Agenda of Franklin Local Board

Franklin Local Board

18 April 2017

Land owner approval for proposed stream planting on the esplanade reserve at 109 Bremner Road, Drury; Reynolds Road Reserve, Pukekohe; Colin Lawrie Reserve, Pukekohe and Kennelly Park, Pukekohe

File No.: CP2017/05247

Purpose

1. To request land owner approval from Franklin Local Board for Karaka and Drury Consultants Limited to undertake planting along various streams and the esplanade reserve at Bremner Road, Drury.

Executive summary

2. Karaka and Drury Consultants Limited (the applicant) has applied to establish riparian margin planting along the streams where there are none or where they partially exist and to manage weeds and pests for the following streams and esplanade reserve:

a. Reynolds Road Reserve, at the corner of Franklin and Reynolds Road, Pukekohe,

b. Colin Lawrie Reserve, 47 Reynolds Road, Pukekohe;

c. Kennelly Park 16 Princes Street Pukekohe

d. Bremner Road Esplanade Reserve, 109R Bremner Road, Drury

3. The decision to accept the riparian planting as appropriate mitigation for offsetting adverse effects associated with stream works within Drury 1 Precinct will be considered as part of the resource consent process and is not a part of this landowner approval process.

4. There are significant benefits for riparian planting on council owned streams, particularly where those reserves and streams are devoid of vegetation or overgrown with weed species. The planting schedule is outlined in Attachment A. This has been reviewed by council’s arborist who has indicated the species chosen and planned approach is acceptable from an ecological perspective.

5. The proposal from Karaka and Drury Developments Limited would be at its cost to:

a. plant the riparian margins of streams as a consequence of the Stream Ecological Valuation calculations associated with any separate resource consent process for Drury 1 Precinct

b. prepare a planting plan in accordance with council guidelines (TP148) for riparian planting. This step has been completed and the planting plan approved by Council arboriculture specialist

c. be responsible for the maintenance for an agreed period of three years.

6. No adverse effects to the esplanade reserve are anticipated, and the works will facilitate the future coastal walkway and integration of the neighbouring residential development into the wider coastal setting.

7. Staff recommend that the local board approve the application. Community and iwi support was demonstrated by the absence of submissions during the notification of the Plan Variation 15 and Qualifying Development for Bremner Road SHA 8. It supports the Franklin Local Board Plan 2014 outcome: Cherished natural environment.

Franklin’s forests, open countryside and waterways are healthy, and local parks are cared for and well used for a variety of leisure activities.

Recommendation/s

That the Franklin Local Board:

a) approve Karaka and Drury Consultants Limited to undertake stream planting and to manage weeds and pests on 109 Bremner Road Esplanade Reserve, Drury; Reynolds Road Reserve, Pukekohe; Colin Lawrie Reserve, Pukekohe and Kennelly Park, Pukekohe, as outlined in the landscape planting plan in Attachment A.

b) delegate to the Manager, Land Advisory Services, Community Facilities, to execute the land owner approval.

Comments

8. Karaka and Drury Consultants Limited (the applicant) have applied for landowner approval to undertake riparian planting of streams and the esplanade reserve at 109 Bremner Road Drury, Reynolds Road Reserve, Pukekohe, Colin Lawrie Reserve, Pukekohe and Kennelly Park, Pukekohe. Council owns the local purpose esplanade reserve which consists of approximately 2.1 hectares and the reserves are held in fee simple by council. The local board has delegated authority to approve landowner applications.

9. The type of planting reviewed and approved by council’s arborist for the steam planting is indicated in Attachment A. The planting will enhance the stream and reserves and the Bremner Road Esplanade Reserve will adjoin the future coastal walkway to ensure the integration of the neighbouring residential development into the wider coastal setting.

10. Weed and pest maintenance will be managed by the applicant for a period of three years to ensure the plants are established prior to hand-over to council.

Applicant proposal

11. The proposed riparian stream planting including the detailed landscape plans, implementation plans and weed and pest control plans have been provided and will be part of the conditions of land owner approval. The proposed works will facilitate the removal of weeds, rubbish and debris from the site.

12. The precinct development provides for the sustainable use of the land and enables an overall environmental benefit in terms of riparian and stream protection and enhancement that will be undertaken across the majority of the esplanade reserve.

13. The specific details of future neighborhood reserves proposed as part of this overall development are to be work-shopped with the local board to enable full consideration of the options on 11 April 2017. This will be reported back to a local board business meeting in April 2017.

Option one – Franklin Local Board approve the land owner application

14. Staff recommend that the local board approves Karaka and Drury Consultants Limited to undertake the proposed riparian stream and esplanade reserve planting and to manage weeds and pests at the sites listed.

Option two – Franklin Local Board decline the land owner application

15. If the local board does not approve the application the improvements and maintenance of the weeds and pests on the reserves will not happen. This does not support the Franklin Local Board Plan 2014 outcome: Cherished natural environment. Staff do not recommend this option.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

16. A further workshop is planned to discuss the type of development to be located on the esplanade reserve and proposed neighbourhood reserves. The board have indicated support for this development. The application supports the Franklin Local Board Plan 2014 outcome: Growth in the right place at the right time by providing for a variety of housing forms, including higher density development around the local centre.

Māori impact statement

17. The applicant has proactively engaged with iwi throughout the Bremner Road special housing area process. Ngāti Tamaoho, Ngāti Te Ata and Te Akitai provided cultural impact assessments and are supportive of the opportunities for affordable housing and ecological restoration.

Implementation

18. The applicant is ready to undertake the planting, weed and pest mitigation on approval of this landowner application.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Landscape planting plan and schedule	3

Signatories

Authors

Raewyn Sendles - Land Use Advisor

Authorisers

Rod Sheridan - General Manager Community Facilities

Sue O'Gorman - Relationship Manager

Franklin Local Board

18 April 2017

New community leases and lease for additional land at Karaka Hall grounds, 321 Linwood Road, Karaka

File No.: CP2016/23824

Purpose

1. To seek Franklin Local Board approval for new community leases to The Karaka Historical Society Incorporated and Karaka Bowling Club Incorporated and a lease for additional land to Counties Playcentre Association Incorporated at Karaka Hall grounds, 321 Linwood Road, Karaka.

Executive summary

2. The Karaka Historical Society Incorporated was granted a community lease for land at 321 Linwood Road, Karaka from 1 January 2009 for the purpose of constructing a museum building. On review of the lease the lease site plan is incorrect in that it includes land to the rear of the site occupied by the Counties Playcentre Association Incorporated. A lease cannot be varied to correct a site plan. It is recommended the present lease is surrendered and a new community lease approved for the society for 10 years with a 10 year term of renewal commencing 1 May 2017 for the site outlined in Attachment A.

3. The society has also applied for a licence to traverse the land which will be leased to the Karaka Bowling Club Incorporated. It needs to be able to cross the land at the rear of the bowling green area to access the gate leading to the Karaka Recreation Reserve on special event days.

4. The Karaka Bowling Club Incorporated has occupied a building and bowling green on the land at 321 Linwood Road, Karaka for over 60 years. Due to an historic oversight the club has never held a lease for the site. It is recommended a new community lease be approved for the group for 10 years with a 10 year term of renewal commencing 1 May 2017 for the site outlined in Attachment B.

5. The Counties Playcentre Association Incorporated was granted a community lease for land at Karaka Recreation Reserve, 297 Linwood Road, Karaka for 30 years from 1 August 2003. In 2004 the association was granted permission to extend its play area into unused land at 321 Linwood Road, Karaka which borders their leased land. On review of the lease this permission has not been incorporated into their leased area. It is recommended a deed of lease for additional land be approved for the site outlined in Attachment C under the terms and conditions of the current lease. This would be for 16 years and three months from 1 May 2017 to expire at the same time as the current lease.

6. A Community Outcomes Plan for The Karaka Historical Society Incorporated (Attachment D) and Karaka Bowling Club Incorporated (Attachment E) will form an attachment to the lease with the approval of the local board.

Recommendation/s

That the Franklin Local Board:

(a) approve a new community lease to The Karaka Historical Society Incorporated at Karaka Hall grounds, 321 Linwood Road, Karaka subject to the following terms and conditions:

i) the surrender of the lease with The Karaka Historical Society Incorporated that is currently in place

ii) term - 10 years commencing 1 May 2017 with one 10-year right of renewal

iii) rent – $1.00 plus GST per annum if requested

iv) all other terms and conditions in accordance with the Local Government Act 2002 and the Auckland Council Community Occupancy Guidelines 2012.

(b) approve a new community lease to Karaka Bowling Club Incorporated at Karaka Hall grounds, 321 Linwood Road, Karaka subject to the following terms and conditions:

i) term - 10 years commencing 1 May 2017 with one 10-year right of renewal

ii) rent – $1.00 plus GST per annum if requested

iii) a clause included in the lease granting The Karaka Historical Society Incorporated a licence to traverse the portion of leased land between its building and the gate into the Karaka Recreation Reserve on up to 10 days per annum by agreement for special events.

iv) all other terms and conditions in accordance with the Local Government Act 2002 and the Auckland Council Community Occupancy Guidelines 2012.

(c) approve a deed of lease for additional land to Counties Playcentre Association Incorporated at Karaka Hall grounds, 321 Linwood Road, Karaka subject to the following terms and conditions:

i) term - 16 years and three months commencing 1 May 2017

ii) rent – $1.00 plus GST per annum if requested

iii) all other terms and conditions in accordance with the Local Government Act 2002 and the Auckland Council Community Occupancy Guidelines 2012.

(d) approve Community Outcomes Plans as required and attached as a schedule to the lease document.

Comments

7. The land known as the Karaka Hall grounds at 321 Linwood Road, Karaka being Lot 1 DP 59691 and Part Lot 18 DP 9285 is held in fee simple by Auckland Council and subject to the Local Government Act 2002.

The Karaka Historical Society Incorporated

8. The Karaka Historical Society Incorporated was granted a community lease for land at 321 Linwood Road, Karaka from 1 January 2009 for five years with one five year right of renewal. The lease site plan contained in the societies lease is incorrect in that it includes land to the rear of the site which is occupied by the Counties Playcentre Association Incorporated. A lease cannot be varied to correct a site plan. A new lease must be created. It is recommended the present community lease be surrendered and a new community lease approved for the Society for 10 years with a 10 year term of renewal commencing 1 May 2017.

9. The society has a strong committee, has successfully completed its building project and opens the museum for viewing by members of the public. It assists with research for the history of the area and the archiving of historic documents and artefacts. It is involved in special historic events and open days in the area.

10. The society has also applied for a licence to traverse the land which will be leased to the Karaka Bowling Club Incorporated. It needs to be able to cross the land at the rear of the bowling green area to access the gate leading to the Karaka Recreation Reserve on special event days. This would be for no more than 10 days per year, on dates to be agreed between the two parties for the purpose of access for special events. Reasonable requests for access should not be unreasonably withheld.

11. A Community Outcomes Plan for The Karaka Historical Society Incorporated will form an attachment to the lease and be reported upon annually.

The Karaka Bowling Club Incorporated

12. The Karaka Bowling Club Incorporated has occupied a bowling club building and green on the land at 321 Linwood Road, Karaka for over 60 years. Due to a historic oversight the club has never held a lease for the site. It is recommended a new community lease be approved for the group for 10 years with a 10 year term of renewal commencing 1 May 2017.

13. The club has 34 members, is active in local tournaments and its greenkeeper has won awards for the state of the bowling green. The clubrooms are used for committee meetings, club tournaments, social days and by other members of the community.

14. The recommended term of lease where a group owns the building is 10 years with one 10 year right of renewal. The recommended rental is $1.00 per annum, if requested. The groups are responsible for maintenance and utilities costs for these buildings.

15. A Community Outcomes Plan for the Karaka Bowling Club Incorporated will form an attachment to the lease and be reported upon annually.

The Counties Playcentre Association Incorporated

16. The Counties Playcentre Association Incorporated was granted a community lease for land at Karaka Recreation Reserve, 297 Linwood Road, Karaka for 30 years from 1 August 2003. The lease expires on 30 July 2033. In 2004 the association was granted permission to extend its play area into unused land at 321 Linwood Road, Karaka which borders their leased land. The permission has not been incorporated into their leased area.

17. It is recommended a deed of lease for additional land be approved for the association under the terms and conditions of the current lease. This would be for 16 years and three months from 1 May 2017 to expire on 30 July 2033 at the same time as the current lease. The lease for additional land would be subject to the Local Government Act 2002 as the land is held in fee simple by Auckland Council.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

18. The recommendations within this report fall within the Local Board’s allocated authority relating to the local, recreation, sports and community facilities.

19. The recommendations have been discussed in the past at portfolio meetings and at a local board workshop in relation to the 2016/17community leases workplan.

Māori impact statement

20. Community leases support a wide range of activities and groups and are awarded based on an understanding of local needs, interests and priorities. They create local benefits for many communities, including Maori.

Implementation

21. All costs involved in the preparation of lease documents are borne by Auckland Council.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	The Karaka Historical Society Inc Site Plan	3
b ⇩	Karaka Bowling Club Inc Site Plan	3
c ⇩	Counties Playcentres Inc Karaka Site Plan	3
d ⇩	The Karaka Historical Society Inc Community Outcomes Plan	3
e ⇩	Karaka Bowling Club Inc Community Outcomes Plan	3

Signatories

Authors

Christine Benson - Lease Advisor

Authorisers

Rod Sheridan - General Manager Community Facilities

Sue O'Gorman - Relationship Manager

Franklin Local Board

18 April 2017

Governance Options: Te Puru Community Charitable Trust

File No.: CP2017/03840

Purpose

1. To provide information on a preferred governance model for Te Puru Community Charitable Trust (the Trust). The preferred option will be recommended to the governing body.

Executive summary

2. Te Puru Community Charitable Trust is a Council-Controlled Organisation (CCO). It is responsible for providing recreation services in their facility in Te Puru Park. It was set up as a CCO by Manukau City Council in 2004.

3. It is council’s role in the appointment of trustees that makes the Trust a CCO. Currently, the Mayor, and the chairpersons of the Trust board and Counties Manukau Sport Foundation (CMSF) have joint responsibility for appointing trustees. Where the parties have differences on appointments, the appointment is based on a majority decision. Council cannot appoint a Trustee directly, nor can it veto an appointment.

4. A recent review of Te Puru’s service delivery, endorsed by the Franklin Local Board, identified a range of community outcomes to improve management and services. Once the preferred delivery model for ownership and management was agreed, options for appropriate governance were considered. These options include remaining a CCO, becoming a Council Organisation with less influence by council, or become an independent entity with no direct governance control from council. (See Attachment A)

5. The services, finances, and governance of the Trust were assessed in 2014, and the Franklin Local Board apprised of the outcomes of the assessment, including governance options.

6. The Trust and CMSF are considering the various governance options. After the Trust board agrees on a preferred option their decision will be brought to the local board at its 18 April 2017 meeting.

7. In addition to the governance arrangements, a funding agreement, a Memorandum of Understanding, the lease and other documents would clearly spell out the terms of the relationship between the local board/council and the Trust.

8. This report provides information on which the local board can base a recommendation to the governing body which will make the formal decision on the preferred governance option.

Recommendations

That the Franklin Local Board:

a) make a recommendation on a preferred governance model for Te Puru Community Charitable Trust.

b) request staff to report to the governing body advising on the governance models considered by the Franklin Local Board and the preferred model for implementation.

Comments

9. Council has conducted a review of service delivery models for Te Puru Community Centre (Te Puru). The purpose of the review was to consider the most efficient, effective and sustainable model to achieve the desired outcomes for sport, recreation and community services at Te Puru.

10. The findings of the review and recommendations are discussed in depth in a separate report but the key recommendation is for a Community Ownership Model of service delivery with:

· additional support (management and governance) and meaningful partnership developed;

· clarity of roles and responsibilities (of the Trust but also the different council departments and other stakeholders at Te Puru).

11. To complement the review, which focused particularly on models of service delivery, it is now relevant to consider governance models that best:

· enable the success of the proposed service delivery model;

· enable decision-making at the appropriate level (local vs regional);

· empower the local community.

Current Governance Model

12. The Trust is governed by a board comprised of five to nine Trustees. The power of appointment of all Trustees is vested in the Mayor of Auckland, the chairperson of the Trust, and the chairperson of Counties Manukau Sports Foundation (CMSF). The three Trustee Appointors have joint power of appointment and shall act collectively in making Trustee appointments.

13. Because of this joint power of appointment of all Trustees assigned to the Mayor, the Trust is a Council-controlled Organisation (CCO) of Auckland Council.

14. Regarding the process of appointments post-amalgamation, the Mayor has delegated power of appointment to the relevant governing body committee, and the Trust provides recommendations on Trustee appointments for approval by council and CMSF.

Exemption

15. The Trust is currently exempted from CCO status which means it does not need to provide a Statement of Intent (SOI) or report its performance against in half year and annual reports. This exemption only applies to the Trust’s status as a CCO. It does not exempt the Trust from obligations under its Trust deed or other agreements.

16. The decision whether or not to exempt the Trust needs to be reconsidered every three years. The factors that council must consider are:

(i) the nature and scope of the activities provided by the Trust;

(ii) the costs and benefits, if an exemption is granted, to council, the Trust, and the community.

An exemption can be revoked at any time.

Annual operational grant

17. Council provides an annual operational grant, currently $327,459 (not subject to GST). In the current financial year (2016/2017) the terms of the funding agreement have been negotiated and approved by the Franklin Local Board.

Asset Ownership

18. The Trust owns the Te Puru Community Centre located at Te Puru Park (954R Whitford-Maraetai Road, Certified Title 118B/53) and leases that part of the land for 10 cents per annum. Te Puru Park land is owned by council.

19. The lease provides that, upon termination, all buildings and improvements revert to ownership of council without compensation being payable to the tenant.

20. The initial lease term was for 10 years commencing on 1 December 2004 to 30 November 2014, with right of renewal for 10 years. The Trust is operating on a monthly roll-over of existing terms and conditions as allowed for in the lease. The Trust has applied for the lease to be renewed.

Governance Models

21. There are three models of governance that can be considered at Te Puru that align with the Community Ownership model of service delivery. These are:

· Council-controlled Organisation: council appoints at least 50% of Trustees;

· Council Organisation (CO): council appoints fewer than 50% of Trustees;

· Independent entity (non CCO or CO): council does not appoint Trustees

22. Each of the three governance models can result in an effective working relationship between council and the Trust based on mutual respect and Trust. For this to happen, and similarly to what is recommended in the service delivery review, it is essential that the purpose of the relationship, as well as roles and responsibilities of all parties are clearly defined.

23. In addition, we recommend that council decision-making regarding the relationship with the Trust be at the local board level, rather than governing body level. This best reflects the nature of the service delivered by the Trust on behalf of council. The CCO and External Partnership Department will be progressing some work in this regard this year. However, currently the governing body has responsibility for governance of all CCOs.

24. The advantages, disadvantages, mitigation strategies and implementation options for each model are outlined in detail under Attachment A.

Views of the Trust and Counties Manukau Sports Foundation

25. The Trust and CMSF have participated in discussions with the local board and council staff, and presented the three options to their Trustees. While both organisations feel the independent organisation option has clear benefits, it has yet to formally endorse an option. Their views will be presented to the local board at or before their meeting of 18 April 2017.

Support mechanisms

26. The three options for governance models each have their advantages and disadvantages but these can be enhanced or mitigated by a few formal and informal support mechanisms, such as:

· Overarching relationship agreement (e.g., Memorandum of Understanding) which outlines how parties agree to work together and clarifies roles and responsibilities;

· Funding Agreement (terms approved by Franklin Local Board);

· Lease Agreement;

· Trust Board-approved Asset Management Plan (including budget and maintenance;

· Accountability Framework, with clarity on who will enforce consequences for non-performance;

· Opportunities for formal and informal governance discussions:

o Performance (looking back)

o Strategic (looking forward)

Consideration

Local board views and implications

27. This report seeks a recommendation from the local board to the governing body on its preferred option. However, in preliminary discussions, the local board has expressed a preference for the independent model of governance (non CCO/CO) with council’s continued relationship with the Trust to be at the Franklin Local Board level.

28. This is because it is the model that better reflects the reality of current practice and nature of the partnership. In particular, it fully devolves control on appointments to the Trust (and community), while removing all CCO monitoring and accountability requirements permanently.

29. The local board has also acknowledged that the mechanism outlined above, if used adequately and in conjunction, can provide the level of confidence, transparency and accountability that are required.

Māori impact statement

30. Within the Beachlands and Maraetai areas 8.1 percent of the population is Māori.

31. Whichever governance option is chosen, there is an opportunity for Māori to participate as Trustees.

Implementation

32. The local board’s preferred model of governance will be reported to the governing body for formal approval.

33. Staff will also inform the Trust and CMSF of the decisions and next steps, and will work with the Trust on implementation, including drafting of Memoranda of Understanding, Funding Agreements, a revised Deed of Trust and other necessary support measures.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Governance Models - Te Puru Community Charitable Trust	3

Signatories

Authors

Steven Branca - BID Partnership Advisor

Alastair Cameron - Manager - CCO Governance & External Partnerships

Rita Bento-Allpress - Senior Advisor

Authorisers

Alastair Cameron - Manager - CCO Governance & External Partnerships

Sue O'Gorman - Relationship Manager

Franklin Local Board

18 April 2017

Te Puru Community Centre - delivery model review

File No.: CP2017/05469

Purpose

1. To endorse the preferred model for the delivery of community, sport and recreation outcomes at Te Puru Community Centre and park.

Executive summary

2. Te Puru Community Centre is located within Te Puru Park in the Maraetai Beachlands community. The facility is an important part of council’s network of community facilities as without it there would be a gap in provision.

3. The Te Puru Community Charitable Trust (the trust) owns the facility and delivers a range of community, sport and recreation services.

4. On 23 August 2017, Franklin Local Board endorsed a review of the facility outcomes that council is seeking at the Te Puru Community Centre, and the most efficient and sustainable model of delivery to achieve them.

5. The review was completed by independent consultants with consultation including key stakeholders and users.

6. The review identified the following desired council/community outcomes for the facility and park:

· a hub for community, sport and recreation activity to serve the Beachlands and Maraetai community

· provision of a wide range of complementary community, sport and recreation activities which are coordinated and delivered in an efficient and cost effective way

· use of facilities (indoor and outdoor) are maximised contributing to growing community participation in recreation and sport

· strong and effective relationships between users, stakeholders, the trust and council.

7. Two facility ownership models were assessed; a community led model and a council owned model. For each model three management options were considered including service delivery by trust staff, a private contractor or by council staff.

8. The review concluded the most efficient and effective delivery model for the Te Puru Community Centre is under a community ownership and management model. This involves the trust continuing to own the facility and employ staff to deliver services at the facility. The rationale for this conclusion includes:

· other delivery models are unlikely to deliver financial efficiencies without a decrease in service

· the current model and operation is working locally and has the support of the local community

· recommended management improvements will enhance operational efficiency and address current issues and limitations

· relationships are maintained at a local level and the potential negative impacts of any change are mitigated

· a community ownership model has the potential to secure additional third party funding for both programme activities (e.g., Kiwisport) and capital development.

9. The review also provided a suite of recommendations for operational and service improvements. One recommendation is for the trust to be recognised as acting on behalf of all users of the park and facility, to provide “one voice” for the park. In addition, recommendations include that protocols and procedures be reviewed to address relationships, field allocations and bookings.

Recommendation/s

That the Franklin Local Board:

a) Endorse the most efficient and effective delivery model for the Te Puru Community Centre is under a community ownership and management model, where the trust continues to employ staff to deliver services at the facility.

b) Approve the desired council/community outcomes for Te Puru Community Centre and Park as:

· a hub for community, sport and recreation activity to serve the Beachlands and Maraetai community

· provision of a wide range of complementary community, sport and recreation activities which are co-ordinated and delivered in an efficient and cost effective way

· use of facilities (indoor and outdoor) are maximised contributing to growing community participation in recreation and sport

· strong and effective relationships between users, stakeholders, the trust and council.

c) Endorse Te Puru Community Charitable Trust acting as “one voice” for all stakeholders and user groups based at Te Puru Park and that a review of protocols and procedures for relationships, field allocations and bookings is undertaken.

Comments

Background

10. Te Puru Community Centre was developed to provide an indoor leisure facility for the residents of Beachlands and Maraetai and to serve as clubrooms for sports based at Te Puru Park.

11. At the time the facility was constructed, the two communities were separate and development of the facility at Te Puru Park was seen as a catalyst for linking the communities through a common hub.

12. Construction of the facility was a local community project that began in 1997 with the help of a capital contribution of $ 385,000 from Manukau City Council. In 1998, construction stopped at the framing stage due to lack of funding.

13. In 2003, the Te Puru Community Charitable Trust (the trust) was incorporated. Manukau City Council and the ASB Community Trust each contributed $1,332,500 to the capital cost of completing construction and the building opened in 2005.

14. The trust was set up by Manukau City Council as a Council Controlled Organisation (CCO) as council saw benefits from having members of the community directly involved in what was delivered and how it was delivered.

15. A decision on the appointment of trustees is the joint responsibility of the mayor, chairperson of the trust and the Chair of Counties Manukau Sport Foundation. Should there be a difference of opinion on trustee appointments, a majority decision must be reached. Council cannot appoint a trustee directly and does not have jurisdiction to veto over an appointment’s panel decision.

16. The trust owns the community centre in Te Puru Park and has a ground lease from council. The lease expired in 2014 with one right of renewal for 10 years to 2024. The trust has applied for the lease to be renewed.

Purpose of the trust

17. The trust’s purpose is stated in its Deed of Charitable Trust (dated 20 December 2002) and is to promote, support and undertake programmes, actions and initiatives for the recreational, cultural and other community needs of the community. The deed specifies that this can include the performing and visual arts, provision of a headquarters for sporting and cultural organisations as well as festivals exhibitions and fairs.

18. The geographic area that the trust must promote its services to includes the Beachlands, Maraetai, Whitford and Clevedon communities. In April 2014, a catchment study found that 90% of facility users came from the Beachlands and Maraetai areas.

19. Seven sports clubs are affiliated with the trust including rugby, soccer, netball, hockey, baseball, touch rugby, athletics. These clubs pay an annual affiliation fee to the trust. Four clubs based at the park are not affiliated to the trust including tennis, cricket, bike and sea scouts clubs. The tennis club and sea scouts own their buildings on the park.

Review of Te Puru Community Centre delivery model

20. The purpose of the review was to consider the facility outcomes the council is seeking at the Te Puru Community Centre and park, and identify the most efficient and sustainable model of delivery to achieve them.

21. The scope of the review included:

· review current delivery and performance of Te Puru Community Centre and Te Puru Park

· identify the council’s desired outcomes for the delivery of sport, recreation and community services at Te Puru Community Centre and park

· identify potential delivery and operational models to achieve the desired outcomes

· assess the efficiency, effectiveness and sustainability of each delivery model

· engage with primary stakeholders to understand their views on the different models

22. The method of enquiry included two workshops with the trust, a workshop with representatives from affiliated clubs and other user groups based at Te Puru Park and two workshops with Franklin Local Board. Meetings were held with Counties Manukau Sport and Auckland Council staff from the Parks, Sport and Recreation Department and Community Facilities Department.

23. In November 2016, staff outlined the review to a mana whenua hui in Manukau and discussed issues with a representative of Ngai Tai Ki Tamaki.

Issues identified during consultation

24. Several issues pertaining to governance and management of the facility were identified. These included no clear understanding about the role of the trust within the park. The trust and affiliated user groups wish for the trust to be “one voice” for the park.

25. The field booking procedure for Te Puru Park does not always work as effectively as it should. Not all parties who book fields know the procedure and processes which has led to frustration for the trust staff and clubs.

26. A summary of the key issues identified are summarised below:

Stakeholder relationships: relationships between the trust and council / Franklin Local Board have been poor which has significantly impacted perceptions of

performance on both sides.

Clarity about the role of the trust: the role of the trust appears to be perceived differently by the various stakeholders.

Reporting and accountability: reporting provided to Franklin Local Board has covered a narrow range of activities provided at the facility and does not accurately reflect the overall outcomes delivered or the benefits to the community.

Planning long term asset management: the trust has accumulated funds for long-term maintenance and replacement of the facility. This has been achieved by generating an operational surplus to fund depreciation. It is generally good business practice to accumulate financial reserves to address long term asset management. The alternative is to rely on grants to fund asset renewal.

Clarity over the CCO status and influence of council: consultation with key stakeholders highlighted there may be confusion over what the CCO status means, and what level of influence council has over the trust.

Design issues: these included building design limitations, public access to toilets when the public toilets under the facility are locked, and safe access around the facility to tennis and netball courts, and the sea scout building.

Desired outcomes and objectives for Te Puru Community Centre and Te Puru Park

27. Desired outcomes and objectives for the facility and park were prepared with input from key stakeholders. The outcomes and objectives were endorsed via a trust resolution on 18 March 2017. The desired community / council outcomes for Te Puru Community Centre and Te Puru Park are:

· a hub for community, sport and recreation activity to serve the Beachlands and Maraetai community

· provision of a wide range of complementary community, sport and recreation activities which are coordinated and delivered in an efficient and cost effective way

· use of facilities (indoor and outdoor) are maximised contributing to growing community participation in recreation and sport

· strong and effective relationships between users, stakeholders, the trust, and council.

28. In order to achieve these desired outcomes, there are a number of objectives for Te Puru Community Centre and park as follows:

· establish a strong and unified community voice which advocates for the facility and park

· define clear roles and responsibilities for all stakeholders and users involved with the facility and park

· engage with the community to identify opportunities and implement new programmes and activities to maximise use of the facility and park

· consider the cultural sensitivities of the park in all decision-making

· adopt best practice management and business planning at the facility, with detailed reporting and evaluation procedures to demonstrate the impact of services delivered within the community

· develop clear protocols for communication and engagement with council staff, the local board, clubs and other stakeholders

· ensure an asset management plan is kept up-to-date for the facility, and that the facility is maintained and renewed in accordance with the asset management plan.

Facility ownership and the management of service delivery

29. Due to the inter-relationship between ownership (governance) and management at Te Puru Community Centre, an assessment of ownership models was completed. Two models were assessed as follows:

· a community led entity such as the trust

· council owned and governed.

A private ownership model was not considered due to the lease arrangement and that the facility is on council reserve land.

30. For each of the two options, the facility owner can either employ staff or engage a contractor or the council to manage the facility. The two main options considered in this report are community owned and managed against council owned and managed.

Community owned and managed facility

31. The pros and cons of a community owned and managed facility are presented in Table 1.

Table 1 - Pros and cons of a community owned and managed facility

Pros	Cons
The trust is flexible and responsive to local community needs.	There is dependency on council operational funding.
There are opportunities to seek third party funding such as Kiwisport funds.	The trust requires efficient and effective systems to ensure accurate data collection on visitor numbers, space utilisation and asset maintenance / planning.
The community has a strong sense of belonging/attachment to the facility.	Significant responsibility is placed on volunteer trustees.
The trust has accumulated funds for long term asset management, in accordance with a requirement stated in its trust deed.	Current reporting arrangements do not enable the full value of council’s investment into the local community to be recognised. However, the trust and local board have acknowledged that this situation can be improved.
The trust can prioritise future facility investment (with landowner approval).	The trust is responsible for long term asset renewal and needs to ensure there is sufficient funding to complete this.
The trust has the opportunity to focus on increasing revenue and reducing operating costs to increase operating efficiency.	The trust is a CCO and this places additional financial and reporting requirements on the trust.
The trust has shown that it is financially responsible.

Council owned and managed facility

32. The pros and cons of a council owned and managed facility are presented in Table 2.

Table 2 - Pros and cons of a council owned and managed facility

Pros	Cons
Council will have clarity about the funds required to own and operate the facility and for long term asset management.	Council’s long term liability for the facility will increase. Council will be responsible for funding asset management and capital development. Asset development will be considered alongside other council facilities.
There is the ability for staff to network with staff in other facilities and apply best practice at Te Puru.	Potential savings through joint staffing/partnering with other facilities are likely to be offset by other council operating costs (internal overheads and charges).
Council’s asset management policies and procedures would be applied to the facility therefore ensuring long term renewals are completed.	Funds accumulated to date by the trust for asset management would be retained by the trust.
There will be less confusion about roles and responsibilities for the facility and park as both would fall within local board decision making delegations.	There is the potential for a negative impact within the local community. There will be a loss of personalisation to the local community as facility decision making becomes standardised alongside other council facilities.
Efficient systems and processes will be developed with a focus on efficient service delivery.	Reduced ability to secure third party funding.
	Council will be focused on delivering council’s outcomes only for sport and recreation which could mean that some community programmes/ initiatives do not continue.
	Staff costs could potentially increase. There is also the potential for a reduction in the level of service if the facility is operated as a satellite centre and staffed only when there are bookings.
	Cost savings are likely to be at the expense of service delivery rather than efficiency.

Preferred option for ownership and management of service delivery

33. The trust has shown it is capable of owning and operating a community facility and it is responsive to local community needs. At a time when many organisations have struggled to engage new members to be on a trust or society, the trust has had between six and nine trustees. The trust estimates trustees devote more than 80 hours voluntary hours per month to the facility operation.

34. Staff involved in council’s operation of similar recreation facilities reviewed the trust’s financial statements and service delivery. They concluded it was unlikely a different service delivery model could manage the facility and deliver the range of activities for a lower cost than the current operating model.

35. The assessment concluded the most efficient and effective model for facility ownership and management is a community led model whereby the trust employs staff to deliver community, sport and recreation services.

36. The rationale for the preferred ownership and management option is:

· other delivery models are unlikely to deliver financial efficiencies without a decrease in service

· the current model and operation is working locally and has the support of the local community

· recommended management improvements will enhance operational efficiency and address current issues and limitations

· relationships are maintained at a local level and the potential negative impacts of any change are mitigated

· a community ownership model has the potential to secure additional third party funding for both programme activities (e.g., Kiwisport) and capital development.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

37. A workshop was held with Franklin Local Board in August 2016 to seek the board’s feedback on the proposed scope of the review of the Te Puru Community Centre. The board requested that Te Puru Park be included within the scope due to the link between the facility and park.

38. On 22 November, the desired outcomes and objectives for the facility and park were presented to the Franklin Local Board, with positive feedback. A draft report was then presented to the local board in February 2017. The report presented the pros and cons of ownership and management options and the preferred option.

39. The local board supported the preferred delivery option of community owned and managed model. The board also supported the need for clarity on the roles and responsibilities of the trust. Feedback from the local board is reflected in this final report.

Māori impact statement

40. Within the Beachlands and Maraetai areas, 8.1 percent of the population is Maori.

41. A significant number of local Maori participate in Touch at Te Puru Park during the summer months. It is likely the trust will continue to offer the current level of support to the club which is 12 hours free administration each week.

42. This review recommends no change to the ownership or management model for Te Puru Community Centre. It includes several recommendations that will improve operational efficiency and effectiveness as well as enhancing relationships with key stakeholders including Ngai Tai Ki Tamaki.

43. Two cultural sites are located at Te Puru Park. Objectives that accompany the desired outcomes require that all stakeholders consider the cultural sensitivities of the park in all decision making. This includes the Po (burial site) and the middens site at Te Puru Park.

Implementation

44. Operational funding for Te Puru Community Centre falls under council’s Community Access Scheme. The Parks, Recreation and Sport Committee approved the Sport and Recreation Community Access Scheme guidelines on 20 July 2016.

45. The purpose of the Community Access Scheme is to leverage access to non-council operated facilities to fill gaps in the network of sports facilities, support an increase in sport and recreation participation and reduce inequities of access for certain communities.

46. A review of current relationships is underway and will be reported to the Environment and Community Committee in May for decisions regarding funding allocations for 2017/2018.

47. Pending the local board consideration of this report and endorsement of the preferred delivery model, the next steps are:

· the Te Puru Community Centre will be considered for a Community Access grant by the Environment and Community Committee in May 2017. The trust has been requested to submit a strategic plan to support this consideration.

· the desired outcomes will be used to inform any future funding agreements for services delivered at the facility. Key performance indicators in any funding agreement will be determined by Franklin Local Board.

· council staff will work with the trust to develop protocols and procedures including how the trust will act as “one voice” for the facility and park.

· recommendations from the review will be actioned to improve service delivery, efficiency and the relationships between all stakeholders using the facility and park.

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Signatories

Authors

Rose Ward - Sport and Recreation Advisor

Authorisers

Sharon Rimmer - Manager Sport and Recreation

Mace Ward - General Manager Parks, Sports and Recreation

Sue O'Gorman - Relationship Manager

Franklin Local Board

18 April 2017

DRAFT

Summary of the draft Franklin Local Board Plan 2017

Help Shape Franklin’s future

FROM THE CHAIR

It’s my privilege to present this summary of the draft Franklin Local Board Plan 2017-2020. The draft plan sets out five outcomes we think we should focus on in the next three years.

We face a huge challenge from the amount of growth coming our way, with a population predicted to grow to 106,800 residents by 2033.

Services such as wastewater and water, as well as our parks, beaches, sports grounds and roads face ever-increasing demand. To cope with this, we need to be proactive and adaptable. We have listened to your concerns and ideas and are working hard to develop solutions.

Advocating for better transport connections to ease congestion is also important.

We understand the challenges that come with maintaining services, while keeping rates rises at acceptable levels. We want to work with you to meet the challenges coming our way, and get the best outcome for everyone.

We look forward to your feedback.

Angela Fulljames

Chair

Franklin Local Board

This summary is an overview of the statement of proposal for our draft 2017 Franklin Local Board Plan. We encourage you to read the full draft plan, available online at www.shapeauckland.co.nz, at public libraries, council service centres and local board offices and tell us what you think by Friday 30 June, 2017. Or tell us what you think in person – see page XX for details of local meetings.

WHAT WE PROPOSE TO FOCUS ON

We propose to focus on five outcomes which acknowledge the feedback and ideas you have given us.

Outcome 1: A well-cared for natural environment

Our aim is to enhance, protect and maintain our diverse natural environment so that it can be enjoyed by all. We plan to do this by:

· implementing local paths plans to enable open spaces to be connected, accessible and well used

· supporting groups and individuals to control weeds and animal pests in the natural environment and raising awareness of good pest management practices

· improving water quality in waterways, along the coastline and on beaches

· reducing the amount of waste to landfill and championing for a zero waste management facility in Pukekohe and Beachlands.

Outcome 2: A thriving local economy
A strong local economy will attract people to live, work locally and visit our area’s attractions. We can work towards this by:

· encouraging new major employers to locate in Franklin and provide local jobs

· advocating for better connectivity in rural areas for mobile phones and broadband

· helping our young people to have clear pathways from school to work

· encouraging rural innovation hubs to be established in Franklin

· increasing the numbers of tourists and visitor spend in Franklin by promoting and linking local attractions, events and heritage.

Outcome 3: An improved transport system

A better and safer transport system is a major focus for us over the next three years,. We will continue to work towards better public transport and safer roads in Franklin by:

· continuing to advocate to Auckland Transport for improvements to Franklin’s public transport services and infrastructure

· advocating to Auckland Transport and the New Zealand Transport Agency for roads that are fit for all types of users, safe and reflect the rural environment

· working with Auckland Transport to improve pedestrian safety and accessibility in urban centres.

Outcome 4: Growth is dealt with effectively
To meet the needs of our growing communities, we need to make the best use of our existing outdoor areas, sports centres, swimming pools and local halls before developing new facilities. We plan to do this by:

· advocating to the governing body and working with the community to ensure areas experiencing growth have appropriate, action-focused plans.

· working with key agencies such as Watercare, Auckland Transport and central government to ensure services, including water, wastewater and roads are in place for growth areas

· Text Box: We are also proposing to explore the idea of introducing a local targeted rate to fund local improvements or facilities if requested by the community, but not currently proposed or budgeted for.
A local targeted rate would involve ratepayers having an additional charge included on their rates bill with this money used specifically to fund a project in their area. making better use of existing outdoor space and facilities and planning new facilities to support growth, where needed.

Outcome 5: Communities feel ownership and connection to their area
We want our communities to be actively involved in shaping their quality of life, creativity, health and wellbeing. We can do this by:

· supporting activities that create quality places for people to live, work, play and learn in

· encouraging initiatives that reflect the diversity of our communities

· improving community facilities to make them fit-for-purpose, safe and accessible for all ages and abilities

· supporting local events and community arts programmes that celebrate the identity of Franklin.

DELIVERING OUR LOCAL BOARD PLAN

To deliver a successful plan, we need to focus our limited resources on what matters most to you and what we can influence. Find out more about our budget in the financial information section of our draft plan, available online at shapeauckland.co.nz or at public libraries, council service centres or local board offices.

HAVE YOUR SAY ON FRANKLIN’S DRAFT LOCAL BOARD PLAN

Feedback must be received by 4pm on Friday 30 June 2017.

Your feedback will go directly to elected members of Franklin Local Board to help inform their decisions.

We encourage you to read a full copy of our draft plan before providing your feedback. Copies of the full plan and submission forms are available:

· online at shapeauckland.co.nz

· at public libraries council service centres and local board offices

· or phone us on 09 301 0101 and we will send a copy to you.

Or you can fill out this form and return it to us:

· email - simply scan your completed form and email to localboardplans@aucklandcouncil.govt.nz

· on person - drop it off at your local library, service centre or local board office

· by post - place your completed form in an envelope and send to this freepost address:

Local Board Plans

Auckland Council

Freepost Authority 232621

Private Bag 92 300, Auckland 1142

Social media

Comments made through Facebook will be considered written feedback.

· Write something on the Franklin Local Board Facebook page - Facebook.com\FranklinLocalBoard and include “Local Board Plan feedback” in your message

· Send a private message using Facebook Messenger to @FranklinLocalBoard and include “Local Board Plan feedback” in your message.

In person

Come and talk to us at one of the pop-up events below. This is an opportunity for you to find out more about our ideas and provide feedback to board members.

· Thursday 25 May – Pukekohe Library, 10.30am-noon

· Saturday 27 May – Franklin Market, Pukekohe, 10am-noon

· Thursday 1 June – Waiuku (outside New World), 10am-noon

· Saturday 3 June – Pine Harbour Market, 10am-noon

· Saturday 10 June – Waiuku Library, 10.30am-noon

· Sunday 11 June – Clevedon Farmers’ Market, 10am-noon

Alternatively, come along to a drop-in discussion hosted by local board members.

· Friday 16 June – Wairoa Community Clinic, Clevedon District Centre, 2pm-4pm

· Friday 16 June – Waiuku Community Clinic, Waiuku Community Hall, 2pm-4pm

Your name and feedback will be considered public documents. All other personal details will remain private.

First name: ________________________________________________________

Last name: ________________________________________________________

Email or postal address: _____________________________________________

Local board/s you are providing feedback on: _____________________________

If you want to give us feedback on more than one draft local board plan you can:

· complete a separate form for each draft plan. Additional forms are available by calling 09 3010101 or online at shape.auckland.co.nz

· complete one submission form and attach your comments, making it clear which draft local board plan they apply to.

The following information is optional.

Are you?

□ Female □ Male □ Gender diverse

What age group do you belong to?

□ <15 □ 15-24 □ 25-34 □ 35-44

□ 45-54 □ 55-64 □ 65-74 □ 75+

Which of the following describes your ethnicity? (Please select as many as apply)

□ NZ European

□ Māori

□ Samoan

□ Tongan

□ Chinese

□ Indian

□ Other (please specify) _____________________________________

Would you like to speak in support of your submission at a public hearing held on Tuesday 8 August? Yes/ No

Is your feedback on behalf of an organisation?

· No, these are my personal views.

· Yes, I am the official spokesperson for my organisation.

If yes, what is the name of your organisation? ___________________________

___________________________________________________________________

Q1. On a scale of one to five, are we on the right track with our proposed local board plan?

[ ] 5 = I strongly agree that the local board is on the right track

[ ] 4 = I agree that the local board is on the right track

[ ] 3 = I neither agree or disagree that the local board is on the right track

[ ] 2 = I disagree that the local board is on the right track

[ ] 1 = I strongly disagree that the local board is on the right track

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Q2. Tell us what you like most about our proposed local board plan?

Q3. Do you have any other comments about our proposed local board plan?

Q4. One of our ideas is to investigate introducing a local targeted rate for Franklin residents to help pay for new initiatives or improvements not currently proposed. Do you support this and why?

Q5. If you support the introduction of a targeted rate for your area, what would you like to see it spent on? (Examples might include a new swimming pool, building and maintaining local paths or seal extension on an existing road.)

Need more room? You can attach extra pages, but please make sure they are A4 and include your name and contact details.

All personal information that you provide in this submission will be held and protected by Auckland Council in accordance with our privacy policy (available at aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/privacy and at our libraries and service centres) and with the Privacy Act 1993. Our privacy policy explains how we may use and share your personal information in relation to any interaction you have with the council, and how you can access and correct that information. We recommend you familiarise yourself with this policy.

___________________________________________________________________

□ Yes, I want to be added to your mailing list to be kept informed about news and events in the Franklin Local Board area.

Franklin Local Board

18 April 2017

Franklin Local Board, Quick Response Grants: Round Three and Four 2016-2017

File No.: CP2017/02397

Purpose

1. The purpose of this report is to present applications received for Franklin Local Board Quick Response Grants Rounds Three and Four 2016/2017. The local board is required to fund, part-fund or decline these applications.

Executive summary

2. The Franklin Local Board has set a total community grants budget of $156,000.00 for the 2016/2017 financial year.

3. A total of $88,037.00 has been allocated under quick response grant rounds one and two and local grants round one, leaving a balance of $67,963.00.

4. 21 applications in total were received in quick response grant round three and four, with a total requested of $37,098.00.

Recommendation/s

That the Franklin Local Board:

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

Table One: Franklin Quick Response Grants: Round Three Applications

App ID	Applicant	Project/ activity focus	Project	Requested	Eligibility
QR1703-312	Manukau Orchestral Society Incorporated	Arts and culture	Towards the technical costs associated with the orchestral programme "Romance" on 24 June, at Vodafone Events Centre.	$2,000.00	Eligible
QR1703-313	Show Me Shorts Film Festival Trust	Arts and culture	Towards print and design, advertising and programming costs for the Show Me Shorts at Pukekohe cinemas.	$1,911.00	Eligible
QR1703-305	Business and Professional Women (BPW) Franklin Incorporated	Community	Towards BPW Incorporated to subsidise the cost of seven women attending the 53rd National BPW New Zealand conference 21-23 April 2017.	$2,000.00	Eligible
QR1703-309	Auckland Urban Mission	Community	Towards mobile caring for the homeless and high need members of the Franklin community, specifically the cost of provisions and van maintenance.	$2,000.00	Eligible
QR1703-310	Waiuku Family Support Network	Community	Towards staff and volunteer training	$2,000.00	Eligible
QR1703-314	Paparimu Preschool Incorporated	Community	Towards the purchase of prizes for the playgroup possum hunt and activities towards at their gala day.	$2,000.00	Eligible
QR1703-316	West Franklin Community Trust	Community	Towards hall hire of the Waiuku War Memorial Town Hall, posters and advertising costs	$2,000.00	Eligible
QR1703-302	Mr Brian Blake	Environment	Towards the purchase of native plants from Awhitu Landcare to plant trees on a farm bordering a public beach.	$2,000.00	Eligible
QR1703-307	Waiau Pa Netball Club	Events	Towards the “Pa 5000 Fun Run or Walk” event for the cost of the traffic management plan, advertising, engraving trophies and groceries.	$500.00	Eligible
QR1703-315	South Auckland Performing Arts Competition Society Incorporated.	Events	Towards the Arts Festival 2017 for the cost of venue hire: Pukekohe Town Hall; Main Hall and Concert Chamber	$2,000.00	Eligible
QR1703-318	Mauku School	Events	Towards the Mauku School Fun Run and Walk for event expenses including the cost of hiring portaloos and providing first aide on site.	$950.00	Ineligible Event is on 9 April 2017, before the board decision meeting of 18 April 2017.
QR1703-303	Mr Shane Hepi	Sport and recreation	Towards the Clarks Beach circuit training course for the cost of administration, transport, clothing and support equipment.	$1,000.00	Ineligible The course has occurred between 17/01/17 and 11/03/17 before the board decision meeting of 18 April 2017.
QR1703-308	Waiuku Junior Boys Rugby Football Club Inc.	Sport and recreation	Towards Waiuku Junior Boys Rugby Football Club Inc. for the purchase of water proof gear bags for coaches for 20 teams.	$2,000.00	Eligible
			Total	$22,361.00

Table Two: Franklin Quick Response Grants: Round Four Applications

App ID	Applicant	Project/ activity focus	Project	Requested	Eligibility
QR1703-401	Knitting Grannies	Community	Towards the cost of wool to make garments for premature and new born babies.	$2,000.00	Eligible
QR1703-402	Waiuku Family Support Network Community Trust Board	Community	Towards the material costs to build a deck at the back of the building.	$2,000.00	Eligible
QR1703-413	Auckland Urban Mission	Community	Towards mobile caring for the homeless and high need members of the Franklin community, specifically the cost of provisions and van maintenance.	$2,000.00	Ineligible Applicant has applied for the same project twice in same financial year.
QR1703-415	Franklin Woodturners Club	Community	Towards the cost of upgrading sharpening equipment at the centre.	$970.00	Eligible
QR1703-404	Whakaupoko (West Franklin) Landcare	Environment	Towards costs of pest control methods (primarily for rats, possums and mustelids).	$2,000.00	Eligible
QR1703-408	Glenbrook School	Environment	Towards materials to establish a garden at the school.	$2,000.00	Eligible
QR1703-410	Waiuku Golf and Squash Club Inc.	Sport and recreation	Towards costs of printed brochures and marketing materials for membership packs	$1,767.00	Eligible
QR1703-414	New Netball Team Limited	Sport and recreation	Towards costs to hire the High Wire Trust Gymnasium for hosting their home round robin netball match.	$2,000.00	Eligible
			Total:	$14,737.00

Comments

5. The implementation of the new Community Grants Policy commenced on 1 July 2015. The policy supports each local board to adopt a grants programme for 2016/2017, see Attachment A.

6. The local board grants programme sets out:

· local board priorities

· lower priorities for funding

· exclusions

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

· any additional accountability requirements.

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

8. The Franklin Local Board has set a total community grants budget of $156,000.00 for the 2016/2017 financial year.

9. A total of $88,037.00 has been allocated under quick response grant rounds one and two and local grants round one, leaving a balance of $67,963.00.

10. Twenty-one applications in total were received in quick response grant round three and four, with a total requested of $37,098.00.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

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

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

Māori impact statement

13. The provision of community grants provides opportunities for all Aucklanders to undertake projects, programmes, and activities that benefit a wider range of individuals and groups, including Maori. As a guide for decision-making, in the allocation of community grants, the new community grants policy supports the principle of delivering positive outcomes for Maori. One organisation in these quick response rounds has identified as Maori.

Implementation

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

15. Following the Franklin Local Board allocating funding for quick response grant rounds three and four, Commercial and Finance staff will notify the applicants of the local board decision.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇨	Franklin Local Board Grants Programme 2016-17 (Under Separate Cover)
b ⇨	Franklin Local Board Quick Response Grants, Round Three application summaries (Under Separate Cover)
c ⇨	Franklin Local Board Quick Response Grants, Round Four application summaires (Under Separate Cover)

Signatories

Authors

Daylyn D'Mello - Environmental and Community Grants Advisor

Authorisers

Marion Davies - Community Grants Operations Manager

Jennifer Rose - Operations Support Manager

Sue O'Gorman - Relationship Manager

Franklin Local Board

18 April 2017

Franklin Local Board – Grant Programme 2017/2018

Our local grants programme aims to provide contestable and discretionary community grants to local communities.

Outcomes

Our grant programme will support the following outcomes outlined in our local board plan

• Cherished natural environment

• Thriving local economy

• Excellent transport connections and infrastructure

• Growth in the right place, at the right time

• Proud, safe and healthy communities

Our priorities for grants

Franklin Local Board is keen to support its strategic goals through providing grants to local communities. The local board has developed the following specific objectives to guide applicants.

Events funding

The local board aims to:

• promote environmental responsibility through supporting events that aim for zero waste (reduce, reuse, recycle)

• strongly encourage smoke-free events, particularly those targeting children, young people and their families

• support events that celebrate our distinctive local communities and enable people to come together

• support events which encourage visitors to spend more time in Franklin as a destination

• support events that aim to be financially sustainable and become regular and celebrate part of the Franklin event calendar.

Community funding

The local board aims to:

• support community groups to be effective and contribute to the community, particularly in shaping and developing their areas to be better and safer places

• assist young people to move from school to work or further training.

• support initiatives that celebrate our arts, culture and heritage

• work with local partners to help make the community feel safe

• support small to medium war commemoration projects providing permanent structures, including new or partially completed projects that commemorate times of war

Environmental funding

The local board aims to:

• support local environmental initiatives

• encourage activities that reduce waste to landfill, prevent illegal dumping and preserve the beauty of our environment

• support the prevention of kauri dieback in our native forests

• encourage a weed and pest-free natural environment

• support community initiatives to enhance waterways and the coastline, including beach clean-ups and planting.

Waterways protection fund

The local board aims to:

• support projects that will protect and enhance the natural environment and improve water quality in the Mauku Stream priority catchment.

Criteria:

The board will support projects that meet the following criteria:

• applicants are landowners, community and environmental groups located or operating in the priority catchment.

• activities or work that has not yet started or been completed (no retrospective funding).

• projects on privately-owned land involving fencing off the stream, wetlands, seeps and drains.

• works relating to the fencing, such as enabling alternative water supplies for livestock needed as a consequence of the fencing.

• environmental weed control and restoration planting using eco-sourced plants within fenced-off areas.

• fifty per cent of the project cost to be funded by applicants, including an in-kind contribution or contribution by other donors.

Refer to the “Franklin Local Board Waterway Protection Fund Guidelines” for more specific requirements and assessment criteria.

Coastal rescue services fund

The local board aims to:

· support the provision of sea rescue services and survival skills training.

Criteria:

The board will support projects that meet the following criteria:

· local volunteers providing effective sea rescue services to the community including:

· vessel expenses outside of rescue events e.g. training costs

· vessel accommodation expenses

· contribution to equipment replacement

· crew training and venue expenses

· Public education activities to improve beach and boating safety for visitors and residents including:

· vessel focused programmes

· risk and hazard focused programmes

· survival skills programmes

Note: learn to swim programmes are funded through other channels and applications for these programmes will not be accepted.

School pool funding

The local board aims to:

• support for additional operational costs incurred by schools such as pool chemicals and provision of keys to enable them to open their pool to the community over the summer period.

Criteria:

The board will support projects that meet the following criteria:

• steps have been taken to increase usage over summer by the wider community and evidence of increased usage is provided

• water testing is undertaken by a certified person (i.e. has attained the NZQA unit standards in swimming pool water quality)

• a user agreement with at least one community user group/organisation (e.g. learn to swim provider) is in place.

• requests for capital grants such as a new pump are outside the funding criteria and will not be considered.

Not normally funded

The Franklin Local Board has identified the following as lower priorities:

• Travel

• Salaries

• Catering

• Vehicles

• Sports equipment

• Sports uniforms

• Organisations which have a closed membership i.e there is benefit to the members and limited benefit to the wider community

Investment Approach

The Franklin Local Board has allocated budgets to support the local grants programme as follows:

• Quick Response Grants: 50% of the total grant budget per annum

Ø Minimum amount per grant $200

Ø Maximum amount per grant $2,000

• Local Grants 50% of the total grant budget per annum

The Franklin Local Board will support match funding as part of the Local Grants fund

Application Dates

Franklin Dates 2017/2018

Contestable Quick Response

2017/2018 funding rounds	Opens	Closes	Decision made	Projects to occur after
Round one	03 July 2017	28 July 2017	22 August 2017	1 September 2017
Round two	02 October 2017	27 October 2017	28 November 2017	1 December 2017
Round Three	26 February 2018	23 March 2018	24 April 2018	1 May 2018

Contestable Local Grants

2017/2018

funding rounds

Opens

Closes

Decision made

Projects to occur after

Round one

26 June 2017

04 August 2017

26 September 2017

1 October 2017

Round two

26 March 2018

04 May 2018

26 June 2018

1 July 2018

School Swimming Pool Fund

2017/2018

funding rounds

Opens

Closes

Decision made

Projects to occur after

Round one

3 July 2017

28 July 2017

22August 2017

1 September 2017

Waterways Protection Fund

2017/2018

funding rounds

Opens

Closes

Decision made

Projects to occur after

Round one

26 June 2017

04 August 2017

26 September 2017

1 October 2017

Coastal Rescue Services Fund

2017/2018

funding rounds

Opens

Closes

Decision made

Projects to occur after

Round one

26 February 2018

23 March 2018

24 April 2018

1 May 2018

Accountability Measures

The Franklin Local Board requires all successful applicants to provide a self-review, including how the group achieved its planned outcomes and participation numbers (where able to be quantified), to be supplied to the local board with an accompanying photo of the activity or event.

Franklin Local Board

18 April 2017

2016 Elections - Highlights and Issues

File No.: CP2017/03240

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.

Recommendation/s

That the Franklin 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

Electoral system

67. 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.

Māori wards

68. 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.

Review of representation arrangements

69. 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
15 January 2019	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.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Franklin Local Board Views	3

Signatories

Authors

Warwick McNaughton - Principal Advisor - Democracy Services

Authorisers

Marguerite Delbet - General Manager Democracy Services

Phil Wilson - Governance Director

Stephen Town - Chief Executive

Karen Lyons - General Manager Local Board Services

Sue O'Gorman - Relationship Manager

Chairperson	Angela Fulljames
Deputy Chairperson	Andrew Baker
Members	Malcolm Bell
	Alan Cole
	Brendon Crompton
	Sharlene Druyven
	Amanda Hopkins
	Murray Kay
	Niko Kloeten

Requirement FY 2015-2016	Status	Comments
A strategic plan for next 3 – 5 years - reviewed every 3 years.	Compliant	2014-2024 Strategic Plan in effect.
Audited financial accounts and audit management letter.	Compliant	Provided
Business plan including: · A minimum of three key performance indicators and budget allocations for programme areas.	Compliant	Provided
Annual review report: · Achievement of previous year’s objectives against business plan.	Compliant	Provided
2017-2018 Indicative Budget	Compliant	Provided
Annual BID programme reporting and alignment meeting between Franklin Local Board and business association board.	Compliant	Meeting held 28 February 2017
BID Programme Agreement	Compliant	Fully signed agreement provided.
Summary	Recommend Targeted Rate	Staff are satisfied that Pukekohe BID is in substantial compliance with policy reporting requirements for the purpose of the recommendation of this report.

Requirement FY 2015-2016	Status	Comments
A strategic plan for next 3 – 5 years - reviewed every 3 years.	Compliant	2014-2019 Strategic Plan in effect.
Audited financial accounts and audit management letter.	Compliant	Provided
Business plan including: · A minimum of three key performance indicators and budget allocations for programme areas.	Compliant	Provided
Annual review report: · Achievement of previous year’s objectives against business plan.	Compliant	Provided
2017-2018 Indicative Budget	Compliant	Provided
Annual BID programme reporting and alignment meeting between Franklin Local Board and business association board.	Compliant	Meeting held 28 February 2017.
BID Programme Agreement	Compliant	Fully signed agreement provided.
Summary	Recommend Targeted Rate	Staff are satisfied that Waiuku BID is in substantial compliance with policy reporting requirements for the purpose of the recommendation of this report.

Authors	Anthea Clarke - Democracy Advisor
Authorisers	Sue O'Gorman - Relationship Manager