|
Papakura Local
Board
03 May 2017
|
|
Allocation
of encumbrance funds within Opaheke Park, Papakura
File No.: CP2017/07275
Purpose
1. To
seek approval for the allocation of encumbrance funds within Opaheke Park,
Papakura.
Executive
summary
2. Auckland
Council and Motleon Ltd have an agreement to discharge the encumbrance over the
former Papakura Golf Course which obligates Motleon Ltd to pay $1.75 million to
council upon approval of resource consent for residential development of the
land.
3. The
encumbrance monies can only be spent within Opaheke Park and the Papakura Local
Board has the responsibility for their allocation.
4. The Development Agreement between Motleon Ltd and Auckland Council
(September 2016) states that the decision to be made by the Local Board is
whether or not the $1.75 million will be spent on the northern park works. If
the Local Board decides not to spend the funds in the northern area, the Board
need not go further and make a decision (at this time) on how those funds are
to be otherwise spent.
5. Taking
into account the Development Agreement and the direction provided by the Local
Board at the April 2017 workshop, three options are proposed
for consideration:
• Option 1 – allocate the encumbrance funds towards the
delivery of the Opaheke Park Concept Plan (August 2016) for
development of the northern area
• Option 2 – do not
allocate the encumbrance funds towards development of the northern area, reduce
the scope of the Opaheke Park Concept Plan (August 2016) to
meet the budget, and either;
A) allocate
the encumbrance funds towards the development of a multi-purpose facility in
the southern area; or
B)
place the encumbrance funds in a
holding account until a decision is made about their future allocation within
Opaheke Park.
• Option
3 – allocate a portion of the encumbrance fund to the northern area
6. Motleon
Ltd has offered an additional $250,000 to be spent on the clubroom facilities
should the Local Board allocate the full $1.75 million to the development of
the northern portion of the park.
7. The Local Board’s decision on the allocation of the
encumbrance funds within Opaheke Park is now sought. Staff support Option 1 as
it will enable the full implementation of the approved concept plan (aligned
with the community expectations), realising the vision to develop a multifunctional suburban park to serve the current and future
needs of the wider Papakura community.
|
Recommendations
That the Papakura Local Board:
a) Approve
the total allocation of the encumbrance funds ($1,75M) to be paid by Motleon
Ltd, towards the implementation of the Opaheke Park Concept Plan prepared by
Surface Design Inc, dated August 2016.
b) Accept the additional contribution of $250,000 from Motleon Ltd
towards the development of a multi-purpose facility within the southern
portion of Opaheke Park adjacent to the sports fields, and request that the
Development Agreement dated September 2016 be amended to reflect this.
|
Comments
8. In
1993 the Papakura District Council placed a 999 year encumbrance on the
Papakura Golf Course when the property was sold, limiting
the use of the land to a public golf course.
9. Motleon Ltd (Motleon) purchased the former
golf course and the adjoining property at 117 Opaheke Road in
2013, and requested that the encumbrance be released to enable residential
development.
10. In
2014 Auckland Council and Motleon executed an Encumbrance Release Agreement. The encumbrance was released for an agreed sum of $1.75 million on
the basis that good quality public space and amenities
are provided for the local community and that a high quality residential
development takes place.
11. The
encumbrance funds are ring fenced for use within the adjoining Opaheke Park and
are subject to resource consent being obtained for the residential development.
Resource consent was granted for the Bellfield Special Housing Area in December
2016.
12. The Papakura Local Board has the responsibility for the
allocation of the encumbrance funds.
Development
of Opaheke Park
13. Opaheke
Park is envisioned as a multi-functional suburb park that will service and provide
a focus for the growing Papakura community.
Northern area
14. A
concept plan for development of the northern area of Opaheke Park was publicly
consulted and approved by the Papakura Local Board in August 2016 (refer to
Appendix A for the approved concept plan).
15. The intent of the concept
plan is to provide a diverse range of informal activities and experiences that complement
the existing sporting activities located in the southern area of the park.
16. The
main components of the concept plan include;
• the provision of a
mix of passive and active recreational opportunities
• an extensive
pathway network
• enhancement of
the parks ecological values through extensive planting
• educational
opportunities around stormwater management, culture and ecology.
17. The
estimated cost to implement the concept plan is $6 million. The development
will substantially be funded by Motleon through a contribution of $4.25
million.
18. The
Development Agreement between Auckland Council and Motleon (September 2016)
reflects this development and outlines the obligations of both parties.
Southern area
19. In 2013 eight sportsfields and a parking area were developed within
the southern area of Opaheke Park.
20. In October 2015 the Local Board approved the development of concept
designs for the staged development of changing rooms/toilets and clubrooms.
Concept plans for the changing rooms and toilets were approved by the Local
Board in April 2016.
21. Funding
for the development of the changing rooms and toilets has been allocated
through the Sport Infrastructure and Development budget (SID). It is
anticipated that the consent will be lodged by the end of 2017 with
construction commencing in 2018.
22. Design
work is also underway to sand carpet up to five of the
existing sportsfields, install lighting for four fields. SID funding has
been allocated to undertake this work. Implementation is
anticipated in 2018/19 (this may be brought forward to align with the construction
of the changing rooms and toilets).
Options
for the allocation of the encumbrance funds
23. The Development Agreement states that the Council will notify the
Developer whether or not Council (through the Local Board) will contribute the
amount of the encumbrance payment as a contribution towards the cost of
undertaking the park works in the northern area of the park. It also states
that if the Council will not contribute the amount of the encumbrance payment
then the scope of the park works in the northern area will be reduced to
reflect the budget.
24. This
means if the Local Board decides not to spend the encumbrance funds in the
northern area, the Board need not go further and make a decision (at this time)
on how those funds are to be otherwise spent.
25. At
a workshop in March 2017, the Local Board expressed an interest in exploring
the potential of developing a multi-purpose facility that can service future
clubs and provide opportunities for wider community use.
26. Taking
into account the Development Agreement and the direction provided by the Local Board
in the March workshop, three options are proposed for the
allocation of the encumbrance funds, for consideration:
• Option 1 – allocate the encumbrance funds towards the
delivery of the Opaheke Park Concept Plan (August 2016) for
development of the northern area
• Option 2 – do not allocate
the encumbrance funds towards development of the northern area, reduce the
scope of the Opaheke Park Concept Plan (August 2016) to
meet the budget, and either;
A) allocate
the encumbrance funds towards the development of a multi-purpose facility; or
B) place
the encumbrance funds in a holding account until a decision is made about their
future allocation within Opaheke Park.
• Option
3 – allocate part of the encumbrance funds to the northern area
Option 1
27. The estimated cost to implement the concept plan for the northern
area of the park is $6 million. Motleon are contributing $4.25 million. The
allocation of the $1.75 million encumbrance funds would therefore make up the
balance.
28. Motleon
has offered an additional $250,000 to be spent on the clubroom facilities
should the Local Board allocate the full $1.75 million to the development of
the northern portion of the park (refer Attachment B for a copy of the letter
from Motleon). The requirement is that the money is used in a reasonable period
of time, three years is suggested.
29. Considerations relating to Option 1;
• Enables
the development of the northern area to be completed in accordance with the
adopted concept plan, meeting community expectations
• Realises
the vision to develop a multifunctional suburban park to serve
the current and future needs of the wider Papakura community
• Delivers a range of informal activities and experiences that
complement the existing sporting activities
• Enhances ecological and educative values
Option 2
30. This option will require a reduction in the scope of the
park works in the northern area to reflect the budget. The Development
Agreement states the intent that a reduction in the planting will form the
primary basis for the reduction in scope.
31. Council staff and Motleon have worked together to explore
a range of options. Two alternatives are proposed for consideration (refer to
Attachment C for plans displaying the alternatives). In line with the
Development Agreement a reduction in planting forms the basis of both
proposals. The removal of some discrete elements, which may be funded at a
later date, are also proposed, so that some planting may be retained for
amenity and structural purposes.
• Alternative A - includes removal of the majority of the large
grade trees and upland bush (including that around the hillocks), reduced
riparian margin planting (achieved through wider spacings between plants), and
removal of the lookout tower and toilet
• Alternative B – includes removal of
the majority of the large grade trees, the central boardwalk, lookout
tower and toilet. The remainder of the planting would stay as per the original
plan.
32. Considerations
relating to Option 2:
• The Local Board will have to determine
whether it is sufficiently aware of the community’s views and preferences
in relation to the proposed design, or whether further engagement with the
community is required. Significant changes to the adopted concept plan (such as
the removal of key features) may require further engagement
• The overall integrity of the concept plan could be impacted
• Reduction
in landscaping would impact the overall amenity and environmental values of the
park. The large grade trees in particular provide an important structural
element creating the different activity ‘rooms’. Removal of
large areas of proposed planting could increase operational costs as these
areas would need to be grassed and mowed instead
• The
toilet services the adventure play area. Its removal would mean that users
would have to travel to the toilets located in the southern park area. The
opening hours of this facility would need to be considered
• The
central boardwalk provides a direct all-weather link from the residential
development through the park to the sporting area. It is a key feature of the
design
• The
lookout tower provides an opportunity for users to enjoy views across the park
in all directions and creates a unique element for users
• The
affected elements could be staged for future development. Appropriate funding
would need to be secured
Option 2A
33. In
line with the Local Board’s request at the March workshop the development
of a multi-purpose facility has been considered. An assumption has been made
that the main focus of this facility will be to service the clubs using the
park, while also providing opportunities for wider community use.
34. A
concept plan for generic clubrooms (151m2) was developed in Feb 2016.
The intention was for the clubrooms to be located above the changing rooms
which will be engineered to accommodate them. Staff consider that a facility of
this size would not adequately serve the needs of users at a park of this
scale. No budget has been allocated for this development.
35. The
multi-purpose facility would need to be substantially larger than 151m2 to
accommodate the addition of meeting room(s), a larger function space with a
flexible design, kitchen and potential office space. It is expected that
construction costs for a fit for purpose facility will considerably exceed the
encumbrance amount. As clubrooms do not meet the criteria for SID funding, an
alternative source of funding will need to be secured.
36. Considerations
relating to Option 2A;
• Current
use of the sportsfields is relatively low. The Papakura Rugby Football Club and
Drury United Cricket Club use the park for training purposes and games during
week day evenings and during the day on Saturdays. It is anticipated that
development of the changing rooms and toilets, field upgrades and increased residential
development should result in an increase in usage.
• The
Sportsfields Guidelines recommend that new sports parks be allocated after a
“Registration of Interest” process. While two clubs have expressed
an interest in being located at Opaheke Park (Papakura Rugby Football Club and
Drury United Cricket Club,) this process has not been initiated.
• A
process to determine the need and demand for a multi-purpose facility, its
status as a network priority and whether Opaheke Park is the appropriate location
is required. This will take approximately 18 months to complete. The allocation of use of the existing sportsfields should be a
precursor.
• Based on the assumption that the
multi-purpose facility will be largely used by the domiciled clubs, it has been
customary for the clubs to initiate the process, and fund the development with seed funding from the Council to enable the preliminary stages
to be carried out. Recent examples include the Rongamai Sports Centre at
Rongamai Park, Flatbush and Bledisloe Park Sports Centre at Bledisloe Park,
Pukekohe. Both of these developments were supported with seed funding from the
Council which in turn leveraged third party funding. One known departure is the
Manurewa Sports Centre, a multi-sport development at Mountfort Park, Manurewa.
This was a council project undertaken prior to amalgamation.
• Management
of the multi-purpose facility will need to be considered. Management of such
facilities varies throughout Auckland. In most cases an umbrella entity
undertakes the management of the shared facility on behalf of user groups.
Experience tells us that such sporting partnerships are more likely to succeed
if a shared vision is agreed and the umbrella entity created prior to any
facility development.
• The
contribution by Motleon of $250,000 is contingent upon the full allocation of
the encumbrance monies to the northern park development. If this was supported
by the Local Board, there are a number of options that can be explored. This
includes the development of a shared community meeting room within the changing
facility which could service park users prior to the development of a larger
multi-purpose facility, or it could be used as seed funding to support the
establishment of the multi-purpose facility.
37. To
determine the feasibility of developing a multi-purpose facility the following
process to guide the investigation and implementation of responses is
recommended:
• High
level assessment
• Needs
Assessment - analysis of strategic context, demand drivers, current levels of
provision and financial situation; engagement with community, iwi and
stakeholders; analysis of options
• Feasibility
– Identify facility requirements, evaluate options, conduct financial
assessment and identify preferred option
• Initial
concept design and business case – includes stakeholder and iwi
consultation
• Project
planning - Detailed design and project execution plan, secure funding, obtain
consents, procurement
• Execution
and delivery - Implementation of the execution plan
• Evaluation - Assessment and review of project performance
Option 2B
38. This
option will result in the encumbrance funds being placed in a holding account
until such time a decision is made by the Local Board about their future
allocation within the southern area of the park.
39. If
this option is supported, staff will review the overall development, identify
and scope discrete projects, and recommend priorities for use of the funds for
consideration by the Local Board.
Option
3
40. The
Local Board has the discretion to allocate all, some or none of the encumbrance
funds towards implementation of the concept plan for the northern area. This
option involves allocating a portion of the funds to the northern park works.
41. If
this option is supported, further decisions would need to be made about which
elements are included in the concept plan depending on the amount of funding
that is made available by the Local Board and how other funding is sourced.
Staff Assessment
42. Opaheke
Park is a large site (42 hectares) that provides the ability to offer a diverse
range of activities and experiences for the local and wider Papakura community.
With the increase in residential development in the surrounding area, the
Council needs to take a strategic view and consider the long term needs of the
community.
43. The
concept plan approved by the Local Board for the development of the northern
area provides an exciting opportunity to create a unique park that is
anticipated to become a focal point for the community. This was reflected in
the positive feedback received through public engagement.
44. Implementation
of the concept plan will be substantially funded by Motleon. Allocation of the
encumbrance funds shows the councils commitment in completing the northern area
for the communities’ enjoyment.
45. The
feasibility of developing a multi-purpose facility is unknown at this stage. We
need to ensure decisions are based on robust evidence of community need and
improved outcomes. We need to understand the service offering and the
appropriate solution to ensure an informed investment decision is made –
ensuring we have the right facility, in the right place, at the right time.
46. Should
the encumbrance funds be placed in a holding account for a decision to be made
around their use within the southern area of the park, staff will need to
review the overall design to determine discrete projects, have them costed and
prioritised. At present there is no clear view on how the funds may be spent.
47. While
allocating a portion of the encumbrance funds to the northern development will
go some way towards implementing the concept plan, the development will not be
completed. Alternative sources of funding will need to be secured.
48. The
staff recommendation is that the full encumbrance funds are allocated to
implementing the concept plan for the northern area of the park.
Development
and consequential costs
Concept
plan for northern area
49. The
combined contribution of $4.25 million from Motleon and the encumbrance
funds of $1.75 million, will enable the approved concept plan for the northern
area of Opaheke Park to be implemented.
50. If the encumbrance funds are not allocated to the northern area and
the concept plan scope is reduced, the affected elements could be staged for
future development. Alternative budget for these elements will need to be
allocated. Budget could potentially be allocated from LDI budget, the
regional growth budget (this would be in the context of competing priorities
across the region), or new budget sought through the next LTP (where the Local
Board could play an advocacy role).
51. The
consequential operational costs of maintaining the northern area once
completed, will depend on the final extent and nature of the development. Based
on the concept plan, the annual maintenance is estimated to be $160,000.
Provision of operational costs is provided for in the 2015 Long Term Plan, and
will be allocated to the appropriate park maintenance budgets as and when
maintenance costs are met by council. Motleon are obligated to maintain the
park for the initial two years.
Multi-purpose
facility
52. The
feasibility of a multi-purpose facility has not been determined. If progressed,
a decision needs to be made around how the facility will be funded, having
regard to ongoing maintenance and operational costs. This will be influenced by
the ownership structure and management structure of the facility once
completed.
53. Capital
funding options include;
• wholly funded by the council
• partially funded by the council (seed funding)
• partnership arrangement
54. Maintenance
and operational funding options include;
• wholly managed and funded by council
• wholly managed and funded by a club or
collective entity
• wholly managed by a club or collective
entity with council funding support (possibly on a reducing basis)
• wholly managed by a club or collective
entity achieving self-sustainability (few existing models are currently
achieving this)
55. If
it is to be entirely funded by the council the funding will require Local Board
advocacy when developing the next LTP.
56. As
previously mentioned, it has been customary for the clubs to initiate the
process, and fund the development with seed funding from the
Council to enable the preliminary stages to be carried out.
Consideration
Local
board views and implications
57. The
Local Board has the responsibility of determining the allocation of the
encumbrance funds within Opaheke Park. Decision making responsibility for the
development and maintenance of Opaheke Park is also allocated to the Local
Board.
58. The
Local Board have been briefed throughout 2016 (and earlier) about the
development proposals for Opaheke Park. Decision making responsibility
for the development and maintenance of Opaheke Park is also allocated to the
Local Board.
59. The
Local Board was briefed on the background of the encumbrance
funds relating to the former Papakura Golf Club and direction was sought on
their allocation within Opaheke Park at a workshop on 1 March 2017. The
Local Board expressed a desire to allocate the funds to the
area of highest priority. Further information was sought on the impact of not allocating the funds towards the delivery of the concept plan
for the northern area of the park, and an interest in investigating the
potential of developing a multi-purpose facility in association with the
changing rooms was expressed.
60. The
supplementary information was considered by the Local Board at a follow up
workshop on 26 April which included additional information on
stormwater management within the Slippery Creek catchment.
Māori
impact statement
61. Motleon
engaged with the two tangata whenua groups, Ngati Tamaoho and Te Akitai
Waiohua, who expressed an interest through the planning and consenting
process. Both groups provided Cultural Values Assessment reports which
were included as part of the plan variation application that was submitted to
Auckland Council at the end of 2016. Ongoing discussions and involvement
will occur during the earthworks and detailed design phases of the project.
62. There are no known sites of significance to Maori identified on
Opaheke Park in the Auckland District Plan (Papakura section) or Auckland
Unitary Plan. An Archaeological Report was included with the consent
application and concluded that there are no specific archaeological or heritage
features within the Bellfield SHA site or Opaheke Park.
Implementation
63. Should the Local Board support Option 1: Motleon will work with staff to develop detailed designs. Earthworks
are anticipated to commence in October this year and should take approximately
11 months to complete. The Development Agreement obligates that the park works
occur immediately following the bulk earthworks.
64. The
additional contribution by Motleon of $250,000 will be documented through a
variation to the Development Agreement.
65. Should
the Local Board support Option 2: Alterations to the approved concept
plan will be finalised and a decision made as to whether further public
consultation is required. Detailed design will be undertaken based on the
revised plan. Motleon will proceed with the baseline design while any further
consultation is undertaken in order to maintain the program.
66. Should
the Local Board support Option 2A: The project’s preliminary
processes will need to be factored into the overall council work programme and
resources allocated accordingly. It is expected that the
recommended process will take approximately 18 months. The Local Board will be
involved throughout this process.
67. For
Option 2A, significant additional funding will be required. Appropriate sources
of funding will need to be investigated and sought.
68. Should
the Local Board support Option 2B: Staff will initiate a review of
the overall development, identify, scope and prioritise discrete projects that
meet the budget, and make recommendations to the Local Board.
69. Should
the Local Board support Option 3: Further decisions would need to be
made about which elements are included in the concept plan depending on the
amount of funding that is made available by the Local Board and how other
funding is sourced.
Attachments
|
No.
|
Title
|
Page
|
|
a
|
Opaheke Park Concept Plan
|
17
|
|
b
|
Letter from Motleon
|
19
|
|
c
|
Alternatives A and B for reducing the scope of the
Opaheke Park Concept Plan
|
21
|
Signatories
|
Authors
|
Sophie Bell - Parks & Open Space Specialists
Manager
Martin Devoy - Sport and Recreation Advisor
|
|
Authorisers
|
Jane Aickin - Paeurungi Te Waka Tai-ranga-whenua
Ian Maxwell - Director Community Services
Rex Hewitt - Relationship Manager
|
|
Papakura Local
Board
03 May 2017
|
|
Annual Budget 2017/2018
File No.: CP2017/07413
Purpose
1. This
report seeks decisions and input from the Papakura Local Board on a range of
annual budget related matters, including Locally Driven Initiatives (LDI),
advocacy, regional financial policy issues and other rates
proposals.
Executive
summary
2. This
report seeks decisions and input from
local boards on a range of annual budget related matters, including:
a) making
decisions on:
i. final
LDI budgets by project, within funding envelopes
ii. advocacy
b) providing
any feedback on regional issues, including:
i. rates
increases
ii. rating
stability (regarding proposals that both businesses and
residential /ratepayers receive the same rates
increase)
iii. paying
for tourism promotion
iv. paying
for housing infrastructure (proposed changes to the Revenue and Financing
policy to allow for the use of targeted rates,
alongside existing growth charges, to fund infrastructure for new houses)
v. paying
council staff a living wage
vi. other
changes for 2017/2018 (regarding waste management and
charges, the mass transit network, SkyPath
implementation, collaborations on reducing homelessness and the rural fire
service)
c) making
recommendations to the governing body on other financial matters such as:
i. any
new/amended Business Improvement District (BID) targeted rates
ii. any
new/amended local targeted rate proposals
iii. proposed
LDI capital projects outside local boards’ decision-making
responsibility.
iv. proposed
LDI opex to capex conversions
v. release
of local board specific reserve funds
vi. LDI
opex projects for deferral to 2017/2018
3. Local board
views on these matters will be considered in discussions between the local
boards and the Finance and Performance Committee on 9 May; and by the governing
body prior to adopting the Annual Budget 2017/2018.
|
Recommendation/s
That the Papakura Local Board:
a) makes
decisions on final 2017/2018 LDI budgets by project,
within funding envelopes
b) agrees
their advocacy initiatives for inclusion in the 2017/2018 Local Board
Agreement
c) agrees one key priority for the organisation to work on (and
potentially a common issue)
d) provides
any views it may have on regional financial policy issues
e) recommends
any new or amended BID targeted rates
f) recommends
any new or amended local targeted rate proposals
g) recommends
any proposed LDI capital projects, which are outside local boards’
decision-making responsibility
h) recommends $XX of 2016/2017 LDI
opex to be deferred to 2017/2018.
|
Comments
Consultation
4. Consultation
on the Annual Budget 2017/2018 took place from 27 February – 27 March
2017. The results from the consultation have been
analysed and summarised, and provided to local boards to assist with
decision-making (see Attachment A).
Locally
Driven Initiatives (LDI)
5. Local
boards are requested to agree the level of funding by project for each group of
activity. The expected delivery outcomes are further detailed in work
programmes which will be reported against throughout 2017/2018.
6. Local
boards can defer those projects that are funded by the LDI where there was an
agreed scope and cost but have not been delivered. The Local Board may
wish to resolve 2016/2017 projects that meet the criteria for deferral to
2017/2018.
7. Key
information of the funding of each activity and the LDI funded projects that
meet the criteria for deferral is provided in Attachments B and C.
Advocacy
8. This triennium a three year approach is proposed for considering
initiatives that local boards wish to progress that are unable to be funded by
LDI. Such an approach seeks to better utilise the annual budget, Long Term Plan
(LTP) and local board plan processes to progress and advise on a narrower range
of local board initiatives, in a more comprehensive way.
9. The
proposed new approach involves:
· as
part of the Annual Budget 2017/2018 process, local boards begin narrowing their
priorities to predominately one key advocacy initiative, and one initiative
held in common with other local boards, for further research and consideration
· Council
departments provide local boards with information to help inform their position
on these initiatives (in essence, developing a business case for them)
· based
on this information, local boards develop the case for their advocacy further
by testing ideas with the community in the local board plan process and other
engagement
· local
boards discuss priority initiatives with the Finance and Performance Committee
through the annual budget and LTP processes, supported by organisational advice
on the key initiative.
10. Local
boards resolved on their key advocacy initiatives in December 2016 (Attachment
D), for potential inclusion in their Local Board Agreements. Local boards
were requested to further consider and refine these at workshops post
consultation, and look to identify:
· one key initiative, and potentially one initiative held in common
with other local boards, for business case development and to progress through
the annual budget, local board plan and LTP processes
· other advocacy initiatives to be included in the Local Board
Agreements, as key matters of importance to the local board.
11. Local
boards may now wish to agree on these advocacy priorities.
12. Discussions
with the Finance and Performance Committee will take place on 9 May.
Regional
issues
13. Regional
issues consulted on as part of the 2017/2018 annual budget process include
rates increases, rating stability, paying for tourism promotion, paying for
housing infrastructure, paying council staff a living wage and other changes
for 2017/2018 (regarding waste management and charges, the mass transit
network, SkyPath implementation, collaborations on reducing homelessness and
the rural fire service).
14. Local
boards may wish to provide feedback on these issues for consideration by the
Finance and Performance Committee.
Local targeted rate and BID targeted rate proposals
15. Local
boards are required to agree any new BID and local targeted rate proposals
(noting that any new local targeted rates and/or BIDs must have been consulted
on before they can be implemented).
Consideration
Local board views and implications
16. Local
board decisions and feedback are being sought in this report.
17. Local
boards play an important role in the development of the annual budget, and
provide views and information at key stages as council continues through the
annual budget process.
Māori
Impact Statement
18. Many local board decisions are of importance to and impact on Māori. Local board agreements and the
annual budget are important tools that enable and can demonstrate
council’s responsiveness to Māori. Local board plans, which were developed in 2014 through
engagement with the community including Māori, form the basis of local priorities.There is a need to continue to build relationships between local boards
and iwi, and where relevant the wider Māori community. Ongoing
conversations will assist local boards and Māori to understand each
other’s priorities and issues. This in turn can influence and encourage
Māori participation in council’s decision-making processes.
Implementation
19. Feedback from the local boards will be provided to the Finance and
Performance Committee and governing body for consideration and adopting the
Annual Budget 2017/2018.
Attachments
|
No.
|
Title
|
Page
|
|
a⇩
|
20170503 Annual Budget 2017/2018 consultation feedback
report
|
27
|
|
b⇩
|
20170503_LDI Schedule for 2017/2018
|
43
|
|
c⇩
|
20170503 List of LDI projects to be carried
forward
|
45
|
|
d⇩
|
20170503 Advocacy Issues
|
47
|
Signatories
|
Authors
|
Faithe Smith - Lead Financial Advisor
|
|
Authorisers
|
Christine Watson - Manager Financial Advisory Services
- Local Boards
Karen Lyons - General Manager Local Board Services
Rex Hewitt - Relationship Manager
|
