Agenda of Governing Body

Governing Body

25 May 2017

Governance Framework Review - update on progress

File No.: CP2017/07527

Purpose

1. To provide a progress update to the Governing Body on the Governance Framework Review. It also seeks endorsement of assessment criteria to be used when assessing policy options across the various work streams.

Executive summary

2. The governance framework review was initiated to assess how well the Auckland governance model (Governing Body/local boards) is meeting the aims of the 2010 reforms. The review’s recommendations are being considered by a political working party made up of local board and Governing Body members. A work programme has been established to consider the review’s recommendations and will report back to the Governing Body on 24 August 2017.

3. The working party has established criteria to assess policy options against and is seeking endorsement of these from the Governing Body. The working party is working through a process of considering a range of policy options under four work streams. As draft recommendations are developed, the working party will engage with all local boards and the Governing Body through a series of workshops during June and July 2017.

4. To date the working party has considered a range of options relating to the funding and financial decision making powers of local boards and has asked for further work to be done on a refined range of options, including detailed financial modelling. Options focus on giving local boards greater financial decision making relating to assets and services under their control.

5. The working party has also considered options around changing the number of local boards and has agreed to recommend that further work on this be deferred pending the completion and implementation of the governance framework review. It noted that a reorganisation proposal for North Rodney and Waiheke is already in train, and that legislation that would simplify changing the number of local boards is currently in Parliament. The outcomes of these processes could have implications for any further work.

Recommendation/s

That the Governing Body:

a) note that the Governance Framework Review was initiated to assess how well the Auckland governance model is meeting the aims of the 2010 reforms

b) note that the Governance Framework Review political working party, established to consider the findings of the review, is currently in the process of assessing options under a number of work streams and will report back to the Governing Body with final recommendations in August 2017

c) endorse the following criteria that have been agreed by the Governance Framework Review working party to assess the various options under consideration:

i) consistency with the statutory purpose of local government

ii) provision for decision making at the appropriate level, as set out in Section17 of the Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009 and consistency with the subsidiarity principle

iii) contribution to improving role clarity between the two arms of governance, both internally and for the public

iv) provision for increased empowerment of local boards, especially in their place shaping role

v) ensuring appropriate accountability and incentives for political decisions

vi) contribution to improved community engagement with, and better services for Aucklanders

vii) administrative feasibility, including efficiency and practicality of implementation

d) note that an extensive process of engagement has been put in place with elected representatives ahead of the final report to the governing body in August 2017.

Comments

Background

6. In early 2016, Auckland Council initiated a review of the Auckland Council governance framework. The primary purpose of the review is to assess how well the Auckland governance model is meeting the aims of the 2010 reforms by delivering strong regional decision-making, complemented by decisions that meet diverse local needs and interests. The focus of the review is on the respective roles and interactions between the governing body and local boards.

7. On 15 December 2016, the Governing Body received the Governance Framework Review and agreed to the establishment of a political working party to further consider and work through the review recommendations. It was agreed that the working party would have seven members from the governing body and seven members from local boards, and would:

· receive and consider the recommendations of the governance framework review

· provide oversight and direction for the development of a work programme to address the findings and recommendations of the report

· report back to local boards and to the Governing Body for decisions on final recommendations.

Members of that working party were agreed in February 2017 and are:

Local Board members	Governing Body members
Shale Chambers (Deputy Chair)	Bill Cashmore (Chair)
Angela Dalton	Cathy Casey
Peter Haynes	Fa’anana Efeso Collins
Phelan Pirrie	Christine Fletcher
Greg Presland	Richard Hills
Paul Walden	Penny Hulse
Lisa Whyte	Denise Lee

8. A project management structure was established within the council to undertake the work required to consider and implement the review’s thirty six recommendations. The findings of the review fall into four broad themes:

· Organisational structures and culture have not adapted to the complexity of the model: the review found that the organisation has struggled to adapt to the unique and complex governance arrangements in Auckland, and that this has impacted on the quality of advice and support for elected members.

· Complementary decision-making, but key aspects of overlap: the review touched on a number of decision-making functions where there is overlap between the governing body and local boards, or a lack of clarity about roles.

· Lack of alignment of accountabilities with responsibilities: the review found that the system of decision-making creates incentives for elected members to act locally despite regional benefits.

· Local boards are not sufficiently empowered: the review identified that there are some practices that are constraining local boards from carrying out their role, including the inflexibility of funding arrangements and the difficulties in feeding local input into regional decision-making. It also noted some local frustrations in relation to transport decision-making.

Progress to date

9. The political working party has met three times to date with initial meetings focusing on establishing the working party’s terms of reference (Attachment A), endorsing the project plan and work programme (Attachment B) and agreeing a set of assessment criteria for policy options.

10. Four work streams were established to consider and further the recommendations of the review. They are:

· policy development

· finance and funding

· representation and governance

· organisational support.

11. Each of these work streams is in the process of developing options to respond to the range of issues identified in the review. As options are developed, it is proposed that they be assessed against a set of criteria developed for this purpose. The criteria proposed are informed by relevant statutory provisions and the key themes of the governance framework review. They are:

· consistency with the statutory purpose of local government

· provision for decision making at the appropriate level, as set out in Section 17 of the Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009 and consistency with the subsidiarity principle

· contribution to improving role clarity between the two arms of governance, both internally and for the public

· provision for increased empowerment of local boards, especially in their place shaping role

· ensuring appropriate accountability and incentives for political decisions

· contribution to improved community engagement with and better services for Aucklanders

· administrative feasibility, including efficiency and practicality of implementation.

12. It is recommended that the Governing Body endorse these assessment criteria, for use by the working party. These will assist in the development of final recommendations to the Governing Body arising from the review.

13. The most recent working party meeting, on 4 May 2017, started to consider more detailed options for change, with the key topics being the funding and finance issues for local boards, and whether there was any current appetite to review the number of local boards.

Funding and finance

14. The current model of budget allocation and control has a mixture of regional and local decision making. This has evolved from the initial set-up by the Auckland Transition Agency when Auckland Council was formed. It has had minor refinements over the past few years but with six years of experience of operating the model it is timely to consider how it could be improved.

15. Approximately $350 million in budgets for services and activities classified as local are currently allocated to local boards, but in practice local boards have full discretion over less than ten per cent of this amount, with the majority of the funding locked in Asset Based Services funding that boards have no discretion over. New investment decisions (purchase and major upgrades of assets) for local services and activities are primarily made at the governing body level. The local board role is confined to influencing the design and specific location of these assets.

16. The situation is further complicated by the fact that the budget allocation between local boards is primarily based on where assets are located, legacy funding and levels of service that, inherently, are uneven in approach. There are different levels of service, operating models and age of assets driving the allocation of the budgets.

17. The critical issue is whether the right balance has already been struck between the need to reap the benefits of regional efficiencies, control the significant financial parameters and devolve relevant decisions, including financial decision making, to the level of governance closest to the local community.

18. The working party has directed staff to narrow the range of options under the funding work stream and to report back in more detail on the refined options. Initial options considered included:

i. retaining the status quo of local boards only having decision making over their Local Discretionary Initiatives funding

ii. entirely local, with full decision making (over funding for local services and assets) being made by the local board and accountability through the setting of local rates

iii. local within parameters – local decision making over funding for local services and assets, but within regional policy and financial parameters

iv. entirely regional – the governing body would control all budgets with local boards taking purely an advocacy role

v. budget decision making being undertaken by a joint committee of representatives from local boards and the governing body

vi. an option that looked at decision making being made over funding of local services and assets by multi-board committee.

19. Options iv, v and vi were not supported and the working party has asked that staff come back with more detailed modelling on a refined number of options, as well as exploring an enhanced status quo option that enables decision making by local boards over Assets Based Services funding as well as Local Discretionary Initiatives funding.

Number of local boards

20. The initial governance framework review concluded that having twenty one local boards contributed to a complex governance structure and logistical inefficiencies. It recommended that the council form a view on the optimum number of local boards. The working party requested preliminary work be done to enable an informed decision as to when (and whether) to undertake more investigation into potentially reducing the number of local boards.

21. The discussion document considered by the working party noted that changing the number of local boards requires a reorganisation proposal under the Local Government Act 2002 and is a significant undertaking that would require a sound and compelling rationale. It was felt that the initial review had not made that case on its own, but was focused purely on reducing time and cost to serve twenty one boards. While these are factors that should be considered, there would need to be a more thorough investigation made of the merits and risks before pursuing a reorganisation proposal.

22. There are also several other processes that may impact on this work, either directly or indirectly, that are currently underway or will be underway in the short to medium term:

· other changes are likely to be proposed under the governance framework review work programme that will further empower local boards

· legislative changes that would introduce a simplified “local authority led” reorganisation process are being considered by Parliament^{^[1]};

· the Local Government Commission is considering reorganisation proposals for North Rodney and Waiheke;

· Auckland Council will undertake its first representation review in 2018.

23. There was a general view that while reducing the number of local boards could be investigated at some point, there was not an overwhelming case for change at this point. There was a view that a change in the number of local boards would create uncertainty and confusion in the public mind and potentially further reduce engagement with council as a whole.

24. The working party accepted the recommendation in the discussion document to not progress any further work on reviewing the number of local boards until after the governance framework review has been completed and the outcome of reorganisation proposals that are underway for North Rodney and Waiheke Island are known. If there is a future appetite for reviewing the number of local boards, a local authority led reorganisation proposal under the new legislation could potentially be initiated.

Next steps

25. The next two working party meetings on 8 and 21 June 2017 will consider a range of issues from the policy and governance work streams including:

· potential changes to the allocations table and potential additional delegations to local boards and considering making provision for the review of local decision making when it demonstrably has regional (or national) impacts

· improving how local boards fulfil their statutory role of providing input into regional policy processes [s16(1)(b)] and how the Governing Body fulfils its statutory role of [s15(2)(c)] considering local views and preferences

· improving options for local boards to have more say in Auckland Transport decision making, especially in relation to local place shaping activities

· a potential pilot project of extended devolution with the Waiheke Local Board

· considering naming conventions for elected representatives

· options relating to the election of governing body members e.g. size of wards, election by wards compared with election at large (this work will inform the 2018 Representation Review).

26. Future meetings of the working party in July and August 2017 will refine options and develop recommendations for consideration across the breadth of the work programme. These will be reported to the Governing Body on 24 August 2017.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

27. The political working party has been appointed to:

· receive and consider the recommendations of the governance framework review

· provide oversight and direction for the governance framework review implementation project

· consider the implications of implementing particular options, and develop recommendations for consideration by the Governing Body and local boards where required

· report back to local boards and to the Governing Body for decisions on final recommendations^{^[2]}.

28. The working party and project team have ensured that all elected members outside of the working group have access to all agenda, minutes and presentations considered by the working party. There is a planned programme of direct engagement with local board chairs forums, Local Board/Governing Body joint forums and local board cluster meetings, in addition to this progress report.

29. As recommendations are developed there will be workshops with every local board as well as with Governing Body members. There will also be an opportunity for formal feedback from local boards at each of their business meetings in July/August.

30. As discussed earlier, local boards were extensively engaged through the governance framework review during the last term. Local boards are also represented by seven members of the political working party.

31. The work of the governance framework review has the potential for significant impact on local boards, in terms of their decision making, input to policy making and their role in place shaping. As the project progresses and recommendations are considered, an in-depth impact assessment will be developed.

Māori impact statement

32. The initial governance framework review document focused on whether the governance framework model is currently giving effect to the intent of the Auckland governance reforms in a general sense. It was largely focused on the respective roles, decision making and support for the governing body and local boards. The review did not look specifically at governance or representation for Māori, or at how the respective governance arms engage with iwi/ Māori. Consideration of the role of the IMSB was also out of scope.

33. This is not to say that the review will not impact on Māori. The project team has recently engaged with the IMSB at a staff level to determine which areas of the review might be more relevant and have more significant impact on Māori. This will enable a more in depth impact assessment to be developed for the final report in August 2017.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Political Working Party Governance Framework Review - Terms of Reference	17
b ⇩	Governance Framework Review - Project Execution Plan	23

Signatories

Author

Linda Taylor – Programme Manager Governance Framework Review

Authorisers

Phil Wilson - Governance Director

Stephen Town - Chief Executive

Governing Body

25 May 2017

Independent Maori Statutory Board - proposed funding agreement for 2017/2018

File No.: CP2017/09139

Purpose

1. To consider the 2017/2018 funding agreement between Auckland Council and the Independent Māori Statutory Board (IMSB).

Executive summary

2. For the IMSB to carry out its purpose, perform its functions and exercise its powers, the Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009 requires Auckland Council to meet the reasonable costs of the IMSB’s operations, secretariat, the establishment of committees, and seeking and obtaining advice (Schedule 2, 20(1)).

3. The IMSB has drafted its work plan and proposed budget for the 2017/2018 financial year. It includes projects such as informing council’s Māori Economic Development Strategy and Te Tiriti o Waitangi Audit, and other costs of the board’s operations such as salaries.

4. The Governing Body established a political working party at its meeting of 23 February 2017 to conduct negotiations with the IMSB and develop a recommended funding agreement, for final approval by the Governing Body.

5. The working party has considered IMSB’s budget proposal and is satisfied that the proposed total direct funding of $2,956,000 for the 2017/2018 financial year is appropriate and falls within the parameters agreed through the Long-term Plan 2015-2025. The working party recommends that the Governing Body approves the proposed funding for the 2017/2018 financial year.

6. It is further recommended that the Governing Body agrees that variations to the funding agreement of no more than $50,000 in the financial year (subject to budget being available to cover the variations) can be agreed by the chief executives of Auckland Council and the IMSB.

7. Auckland Council and the IMSB also have a Service Level Agreement which records shared services between council and the IMSB, and support services provided by third parties through council to the IMSB, such as finance, information technology and property. This is similar to the arrangements between council and its council-controlled organisations.

Recommendation/s

That the Governing Body:

a) approve the 2017/2018 funding agreement between Auckland Council and the Independent Māori Statutory Board, which comprises a total direct funding of $2,956,000 (opex).

b) approve that variations to the 2017/2018 funding agreement between Auckland Council and the Independent Māori Statutory Board of no more than $50,000 in the financial year can be agreed between the chief executive of the Auckland Council and the chief executive of the Independent Māori Statutory Board, subject to budget being available to cover the variations.

c) note that the 2017/2018 funding agreement between Auckland Council and the Independent Māori Statutory Board will be prepared and signed by the mayor and council’s chief executive and the Independent Māori Statutory Board chair and chief executive.

d) note that a Service Level Agreement between Auckland Council and the Independent Māori Statutory Board records additional services council will supply and services provided by third parties will be finalized and agreed by the governance director of Auckland Council and the chief executive of the Independent Māori Statutory Board.

Comments

8. The Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009 requires Auckland Council to meet the reasonable costs of the IMSB board’s operations, secretariat, the establishment of committees, and seeking and obtaining advice (Schedule 2, 20(1)).

9. The funding provided to the IMSB supports their role in advising council on matters of importance to Māori. For example, in 2015/2016 the IMSB submitted evidence on key Proposed Auckland Unitary Plan topics. The IMSB provided Te Ao Māori perspectives for inclusion in the plan. The Independent Hearings Panel gave positive feedback about the Board’s coordinated approach with mana whenua.

10. Another recent project of the IMSB was the Māori report released in November 2016. This progress report against the Māori Plan provides council with robust evidence about and analysis of Māori outcomes. The reporting framework uses a strengths-based Māori potential approach. Its development was overseen by a data strategy expert panel including Government Statistician Liz MacPherson.

11. The Governing Body established a political working party at its meeting of 23 February 2017 to conduct negotiations with the IMSB and develop a recommended funding agreement, for approval by the Governing Body.

2017/2018 Budget proposal

12. The table below summarises the total direct funding (opex) in IMSB’s proposed 2017/2018 budget, including a comparison with previous years and percentage increase from previous year. The 2 per cent increase for the 2017/2018 financial year from 2016/2017 is within the parameters agreed through the 2015-2025 LTP.

	2015/2016	2016/2017	2017/2018 (proposed)
Total direct funding (opex)	$2,829,000	$2,898,000	$2,956,000
% increase from previous year	4.4%	2.4%	2.0%

13. The proposed budget covers the costs of the IMSB’s operations such as salaries and remuneration, and costs of strategic projects outlined in the work plan, such as monitoring and informing council’s Māori Economic Development Strategy. Details of the budget proposal for both IMSB’s operations and work plan projects are provided in the table below.

IMSB board operations and work plan

	2016/2017	2017/2018 Proposed	% increase/ (decrease)
Board remuneration and expenses	$832,000	$824,000	(1)
Secretariat salaries	$1,321,000	$1,338,000	1.3
Expenses (including audit fees)	$119,000	$119,000	0
Professional Services	$130,000	$110,000	(15)
Engagement and reporting to Māori and stakeholders	$141,000	$140,000	(0.7)
Engagement of specialist Māori expertise for IMSB’s input into council projects/plans work program	$125,000	$110,000	(12)
Te Tiriti o Waitangi Audit	$30,000	$160,000	433
Research, management and monitoring of Māori Plan outcomes	$105,000	$55,000	(48)
Monitoring and information of the council’s Māori Economic Development Strategy	$100,000	$100,000	0
TOTAL	$2,898,000*	$2,956,000	2

*The individual cost areas for 2016/2017 add to $2.903 million. A saving of $5000 in one of the cost areas will be reported in actual figures to account for the lesser total being approved.

14. As it is required by legislation, an independent review of remuneration for the IMSB board members has been conducted by Strategic Pay Limited. The independent reviewer recommends that the IMSB members’ remuneration be set at 68 per cent of elected members’ remuneration, with additional allowances for the chair and deputy chair. If the Remuneration Authority determines an increase for elected members’ remuneration within the next six months, the IMSB members’ remuneration will be adjusted accordingly.

15. An increase of $130,000 is proposed for 2017/2018 for the next Te Tiriti o Watangi Audit which is due to begin in 2018. This will be the third audit undertaken by the IMSB. It reflects an aspect of its statutory purpose to “assist the council by ensuring that the council acts in accordance with statutory provisions referring to the Treaty of Waitangi”.

16. Both of the previous audits have resulted in reports recommending a comprehensive set of actions to improve council’s responsiveness to Māori.

Other budgetary considerations – funding held in council’s budgets

17. In addition to direct funding outlined in the proposed funding agreement, up to $130,000 will be held in council’s budgets for the engagement of specialist Māori expertise to assist council, as necessary.

18. As has been the case for the last two financial years, there will be an agreed sign-off process between the chief executives of Auckland Council and the IMSB for that expenditure to ensure that this resource is committed to appropriate projects and that there is no duplication of effort between council and the IMSB.

Shared Services

19. Alongside the funding agreement, Auckland Council and the IMSB have a service level agreement which records additional services council will supply to IMSB, and support services provided by third parties through council to the IMSB. These are services related to finance, information technology and property. This is similar to the service agreements council has with its council-controlled organisations.

20. There are no actual payments from the IMSB to council for the services covered in the service level agreement. However, to meet accounting standards, the budget for the support services provided by third parties to the IMSB and paid through council (property, insurance and telecommunications) will be included as a separate line item in the 2017/2018 funding agreement.

21. The value of these services is yet to be determined for the forthcoming financial year. However, in the current financial year the value of these services was estimated at $429,000. Payment to third parties on behalf of the IMSB in the current financial year was estimated at an additional $464,000.

Variations of the funding agreement

22. The IMSB or council may initiate a review of the funding agreement by giving written or electronic notice to the other party stating the terms of the review (Schedule 20(2), Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009).

23. To remove the need to formally negotiate an amendment to the 2017/2018 agreement as envisaged by the Local Government (Auckland Council) Act, a process is proposed where variations of no more than $50,000 can be agreed by the chief executives of Auckland Council and the IMSB, subject to budget being available. The Governing Body agreed the same process for the 2016/2017 funding agreement.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

24. Local board views have not been sought in relation to this matter as the governing body is responsible for negotiating the funding agreement with the IMSB.

25. However, the IMSB work supported by the funding may have outcomes that are relevant to local boards.

Māori impact statement

26. The funding provided through the annual funding agreement supports the IMSB to give effect to its statutory purpose of promoting cultural, economic, environmental, and social issues of significance for Māori in Tāmaki Makaurau, and ensuring that the council acts in accordance with statutory provisions referring to the Treaty of Waitangi.

Implementation

27. Following approval of the funding by the Governing Body, the 2017/2018 funding agreement between Auckland Council and the IMSB will be signed by the mayor and council’s chief executive, and IMSB chair and chief executive.

28. The 2017/2018 funding agreement will take effect from 1 July 2017.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Draft Independent Maori Statutory Board Funding Agreement 2017/2018	45

Signatories

Author

Edward Siddle - Principal Advisor

Authorisers

Alastair Cameron - Manager - CCO Governance & External Partnerships

Phil Wilson - Governance Director

Stephen Town - Chief Executive

Governing Body

25 May 2017

Hearing Panel report on the proposed Air Quality Bylaw for Indoor Domestic Fires

File No.: CP2017/07725

Purpose

1. To determine whether to make the Air Quality Bylaw for Indoor Domestic Fires 2017, as recommended by the Hearing Panel.

Executive summary

2. Auckland Council had regional rules for indoor domestic fires in its Auckland Council Regional Plan: Air, Land and Water (“the former Regional Plan”), to complement the national standards for new wood burners set by central government regulations.

3. The former Regional Plan was adopted in 2010 and expired in November 2016, when Auckland’s Unitary Plan became operative in part.

4. The Unitary Plan does not have specific regulations for indoor domestic fires. This has created a gap in the regulation of indoor domestic fires in Auckland.

5. The council needs to decide:

· whether to make a bylaw to re-establish the regional rules for indoor domestic fires; and, if so

· how to apply those rules spatially across Auckland.

6. On 23 February 2017, the Governing Body adopted a statement of proposal for public consultation, which included:

· a draft Air Quality Bylaw for Indoor Domestic Fires (“draft bylaw”) based on the council’s preferred approach

· alternative options for responding to the regulatory gap and for defining the Auckland Urban Air Quality Area.

7. The council appointed a Hearing Panel, which has considered submissions and local board feedback. The feedback is summarised in the body of the report.

8. On 28 April 2017, the Hearing Panel deliberated in public and agreed on a proposed Air Quality Bylaw for Indoor Domestic Fires 2017 (“proposed bylaw”). The Panel recommended only two minor wording changes to the draft bylaw as notified. A copy of the proposed bylaw is provided in Attachment A.

9. The Hearing Panel recommends that the Governing Body make the Air Quality Bylaw for Indoor Domestic Fires 2017. The bylaw would:

· re-establish Auckland’s regional for indoor domestic fires that were in the former Regional Plan

· update the definition of the Auckland Urban Air Quality Area to reflect Auckland’s urban area as it is today.

Recommendation/s

That the Governing Body:

a) confirm that, pursuant to section 155 of the Local Government Act 2002, the Air Quality Bylaw for Indoor Domestic Fires 2017 (“the bylaw”) is:

i) the most appropriate form of bylaw to address the problems associated with the use of indoor domestic fires in Auckland, as set out in the statement of proposal

ii) not inconsistent with the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990.

b) make the Air Quality Bylaw for Indoor Domestic Fires 2017 in Attachment A of the report, pursuant to section 145 of the Local Government Act 2002, with effect from 1 June 2017, noting that the bylaw will:

i) re-establish Auckland’s regional regulations for indoor domestic fires that were contained in the Auckland Council Regional Plan: Air, Land and Water; and

ii) update the Auckland Urban Air Quality Area, as defined in Clause 5 of the bylaw.

c) delegate responsibility for enforcing the Air Quality Bylaw for Indoor Domestic Fires 2017` to the Chief Executive, who can sub-delegate specific responsibilities to staff within the council’s relevant departments.

d) authorise the Manager, Social Policy and Bylaws, in consultation with Councillor Quax, Chair of the Hearing Panel, to make any minor edits or amendments to the Air Quality Bylaw for Indoor Domestic Fires 2017, to correct any identified errors, typographical edits or to reflect decisions made by the Governing Body.

Comments

Background

Managing air quality in Auckland

10. Like the rest of New Zealand, Auckland’s air quality is impacted by air pollution from several sources, including transport, indoor domestic fires and industry. Natural sources, such as sea spray and windblown dust, also play a role.

11. Auckland Council (“the council”) manages the region’s air quality. Central government has established maximum levels for key air pollutants (“the National Air Quality Standards” ^{^[3]}). It is the council’s responsibility to ensure these are met.

12. Auckland’s air quality has improved over the last two decades. However, it sometimes exceeds the National Air Quality Standards. In Auckland, the risk of exceeding the National Air Quality Standards is generally greatest in winter, when smoke from the city’s indoor domestic fires increases.

13. In Auckland, indoor domestic fires are regulated by both national and regional standards, as summarised below:

· There are national design standards for new enclosed wood burners on properties less than two hectares (“the National Wood Burner Standards” ^{^[4]}).

· Auckland also had regional rules for other types of indoor domestic fires in the Auckland Council Regional Plan: Air, Land and Water (“the former Regional Plan”), to complement the National Wood Burner Standards. The former Regional Plan was adopted in 2010 and expired in November 2016, when Auckland’s Unitary Plan became operative in part.

14. Attachment B illustrates how Auckland’s regional rules and the National Wood Burner Standards fit together.

What is the problem?

15. The former Regional Plan no longer applies and the Unitary Plan does not have specific regulations for indoor domestic fires. This means there is now a regulatory gap.

16. Without effective regulation of Auckland’s indoor domestic fires, the city’s winter air quality is likely to deteriorate. This could impact public health as it increases the risk of Auckland’s air quality exceeding the acceptable pollution levels set in the National Air Quality Standards.

17. The council needs to determine:

· whether to make a bylaw to re-establish the regional rules for indoor domestic fires; and, if so

· how to apply those rules spatially across Auckland.

18. The proposed Air Quality Bylaw for Indoor Domestic Fires 2017 (the “proposed bylaw”) would re-establish the regional rules to address the regulatory gap.

Developing the air quality bylaw

19. On 23 February 2017, Auckland Council’s Governing Body adopted the Statement of Proposal: Draft Air Quality Bylaw for Indoor Domestic Fires (“the statement of proposal”) for public consultation (Resolution no. GB/2017/15).

20. The draft bylaw was based on the council’s preferred approach for consultation. The statement of proposal also included alternative options for responding to the regulatory gap and for defining the Auckland Urban Air Quality Area.

21. The statement of proposal was publicly notified on 27 February 2017. The council placed public notices in the New Zealand Herald and in eight suburban newspapers, in order to inform residents in the local board areas most affected by the proposal to update the Auckland Urban Air Quality Area for the draft bylaw.

22. Council staff directly notified:

· Auckland’s 18 Mana Whenua iwi, seven Mataawaka groups, 24 Mataawaka marae and five Māori public health agencies

· stakeholders, such as resident groups, in the local board areas most affected by the proposal

· a list of customers that had previously expressed an interest in the council’s air quality work.

23. Auckland’s local boards were invited to provide written feedback on the statement of proposal and/or to present their feedback at the hearings.

24. The council received 51 submissions and written feedback from 13 local boards.

25. On 9 February 2017, the council’s Regulatory Committee appointed a Hearing Panel to hear submissions, deliberate and make recommendations to the council’s Governing Body (resolution no. REG/2017/6).

26. The Hearing Panel held a public hearing on 20 April 2017, where seven submitters and three local board representatives spoke.

27. On 28 April 2017, the Hearing Panel deliberated in public and agreed on a proposed Air Quality Bylaw for Indoor Domestic Fires 2017 (“proposed bylaw”). A copy of the proposed bylaw is provided in Attachment A.

Overview of the proposed bylaw

The proposed Air Quality Bylaw for Indoor Domestic Fires 2017

28. Table 1 summarises how the proposed bylaw would re-establish the rules for Auckland’s indoor domestic fires that were in the former Regional Plan.

29. The proposed bylaw does not include any new measures. It provides regional rules for indoor domestic fires that replicate the rules in the former Regional Plan.

30. The proposed bylaw would update the definition of Auckland’s urban air quality area from that used in the former Regional Plan, to more accurately reflect Auckland’s growth since 2010. It proposes a new definition for the Auckland Urban Air Quality Area, based on the urban zones in the Unitary Plan and the Auckland Council District Plan: Hauraki and Gulf Islands Section.

31. The proposed bylaw complements the National Wood Burner Standards and the air quality regulations in the Unitary Plan.

32. Outdoor fires are regulated separately through the Auckland Council Outdoor Fire Safety Bylaw 2014 and the Unitary Plan.

Table 1: Summary of the proposed bylaw

	Auckland Council Regional Plan: Air, Land and Water		Proposed Air Quality Bylaw for Indoor Domestic Fires 2017
	Rule description	Rule ref.	In bylaw?	Clause description	Clause ref.
Rules about ALL indoor domestic fires	Discharge rule: Prohibited discharge of contaminants that would have significant impacts on human health and safety and on other properties	4.5.1 (a)-(c) and 4.5.6	ü	Intent same as former Regional Plan; drafting updated	6(1)
	Prohibited fuels: Prohibited burning the following:			Same standards as former Regional Plan
	· wet wood – wood with a moisture content of more than 25 per cent	4.5.10	ü		6(2)(a)
	· any fuel with high sulphur content greater than 0.5 per cent – e.g. high sulphur coal	4.5.10	ü		6(2)(b)
	· treated wood and wood products	4.5.9	ü		6(2)(d)
	· rubbish or green waste	4.5.9	ü		6(2)(c) and (e)
Rules about NEW indoor domestic fires	National Wood Burner Standards ^{^[5]}: The rules in the Regional Plan complemented the National Wood Burner Standards, which only apply to new enclosed wood burners on properties smaller than two hectares (approx. five acres). Enclosed wood burners installed after 1 September 2005 must meet:	Noted in Section 4.5	ü	Same approach as former Regional Plan; the National Wood Burner standards are noted in an explanatory note	Noted at Clause 7
	· design emission standard of less than 1.5 g/kg of fuel burned		ü
	· thermal efficiency standards of at least 65%.		ü
	Use of indoor domestic fires in urban areas: Permitted use of new solid fuel burners in the Urban Air Quality Management Area, but only for appliances that meet the following emission standard:	4.5.7 and 4.5.1 (a)-(c)	ü	Same standards as former Regional Plan, but the council proposes updating the Auckland Urban Air Quality Area ^{^[6]}	7(1)
	· 4 g/kg of fuel burned ^{^[7]}	4.5.7 and 4.5.1 (a)-(c)	ü		7(1)
	Use of indoor domestic fires in rural areas: Permitted use of solid fuel burners in the Rural Air Quality Management Area, subject to the general discharge rules	4.5.5 and 4.5.1 (a)-(c)	ü	Use permitted in rural areas by default, but still subject to general discharge rules in the draft bylaw	6(1) and 6(2)
	New gas or liquid burners: Permitted use of new liquid fuel burners, subject to the general discharge rules	4.5.4 and 4.5.1 (a)-(c)	ü	Same as former Regional Plan	6(1) and 6(2)

Recommended changes to the draft bylaw

33. Following the public deliberations on 28 April 2017, the Hearing Panel recommends two minor changes to the wording of the draft bylaw as notified (Table 2).

34. The two amendments have been incorporated into the proposed Air Quality Bylaw for Indoor Domestic Fires 2017, in Attachment A of the report.

Table 2: Recommended changes to the draft bylaw

Bylaw ref

Wording of draft bylaw as notified:

Change recommended by Hearing Panel on 28 April 2017

Clause 7

Use of indoor domestic fires in Auckland urban air quality area

(1) The owner or occupier of a property in the Auckland urban area containing an indoor domestic fire that burns solid fuel that was installed, replaced or retrofitted (into an existing building) on that property on or after 1 September 2005, may not discharge, or permit to be discharged, contaminants into the air from that solid fuel indoor domestic fire unless:

Use of indoor domestic fires in Auckland urban air quality area

(1) The owner or occupier of a property in the Auckland urban air quality area containing an indoor domestic fire that burns solid fuel that was installed, replaced or retrofitted (into an existing building) on that property on or after 1 September 2005, may not discharge, or permit to be discharged, contaminants into the air from that solid fuel indoor domestic fire unless:

Clause 9

Offences and penalties

(1) A person who fails to comply with this bylaw commits an offence against section 239 of the Local Government Act 2002 and is liable on conviction to the penalties set out in section 242 (4) of the Local Government Act 2002.

Explanatory note: As at 27 February 2017, a penalty in relation to this bylaw relates to an offence for which a person is liable on conviction to a fine not exceeding $20,000.

Offences and penalties

Explanatory note:

As at ~~27 February 2017~~ 25 May 2017, a penalty in relation to this bylaw relates to an offence for which a person is liable on conviction to a fine not exceeding $20,000.

Feedback and deliberations

35. The section below provides a summary of the feedback received and the Hearing Panel’s recommendations. Table 3 outlines the topics considered at the public deliberations and provides the format for the remainder of this report.

Table 3: Deliberation topics

Deliberation topic

Topic 1: Whether to establish a bylaw

Topic 2: Content of the bylaw

Topic 2.1: Introduction and purpose of bylaw

Topic 2.2: Definitions in the bylaw

Topic 2.3: Definitions in the bylaw – Auckland Urban Air Quality area

Topic 2.4: Definitions in the bylaw – Indoor domestic fire

Topic 2.5: Definitions in the bylaw – Nuisance

Topic 2.6: Using indoor domestic fires in Auckland – general conditions

Topic 2.7: Standards for new fireplaces in the Auckland urban air quality area

Topic 2.8: Enforcement, offences and penalties

Topic 3: Other issues raised in feedback

Deliberation Topic 1: Whether to establish a bylaw

Issue

36. There is currently a gap in the regulation of indoor domestic fires in Auckland, as outlined above.

Consultation: Options

37. The council consulted on two options:

· Option A1: No regional rules for indoor domestic fires

· Option A2: Address the regulatory gap by making a bylaw to re-establish regional rules.

38. The council’s preferred approach in the statement of proposal was to make a bylaw (Option A2).

Summary of feedback

39. Of the 51 submissions received:

· 33 (65 per cent) supported the proposed Option A2. These submitters considered a bylaw will help to control pollution, protect the environment and address public nuisance issues when neighbours use their fireplaces

· 15 (29 per cent) did not support the proposal and prefer Option A1. The key reasons submitters gave for this position include:

o emissions from fireplaces are not an issue for Auckland (due to wind, the declining number of fireplaces or the pollution from vehicles)

o fireplaces are more sustainable than some of the alternatives (such as gas heating)

o concerns that the bylaw would ban using older fireplaces or open fires (which is does not), which would mean that people with older fireplaces would face the cost of installing a new fireplace or alternative heating

· three (6 per cent) do not state a preference or do not have a view.

40. Thirteen local boards provided substantive written feedback. Of these, 12 local boards supported the proposal (Option A2).

Staff advice

41. Re-establishing the regional rules through a bylaw would help the council to manage Auckland’s air pollution levels, particularly in winter. This will help to protect Aucklanders’ health.

42. In Auckland the risk of higher levels of air pollution is generally greatest in winter, when smoke from the city’s indoor domestic fires increases.

Hearing Panel recommendations

43. To adopt the proposed bylaw as outlined in Attachment A (Option A2).

Deliberation Topic 2: Content of the bylaw

Topic 2.1: Introduction and purpose of bylaw

Consultation: Draft bylaw

44. As notified for public consultation, the draft bylaw included the following clauses:

· Clause 1 – Title of the bylaw

· Clause 2 – Commencement date of 1 June 2017

· Clause 3 – Application of the bylaw to Auckland

· Clause 4 – Purpose of the bylaw.

Summary of feedback

45. There were no specific submission or local board feedback points on clauses 1-4 of the bylaw.

Staff advice

46. Staff recommend no changes to the bylaw as notified.

47. The proposed commencement date of 1 June 2017 would allow the council to regulate indoor domestic fires over the coming winter.

Hearing Panel recommendations

48. At deliberations, the Hearing Panel asked staff to clarify that outdoor fires are not covered by this bylaw. This is stated in the Explanatory Note to clause 4 and can also be highlighted in communications to support implementation of the bylaw.

49. To endorse Clauses 1-4 of the bylaw as drafted in Attachment A.

Topic 2.2: Definitions in the bylaw - general

Consultation: Draft bylaw

50. Clause 5 defines the key terms that are used in the bylaw.

51. Wherever possible, the bylaw uses definitions provided in relevant legislation.

Summary of feedback

52. Aside from the feedback on the proposed definition of Auckland Urban Air Quality Area (which is covered separately below), there were no specific submission or local board feedback points on the other definitions contained in Clause 5.

Hearing Panel recommendations

53. To endorse Clause 5 of the bylaw as drafted in Attachment A.

Topic 2.3: Definitions in the bylaw – Auckland Urban Air Quality area

Issue

54. The former Regional Plan differentiated between urban and rural areas when setting emission standards for new indoor domestic fires. However, the former Regional Plan’s definition of urban is now outdated, as Auckland’s urban form has changed significantly since 2010.

55. The bylaw seeks to update the definition of Auckland’s Urban Air Quality Area to more accurately reflect Auckland’s current urban form.

56. The Auckland Urban Air Quality Area is defined in Clause 5 of the bylaw.

Consultation: Options

57. The council consulted on three options for defining the Auckland Urban Air Quality Area for the bylaw:

· Option B1: Retain the definition in the former Regional Plan, which defined the urban air quality management area as at 2010.

· Option B2: Use a definition based on the Auckland Urban and Township Air Sheds (“the air sheds”). The air sheds were set by the Ministry for the Environment in 2005 and are used for air quality monitoring, reporting and consenting purposes ^{^[8]}.

· Option B3: Update the definition to reflect the urban zones in Auckland’s Unitary Plan and in the Auckland Council District Plan: Hauraki and Gulf Islands Section. This definition also includes several small urban areas within the Waitakere Ranges that were previously defined as urban air quality management areas, in the former Regional Plan.

58. The council’s preferred approach for public consultation was to update the definition of Auckland Urban Air Quality Area in line with Option B3.

Summary of feedback

59. 30 of the 51 submissions supported one of the options proposed for defining the Auckland Air Quality Management Area. Of these:

· twenty-three (77 per cent) supported the proposed option (Option B3)

· six supported the urban air quality management area used in the former Regional Plan (Option B1)

· one supported the use of the Urban and Township Air Sheds (Option B2).

60. Twenty-one submitters did not note their support for any of the options or chose not to comment on this issue.

61. Twelve of the 13 local boards that gave feedback supported the Option B3.

62. One local board did not support the creation of a bylaw and therefore did not comment on any of the Auckland Urban Air Quality Area options.

Staff advice

63. The term Auckland Urban Air Quality Area is key to the interpretation of Clause 7 of the bylaw - Use of indoor domestic fires in Auckland Urban Air Quality Area.

64. Properties in the proposed Auckland Urban Air Quality Area would have to meet urban standards for new fireplaces (noted in Clause 7 of the bylaw), but those standards would not be applied retrospectively to existing fireplaces.

65. Option B3 most accurately reflects Auckland’s current urban form. It aligns well with the intent of the former Regional Plan and would be the easiest to keep up-to-date as the city continues to develop.

66. The proposed Auckland Urban Air Quality Area in the bylaw includes approximately 5639 additional properties that were not included in the urban air quality management area of the former Regional Plan. Approximately 90 percent of those additional properties are less than two hectares in size, meaning that they already have to meet the National Wood Burner Standards when installing a new enclosed wood burner.

67. The 5639 additional properties are mostly within six local board areas where there has been significant urban development over the last few years:

· Franklin

· Henderson-Massey

· Rodney

· Upper Harbour

· Waiheke

· Waitakere Ranges.

68. The additional properties include several residential properties on Rakino Island that are zoned as “tr” Island Residential 1 (traditional residential), under the Auckland Council District Plan: Hauraki and Gulf Islands Section. They were not part of the urban air quality management area used in the former Regional Plan, but fall within the Auckland Urban Air Quality Area because of their island residential zoning. They are small residential properties, similar to some areas on Waiheke Island.

69. Great Barrier Island was not part of the urban air quality management area used in the former Regional Plan and is not included in the proposed Auckland Urban Air Quality Area. Great Barrier Island is part of the outer islands of the Auckland Council District Plan: Hauraki and Gulf Islands Section, where different planning zones apply.

70. Clause 7 of the bylaw includes transitional provisions for properties that would be re-categorised as urban under the proposed definition of Auckland Urban Air Quality Area (see Topic 2.7).

Hearing Panel recommendations

71. To endorse the definition of Auckland Urban Air Quality Area in Clause 5 of the bylaw as drafted in Attachment A, which reflects Option B3.

Topic 2.4: Definitions in the bylaw - Indoor domestic fire

Consultation: Draft bylaw

72. Clause 5 of the bylaw defines an indoor domestic fire as an indoor combustion appliance with a chimney or flue; the definition excludes an indoor combustion appliance located in a commercial premises (detailed in Attachment A).

Summary of feedback

73. Although there were no specific submission or local board feedback points on this topic, the Hearing Panel sought clarification on what specifically would be covered by the definition of indoor domestic fire.

Staff advice

74. The term indoor domestic fire is key to the interpretation of Clauses 4, 6 and 7 of the bylaw.

75. Staff confirmed that buildings that are not commercial in nature would be covered by this bylaw. This includes:

· residential dwellings

· buildings such as community halls, club rooms and marae.

76. Staff also confirmed that the bylaw would not apply to:

· indoor fireplaces in commercial properties

· cooking fires in commercial properties such as wood-fired pizza ovens

· outdoor fires

· air pollution from other sources such as vehicles and industry.

Hearing Panel recommendations

77. To endorse the definition of indoor domestic fires in Clause 5 of the bylaw as drafted in Attachment A.

78. That the scope of the bylaw be clarified in the communications developed to support the bylaw. Information should also be made available to make people aware about clean burning practices generally.

Topic 2.5: Definitions in the bylaw – Nuisance

Consultation: Draft bylaw

79. Clause 5 of the bylaw defines nuisance as an unreasonable interference with the peace, comfort or convenience of any person, and includes adverse impacts on human health or property due to the generation of noxious, dangerous, offensive or objectionable odours, particulate matter, dust, fumes, smoke, ash or visible emissions.

Summary of feedback

80. There were no specific submission or local board feedback points on the wording of the definition. However, there was feedback supporting the intent of the bylaw to address nuisance issues (noted in Topic 2.6).

Staff advice

81. The term nuisance is key to the interpretation of Clause 4 and Clause 6 of the bylaw.

82. The potential impacts of air pollution noted in the bylaw’s definition of nuisance are consistent with the impacts identified in the national air quality regulations and in Auckland’s Unitary Plan.

Hearing Panel recommendations

83. To endorse the definition of nuisance in Clause 5 of the bylaw as drafted in Attachment A.

Topic 2.6: Using indoor domestic fires in Auckland – general conditions

Issue

84. Indoor domestic fires sometimes cause a nuisance for neighbouring properties due to smoke and contaminants.

Consultation: Draft bylaw

85. The former Regional Plan regulated this issue through several rules, which are replicated in Clause 6 of the bylaw.

86. Clause 6 prohibits:

· Discharging contaminants that would have significant impacts on human health and safety and on other properties

· Burning certain fuels, such as:

o wet wood – wood with a moisture content of more than 25 per cent

o any fuel with high sulphur content greater than 0.5 per cent – e.g. high sulphur coal

o treated wood and wood products

o rubbish or green waste.

Summary of feedback

87. Of the submitters that supported the proposal, the key reasons were:

· the bylaw would control pollution and protect the environment

· there can be a public nuisance issue when neighbours use their fireplaces.

88. Several submitters suggested that the council should ban burning all coal.

89. Several submitters noted the importance of public education about using a fireplace, to ensure people use the right fuels and dry firewood.

90. Of the submitters that did not support the draft bylaw, the key reasons provided were:

· emissions from fireplaces do not contribute to air pollution, as the use of fireplaces is decreasing and Auckland is windy

· vehicular emissions are more polluting than indoor fireplaces.

Staff advice

91. The bylaw replicates the rules in the former Regional Plan; it does not propose any new measures.

92. The standards in Clause 6 would apply to all types of indoor domestic fires and to all parts of Auckland.

93. Re-establishing these rules would help the council to manage smoke from indoor domestic fires and protect Aucklanders’ health.

Hearing Panel recommendations

94. To endorse Clause 6 of the bylaw as drafted in Attachment A.

Topic 2.7: Standards for new fireplaces in the Auckland Urban Air Quality Area

Issue

95. New indoor domestic fires installed in the Auckland Urban Air Quality Area must meet a stated emission standard to minimise their impact on neighbouring properties.

96. Auckland’s regional standards for new indoor domestic fires are more restrictive for the city’s urban areas than for rural areas because urban properties are closer together.

97. Auckland’s regional standards complement the National Wood Burner Standards, which apply to new enclosed wood burners on all urban and rural properties less than two hectares (see Attachment B).

Consultation: Draft bylaw

98. The former Regional Plan regulated new indoor domestic fires through several rules, which are replicated in Clause 7 of the bylaw.

99. Clause 7 specifies the regional emission standard for indoor domestic fires in the Auckland Urban Air Quality Area (a limit of no more than 4 g of particles per kg of fuel burned).

100. Clause 7 of the draft bylaw includes transitional provisions for properties that would be re-categorised as urban under the proposed definition of Auckland Urban Air Quality Area. The provisions include a dispensation for properties that are granted a building consent for the installation of a new indoor domestic fire before the bylaw comes into effect.

101. The explanatory note to clause 7 explains the National Wood Burner Standards.

Summary of feedback

102. Several submitters had concerns that urban standards for new fireplaces would be applied retrospectively to existing/older fireplaces. However, Clause 7 sets standards for new fireplaces only.

103. There was support for the proposed transitional arrangements in Clause 7, particularly for properties re-classified as urban in the proposed definition of the Auckland Urban Air Quality Area.

104. There were several submission points suggesting alternative criteria for triggering the National Wood Burner Standards, such as proximity to other dwellings. Rural dwellings are sometimes quite close to each other, in spite of large property sizes overall.

Staff advice

105. The bylaw replicates the rules in the former Regional Plan. The bylaw does not propose any new measures.

106. Clause 7 of the bylaw requires properties in the proposed Auckland Urban Air Quality Area to meet urban standards for new fireplaces. Those standards would not be applied retrospectively to existing/older fireplaces.

107. Auckland Council is required to give effect to the National Wood Burner Standards that apply to properties less than two hectares. Any changes to the National Wood Burner Standards will be managed by central government.

Hearing Panel recommendations

108. To make a minor editorial amendment to the notified version of Clause 7 (noted in Table 2).

109. To endorse Clause 7 of the bylaw as drafted in Attachment A.

110. In its communication and education initiatives, the council needs to make it clear that both national and regional standards apply to new indoor domestic fires. If a property is in the Auckland Urban Air Quality Area, it may need to comply with the National Wood Burner Standards as well.

Topic 2.8: Enforcement, offences and penalties

Consultation: Draft bylaw

111. Clauses 8 and 9 of the bylaw state the council’s enforcement powers under the Local Government Act 2002. These are standard clauses in all council bylaws.

Summary of feedback

112. Five submitters stated it is important that the bylaw is appropriately enforced, particularly where smoke is a nuisance.

113. Three of the 13 local boards were unclear or had concerns about how effectively the new bylaw would be enforced.

Staff advice

114. The enforcement approaches used for the rules in the former Regional Plan would continue if the bylaw is adopted (see Table 5).

115. There could be cost implications if the council seeks to increase its level of enforcement.

Hearing Panel recommendations

116. To make a minor editorial amendment to the explanatory note to Clause 9 (noted in Table 2).

117. To endorse Clause 8 and Clause 9 of the bylaw as drafted in Attachment A.

Table 5: Applying the rules for Auckland’s indoor domestic fires

Issue	Enforcement approach for former Regional Plan	Equivalent clause in the bylaw	Future enforcement of bylaw clauses
The former Regional Plan regulated smoke and contaminants from indoor domestic fires	Rules were enforced by the council’s enforcement officers, in response to complaints received by council (e.g. through the Pollution Hotline)	Clause 6	No changes anticipated - same enforcement approach as applied under the former Regional Plan
The former Regional Plan set regional standards for new indoor domestic fires	The regional standards were applied through the council’s building consent process. Only compliant appliances were granted approval	Clause 7	No changes anticipated – will continue to be enforced through the building consent process
Applying the National Wood Burner Standards for new enclosed wood burners on sites less than two hectares (approx. five acres)	The National Wood Burner Standards are applied through the council’s building consent process. Only compliant appliances are granted approval.	Noted in an explanatory note to Clause 7	The national standards are separate, so are unaffected by the expiry of the former Regional Plan or the adoption of a bylaw The council continues to apply the standards through the building consent process.

Deliberation Topic 3: Other issues raised in feedback

118. The submitters and local boards raised several issues that were determined to be out of scope for the proposed bylaw, but are relevant to managing Auckland’s air quality. These are summarised below:

· The impacts on human health of air pollution, particularly from small airborne particulates, are significant and increase with the level of pollution

· The council could consider further measures for managing emissions from indoor domestic fires, such as banning the burning of coal and phasing out the use of older fireplaces and solid-fuel open fires

· Several submissions noted that if the council introduces new restrictions on older fireplaces in the future, the changes should be phased in gradually to allow households time to replace their old fireplaces

· Some submitters noted the importance of education about the appropriate use of indoor domestic fires, including using the right fuels and dry wood; and about the impacts of smoky vehicles.

119. Attachment C provides more detail about these issues and the Hearing Panel’s responses.

120. Staff will report to the Environment and Community Committee later this year about broader air quality policy issues for Auckland. This will provide an opportunity to address the above submission points.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

121. Local boards were invited to provide written feedback on the statement of proposal and/or to present their feedback at the hearings.

122. In order to facilitate this, staff presented an overview of the statement of proposal at local board cluster workshops on 20 and 27 February 2017. Staff also attended one local board workshop and one local board meeting on request.

123. Thirteen local boards provided substantive written feedback on the proposal. These local boards are:

· Albert Eden

· Devonport-Takapuna

· Franklin

· Great Barrier

· Henderson-Massey

· Kaipātiki

· Manurewa

· Orakei

· Ōtara-Papatoetoe

· Papakura

· Puketāpapa

· Upper Harbour

· Waitematā

124. Feedback from the local boards is summarised under the relevant deliberations topics in the body of this report.

Māori impact statement

125. The Schedule of Issues of Significance to Māori in Tāmaki Makaurau highlights the principle of kaitiakitanga, the exercise of guardianship in relation to nature and environmental assets in Auckland.

126. As part of the initial consultation on air quality issues undertaken in 2014, staff consulted with Mana Whenua at a hui held at Orewa. Feedback from the hui included the following:

· support for the control of indoor domestic fires to meet the National Air Quality Standards

· concern that if Auckland’s air shed is polluted, the region risks additional restrictions on the use of indoor fires (determined by the National Air Quality Standards)

· concern that if the use of old fireplaces was banned, Auckland’s lower socio-economic groups would be hit hardest

· comments that any regulatory restrictions that impact on lower socio-economic groups, should be complemented with grants and dispensations to mitigate potential hardship.

127. The proposed bylaw gives effect to several aspects of this feedback. The bylaw would continue to manage indoor domestic fires, so that Auckland’s air quality complies with the National Air Quality Standards, while allowing Aucklanders to continue using fireplaces as a means of home heating.

Implementation

128. If the bylaw is adopted, the council could implement it immediately.

129. The proposed commencement date in Clause 4 of the bylaw is 1 June 2017, which would allow the council to regulate indoor domestic fires over winter 2017.

130. The council’s existing enforcement approaches can be maintained within current enforcement budgets. As explained in Table 5 in this report, the enforcement procedures for the bylaw would be essentially the same as for the former Regional Plan.

131. It is recommended that the responsibility for enforcing the bylaw be formally delegated to Auckland Council’s Chief Executive, who would sub-delegate specific responsibilities to officers in the relevant departments.

132. If the bylaw is adopted, staff will update the council’s Delegations Register to:

· reflect update the change in approach from the former Regional Plan to the bylaw

· document the council departments responsible for enforcing the bylaw.

133. If the bylaw is adopted, staff will prepare guidelines for the bylaw, which will be available on the council’s website along with the bylaw itself. Guidelines would assist members of the public and council staff to understand how the bylaw works.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Air Quality Bylaw for Indoor Domestic Fires 2017	73
b ⇩	Regional and national standards for indoor domestic fires	91
c ⇩	Other issues raised in feedback on the draft bylaw	93

Signatories

Author	Cr Dick Quax, Chair Hearing Panel
Authoriser	Stephen Town - Chief Executive

Governing Body

25 May 2017

Recommendation for Appointments to the Youth Advisory Panel for the 2016-2019 term

File No.: CP2017/09036

Purpose

1. To note the selection process for appointments to the Youth Advisory Panel for the 2016-2019 term.

Executive summary

2. To give effect to its legislative responsibilities and to ensure a mechanism for meaningful engagement with diverse communities such as youth, on 10 November 2016 the Governing Body established a Youth Advisory Panel with 21 members, one from each of the 21 local board areas (GB/2016/51).

3. Council staff worked with young people from local youth councils and youth groups between November 2016 and January 2017 to co-design the selection process for the Youth Advisory Panel. Allowing for a ‘youth voice’ and perspective in the process was a common and important theme of these discussions and a citizen jury approach was implemented.

4. On 8 March 2017, more than 70 young Aucklanders aged between 14 and 24 participated in a Youth Citizens’ Jury and co-designed recommendations for the make-up of council’s Youth Advisory Panel. The list of recommendations is in Attachment A. Most of these recommendations were adopted for the panel selection process. Specifically the youth jury recommended that members should be selected rather than elected.

5. Youth also co-designed the selection process, which included online applications, a selection panel and interview process. The council called for applications for the 21 positions over two weeks, and received more than 250 applications. 58 shortlisted candidates went through the selection and interview process with a selection panel comprising council staff, community members and young people. 21 final candidates are now proposed for appointment.

6. A report requesting the Governing Body’s endorsement of the 21 candidates is included in the confidential section of the Governing Body agenda.

Recommendations

That the Governing Body:

a) note the selection process for appointments to the Youth Advisory Panel for the 2016-2019 term.

b) note that it will consider recommendations for appointments to the Youth Advisory Panel after the public has been excluded.

Comments

The Governing Body established a Youth Advisory Panel for the 2016-2019 term

7. The Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009 sets out that the role of the mayor is to “ensure there is effective engagement between the Auckland Council and the people of Auckland, including those too young to vote.” Auckland Council’s Youth Advisory Panel is one of the council mechanisms that gives effect to this legislative provision.

8. On 10 November 2016, the Governing Body established a Youth Advisory Panel with 21 members, one from each of the 21 Auckland local board areas for the 2016-2019 term of the council (GB/2016/51).

9. As one of the council’s engagement mechanisms with the young people of Auckland, the Youth Advisory Panel will advise the Governing Body and the staff on council’s regional policies, strategies and any matters of particular interest to young people.

10. In this term, the main policies and strategies the panel will consider include the Auckland Plan refresh, the long-term plan, annual plans and council’s key initiatives aligned with the forward work programme of the Environment and Community Committee.

11. On 24 March 2017, the Governing Body agreed changes to the terms of reference which included changes in the frequency of Youth Advisory Panel meetings from ten to seven meetings per annum including workshops, to compensate for the increased number of panel members to 21 from the initial staff proposal of eight (GB/2017/31). This means there will be three meetings and no more than four workshops per financial year, so as to ensure that the panel costs remain within budget.

Youth co-design of selection process

12. Following the Governing Body resolution on 10 November 2016, staff engaged with youth council members and local youth from November 2016 to January 2017 to discuss the selection process of the panel. The participants recommended that the council engage with more young Aucklanders through a youth citizens’ jury.

13. An oversight group guided staff through the development of a suitable process for young people. The oversight group included senior council and council-controlled organisation staff and council staff specialising in youth engagement. A councils ethics committee was also formed to advise on an appropriate process for engaging with young people.

14. On 8 March 2017, the Youth Citizens’ Jury 2017 was held at the Auckland War Memorial Museum. The one-day event brought together more than 70 young people aged between 14 and 24 from across Auckland to recommend a regional selection process for the panel. Councillors Fa'anānā Efeso Collins and Richard Hills attended the event and local board members were also invited to observe the discussions and process of the jury.

15. Jury participants learnt more about the role of the Youth Advisory Panel and made recommendations on the roles and responsibilities, selection process and the make-up of the panel. The list of recommendations is in Attachment A of this report. Main recommendations included:

· Youth Advisory Panel members should be selected rather than elected

· interviews will be competency-based

· applicants must live, work, study and or have meaningful connections to the local board area they want to apply for

· application forms should be available online

· the council will form selection panels for the West, South, Central and North sub-regions with the potential addition of the Waiheke and/or Great Barrier Islands

· each selection panel should be made up of between three and five people, who are council staff, community members with an extensive experience in youth development and former Youth Advisory Panel members or young people with a good understanding of youth issues who will not apply for the panel this term.

16. The participants also suggested the selection criteria should include candidates with an:

· understanding of the roles and functions of the Youth Advisory Panel

· understanding of the issues young people are facing in Auckland

· understanding of the Te Tiriti O Waitangi

· ability to work as a team.

17. These recommendations formed the basis of the selection process followed by the council.

Application process and shortlisting

18. Online applications for the panel were open for two weeks from 4 to 17 April 2017.

19. The vacancies were promoted on council websites and social media and through youth networks. Youth agencies and local youth groups also promoted the opportunity

20. In total over 250 applications were received for the 21 positions.

21. Six council staff, nine community members and seven young people made up the selection panel based on the recommendations from the Youth Citizens’ Jury.

22. All candidates went through the same process. Unsuccessful candidates who did not get shortlisted were informed by email between 19 and 25 April 2017.

Selection of 21 final candidates

23. Using a consistent set of questions, the selection panel interviewed 58 applicants. Based on the criteria developed with the Youth Citizen Jury the selection panel focused on candidates’ understanding on the role of the Youth Advisory Panel, their ability to offer advice and to work as a team.

24. Following the interviews the selection panel members discussed the candidates’ competencies and recommended 21 candidates. Staff called and informed each of all the unsuccessful candidates of the interview outcomes.

25. Liaison Councillor Fa'anānā Efeso Collins has recommended the candidates to the Mayor. The Mayor considered the recommended candidates and is proposing to the Governing Body to endorse the membership of the Youth Advisory Panel as per the confidential item on this agenda.

26. In line with council policy the proposed candidates will complete a Ministry of Justice Criminal Conviction History Check.

Recruitment costs

27. The total amount of the selection process is approximately $19,000, which includes costs for the Youth Citizens Jury ($12,000), staff costs and advertising. This is within the operational budget for the advisory panels.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

28. Local boards expect the Youth Advisory Panel to strengthen ties with local youth, particularly local youth councils.

Māori impact statement

29. The Youth Advisory Panel has historically been guided by I Am Auckland: the Children and Young People's Strategic Action Plan. Goal seven of this plan is rangatahi tū rangatira (all Rangatahi will thrive). In line with this, the previous panel sought representation from rangatahi on the panel and worked closely with Te Ohu Mana Rangatahi to support leadership of Rangatahi Roopu.

30. The strategic review of the I Am Auckland plan noted that this outcome had the fewest initiatives attributed to it and also the fewest strategic documents, local board plans or funding criteria aligned to it. It also highlighted that there is an opportunity to do more in this area. One way to give effect to our obligations is to work towards young Māori having a dedicated voice in council

31. To give effect to our obligations under the Treaty of Waitangi, an understanding of the Treaty of Waitangi was one of the key desired competencies in the selection process. The selection panel also recommends that, once appointed, the Youth Advisory Panel members be given training to enhance their understanding on the Treaty of Waitangi.

32. Rangatahi participated in the Youth Citizens Jury to share their views and voices on the make-up of the Youth Advisory Panel. No specific engagement with Māori was undertaken for the purposes of this report or selection process.

33. Of the 21 proposed candidates four identify themselves as Māori or of Māori descent.

Implementation

34. Staff are presenting a report with a list of the proposed candidates to the Governing Body. The report will remain in confidence until the Governing Body endorses the recommendations and the successful candidates confirm their acceptance of the appointment.

35. An induction for the members of the panel will be held in mid-June 2017.

36. The Youth Advisory Panel’s meetings, annual summit and support are planned to be resourced from within existing operational budgets.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Recommendations from Youth Citizens Jury 2017	101

Signatories

Author

Austin Kim - Principal Advisor Panels

Authorisers

Marguerite Delbet - General Manager Democracy Services

Phil Wilson - Governance Director

Stephen Town - Chief Executive

[1] The Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill (No 2) is being reported back in June and may pass in this term of government. It would enable council led reorganisation proposals under a simpler process

[2] Terms of Reference: Governance Framework review Political Working Party, 15 February 2017

[3] The national air quality standards are specified in the Resource Management (National Environmental Standards for Air Quality) Regulations 2004.

[4] The national standards for new wood burners are set in the Resource Management (National Environmental Standards for Air Quality) Regulations 2004; two hectares is approximately five acres.

[5] Regulations 22-24 of the Resource Management (National Environmental Standards for Air Quality) Regulations 2004 state the national standards for new enclosed wood burners.

[6] Clauses 7(1)(b) and (c) of the draft bylaw include transitional provisions for properties that are affected by any change in the definition of urban for the purposes of the bylaw.

[7] For new enclosed wood burners on properties less than two hectares, the national emission standard trumps the regional emission standard, as the former is more restrictive. This means that new enclosed wood burners in Auckland properties less than two hectares must meet the national emission standard (limit) of 1.5 g/kg of fuel burnt.

[8] The air sheds are determined through the Ministry for the Environment’s gazetting process.

Mayor	Hon Phil Goff, CNZM, JP
Deputy Mayor	Bill Cashmore
Councillors	Cr Dr Cathy Casey	Cr Dick Quax
	Cr Ross Clow	Cr Greg Sayers
	Cr Fa’anana Efeso Collins	Cr Desley Simpson, JP
	Cr Linda Cooper, JP	Cr Sharon Stewart, QSM
	Cr Chris Darby	Cr Sir John Walker, KNZM, CBE
	Cr Alf Filipaina	Cr Wayne Walker
	Cr Hon Christine Fletcher, QSO	Cr John Watson
	Cr Richard Hills
	Cr Penny Hulse
	Cr Denise Lee
	Cr Mike Lee
	Cr Daniel Newman, JP

Author	Sarndra O'Toole - Team Leader – Governance Advisors
Authoriser	Stephen Town - Chief Executive