylaw
64. Auckland Transport has undertaken to review the bylaw. The review will take place in time for implementation for the 2017 parliamentary election.
Submission to Justice and Electoral Select Committee on legislative change
65. The Justice and Electoral Select Committee conduct an enquiry following each election. Submissions on the inquiry into the 2016 elections will close in December 2017.
66. This report seeks input from local boards for the submission, particularly on the following issues. A proposed submission will be reported to the governing body later in 2017.
(i) Matai names
The Local Electoral Act 2001 prohibits the use of official titles when listing candidate names on the voting document. Names that can be used include a registered name or a name by which the candidate has been commonly known for the six months prior to an election. Although sometimes referred to as ‘matai titles’, legal advice provided to staff is that these are more in the nature of names than of a title denoting the holding of some sort of office. To avoid doubt, the legislation should give guidance.
(ii) Vacancies occurring within six months of an election
Since the 2016 elections were held, three vacancies have occurred – Auckland (resignation of local board member), Bay of Plenty Regional Council (death) and Waikato Regional Council (death). When considering the budget for the Howick by-election, the governing body resolved to seek a law change allowing a local authority using the first past the post electoral system to appoint the highest polling unsuccessful candidate to a vacancy occurring within six months of an election.
(iii) Legal requirement for candidate to state whether residing in area
Some candidates complained about this requirement. The council has previously submitted in opposition to it and may consider doing so again. Following the 2013 elections, the select committee recommended that the requirement be removed and noted that candidates for parliamentary elections did not have to make a similar statement. However, it has not yet been removed.
(iv) Timing of school holidays
The school holidays overlap with the postal voting period. Many people go out of the area during school holidays and do not vote. Currently local government elections are on the second Saturday in October. Moving election day to the first Saturday in October would provide one week before election day that would not overlap with school holidays. This still gives time to adopt the annual report and it provides an additional week between the elections and the end of the year for the new council to attend to business, such as a draft annual plan.
(v) Electronic transmission of voting documents to and from voters overseas
Voters who are overseas during the postal voting period often do not have enough time to post back voting documents prior to election day, after receiving their voting documents in the post. The select committee has previously recommended electronic transmission. The government has supported sending blank voting documents electronically but has opposed the return of completed votes electronically. On-line voting would also solve this issue.
(vi) Electoral Officer to have access to the supplementary roll
The processing of special votes relies on the Electoral Commission checking that voters are on the electoral roll. If the EO had access to the supplementary roll, the EO could do this, with the potential to speed up the counting of special votes. This has previously been supported by the select committee and the government.
(vii) Access to data associated with electoral roll
It is a concern that local government election turnouts are low. Having access to statistical data associated with the electoral roll, such as age groups of electors, would be helpful when planning election awareness campaigns. Currently the Electoral Act only allows this information to be supplied for research into scientific or health matters.
(viii) Electronic nominations and candidate profile statements.
The option to submit nominations electronically would benefit the candidate experience and it would lead to more accurate representation of candidate profile statements. Currently there are over 600 profile statements to be typed, from copy supplied by candidates, and then proof-read. Occasionally this leads to mistakes.
(ix) Legislative confirmation that local authorities may promote elections
Legislation should give a clear mandate to local authorities to promote elections. This is to avoid any uncertainty about public funds being used for election promotion purposes.
(x) Time period for printing electoral rolls
Electoral rolls were not printed in time for the start of candidate nominations because the legislated time period is too short. Extend time period for printing. This corrects a previous change to timeframes which shortened the time for printing the rolls.
(xi) Electronic access to electoral rolls for election staff
When processing candidate nominations, staff at service centres need to check whether nominators are on the electoral roll for the specified area. They may only have one hard-copy version to share between staff processing nominations for different candidates. It would be more efficient to access the current roll electronically.
(xii) Close of voting time
Extend voting later into the last day and create one full 'voting day'. The Electoral Officer received 18,000 votes on the Saturday morning via our ballot boxes. Extra time on the final Saturday would give voters more time to vote and could help turn the final Saturday into a voting day celebration.
(xiii) Discourage inappropriate use of elections
There were 19 candidates for mayor. Clearly some of these had no chance of being elected but presumably used the opportunity to promote their cause. Consideration could be given as whether this is an issue that needs to be addressed.
(xiv) Separation of DHB elections.
A variety of election issues on the one voting document together with different voting systems and ordering of names confuses voters. It would be better to hold DHB elections on a separate time, for example a separate year, or with the parliamentary elections. However, this would increase the cost of an election to Auckland Council, which currently receives $1.5 million in recoveries from DHBs and Licensing Trusts.
(xv) Candidate information in different languages
Candidate profile statements are limited to 150 words. If a candidate profile statement is provided in English and Māori, then each version may have 150 words as Māori is an official language. If a candidate profile statement includes English and a language other than Māori it is limited to 150 words in total. Consideration could be given to other options for candidates to provide information in languages relevant to their constituents.
(xvi) Consistency between Electoral Regulations and Local Electoral Regulations
The Electoral Regulations include provisions that would be helpful to local elections such as:
· Telephone dictation for voters with disabilities
· Receipt of special votes electronically.
(xvii) Relationship with Electoral Commission
Some voters, confused about who was responsible for running the council elections, contacted the Electoral Commission. The Electoral Commission typically referred callers to the council and enquirers ended up calling the council call centre only to be referred on to Independent Election Services. There should be consideration to jointly promoting awareness about who enquirers should contact with queries about local elections. This does not require a legislative change but could be implemented through Local Government New Zealand.
Timetable for 2019 elections
67. Electoral system
If the council wishes to change the electoral system from First Past the Post to Single Transferable Vote, a resolution is required by 12 September 2017. Such a resolution might then be subject to a petition for a poll. Alternatively the council could conduct a poll.
68. Māori wards
If the council wishes to establish Māori wards, a resolution is required by 23 November 2017. Such a resolution might then be subject to a petition for a poll. Alternatively the council could conduct a poll.
69. Review of representation arrangements
The council is required to review:
· whether the election of councillors is on a ward basis or at large and, for each local board, whether election of board members is on a subdivision basis or at large
· the number of members in each local board within a minimum of five and a maximum of twelve
· if there are wards or subdivisions, what the boundaries are and how many members there are in each
· the names of wards, subdivisions and local boards.
70. Unlike other councils, the council cannot review the number of members of the Governing Body because the legislation sets this at 20 members.
71. The statutory timetable for the review is:
Due dates |
Requirement |
No earlier than 1 March 2018 |
A council resolution setting out the council’s initial proposal |
Within 14 days of resolution but no later than 8 September 2018 |
Public notice of the resolution, providing at least one month for submissions |
Within 6 weeks of close of submissions |
The initial proposal may be amended after considering submissions. Public notice of the final proposal |
20 December 2018 |
Appeals from those who submitted on the initial proposal and fresh objections to any amendments are received |
|
Appeals and objections are forwarded to the Local Government Commission |
11 April 2019 |
Appeals and objections are determined by the Local Government Commission, which may conduct hearings in order to do this |
72. The review will be conducted as one component of the wider governance framework review reported to the Governing Body last December. The Governing Body established a political working party comprising 7 governing body members and 7 local board members.
Consideration
Local board views and implications
73. The report is being presented to all local boards for their views, before being presented back to the Governing Body to finalise a submission to the select committee.
Māori impact statement
74. Initiatives that encourage the community to engage with elections will have a positive impact on Māori. There are activities associated with elections that are particularly significant to mana whenua, such as the pōwhiri to welcome all elected members following the elections.
75. The survey of candidates asked candidates to identify their ethnicities. Ten per cent of candidates were Māori, compared to 9 per cent of the total Auckland population. As a result of the election, 7 per cent of elected members are Māori (115 of 170 elected members replied to the survey).
76. There will be an opportunity to consider the establishment of Māori wards for the 2019 elections.
Implementation
77. This report will be presented to local boards for their comments, to be included in a report back to the Governing Body so that the Governing Body can finalise its submission to the select committee.
There are no attachments for this report.
Authors |
Warwick McNaughton - Principal Advisor - Democracy Services |
Authorisers |
Marguerita Delbet – General Manager Democracy Services Karen Lyons – General Manager Local Board Services Victoria Villaraza - Relationship Manager |
Puketāpapa Local Board 16 March 2017 |
|
Exclusion of the Public: Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987
That the Puketāpapa Local Board:
a) exclude the public from the following part(s) of the proceedings of this meeting.
The general subject of each matter to be considered while the public is excluded, the reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter, and the specific grounds under section 48(1) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 for the passing of this resolution follows.
25 Project 17: Auckland Council Maintenance Contracts - Attachment e - Supplier Specific Information
Reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter |
Particular interest(s) protected (where applicable) |
Ground(s) under section 48(1) for the passing of this resolution |
The public conduct of the part of the meeting would be likely to result in the disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding exists under section 7. |
s7(2)(c)(i) - The withholding of the information is necessary to protect information which is subject to an obligation of confidence or which any person has been or could be compelled to provide under the authority of any enactment, where the making available of the information would be likely to prejudice the supply of similar information or information from the same source and it is in the public interest that such information should continue to be supplied. In particular, the report contains information regarding an ongoing tender that is still under negotiation.. |
s48(1)(a) The public conduct of the part of the meeting would be likely to result in the disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding exists under section 7. |
25 Project 17: Auckland Council Maintenance Contracts - Attachment h - Contract Information
Reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter |
Particular interest(s) protected (where applicable) |
Ground(s) under section 48(1) for the passing of this resolution |
The public conduct of the part of the meeting would be likely to result in the disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding exists under section 7. |
s7(2)(c)(i) - The withholding of the information is necessary to protect information which is subject to an obligation of confidence or which any person has been or could be compelled to provide under the authority of any enactment, where the making available of the information would be likely to prejudice the supply of similar information or information from the same source and it is in the public interest that such information should continue to be supplied. In particular, the report contains information regarding an ongoing tender that is still under negotiation.. |
s48(1)(a) The public conduct of the part of the meeting would be likely to result in the disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding exists under section 7. |