|
Resolution number FR/2017/128
MOVED
by Chairperson A Fulljames, seconded by Member A Cole:
That the Franklin
Local Board:
a)
supports the following draft positions and
recommendations of the Political Working Party and provides other feedback as
follows:
Regional policy
and decision-making
i.
Agrees that council should
implement new mechanisms that ensure effective local board input to regional
policy decisions, via a framework that sets out, at a minimum:
· A process for involving local boards in the development
of jointly agreed regional work programmes at the beginning of each term and
in an annual refresh
· Earlier and more joint engagement between local boards
and the governing body in regional decision-making processes
· Requirements for analysis of local impacts and local
interest of regional decisions and options, and reporting of this to local
boards and the governing body
· Specified criteria for categorising the potential local
impact and local board interest of regional decisions
· Processes and methods for tailoring local board
engagement in line with the local impact and local interest of regional
decisions e.g. high categorisation requiring more specific local engagement
and analysis, low categorisation requiring more cluster joint local board
workshop sessions and less in depth analysis.
· Specified methods for engagement and communication with
local boards at all stages of the decision-making process noting that some
timeframes (such as government submissions) are outside council’s
control, meaning that the methods may not be able to be implemented in all
cases.
ii.
Directs that local boards
will be consulted on the details of these mechanisms prior to implementation.
iii.
Requests sufficient capacity
for development of policy that is a priority for multiple local boards;
iv.
Notes that the Quality
Advice programme is continuing to be implemented in order to improve the
quality of advice to elected members for decision-making, in line with the
recommendations of the Governance Framework Review.
v.
Agrees not to implement any
formal policies or procedures that control when and how local boards may
procure external or contestable advice, but note that, in principle, the
Auckland Council organisation should be the first provider of advice to local
boards.
vi.
Agrees not to implement any
policy or procedure that would limit local boards’ ability to advocate
to the governing body on regional issues.
Local decisions
that may have regional impacts (development of a ‘call-in’ right)
vii.
Notes that an explicit
call-in right is not possible under the Local Government (Auckland Council)
Act.
viii.
Agrees not to implement any
mechanism that would have the effect of ‘calling in’ or
allocating decision-making to the governing body for otherwise local activities
or decisions that have regional implications but advocate for the
introduction of a mechanism that triggers notification to the governing body
and any affected local board;.
ix.
Directs officers that,
whenever a local board is to make a decision that has potential impacts
beyond the immediate local board area e.g. a sub-regional impact or an impact
on regional networks, advice on those potential impacts is to be provided to
the local board as a matter of course (for example through a regional impact
statement).
Allocations
and delegations
x.
Agrees that the governing
body delegates, subject to the necessary statutory tests being met, the
following Reserves Act 1977 decision-making functions for local reserves to
local boards:
· declaration
· classification
· reclassification
· application for revocation of reserve status (limited
to when there is a desire by a local board to manage open space under the Local
Government Act)
xi.
Notes that officers’
advice on decision-making for exchanges of reserve land was that it should
remain with the governing body, with the relevant local board consulted on
these decisions
xii.
Notes that the working party
did not reach consensus on this issue, and will consider the feedback of
local boards before making a recommendation
xiii.
Agrees that the Minister of
Conservation’s supervisory powers remain delegated to staff, but where
there is likely to be significant public interest, an independent
commissioner should be engaged.
The role of
Auckland Transport and local boards
xiv.
Notes the critical interface
between the local place-shaping role of local boards and Auckland
Transport’s jurisdiction over the road corridor and transport networks.
xv.
Notes that the Governance
Manual for Substantive Council Controlled Organisations requires Auckland
Transport, amongst other things, to:
· develop, with local boards, a shared understanding of
local board views and Council Controlled Organisation priorities to inform
the following year’s business planning, including through an annual
interactive workshop ‘where local boards communicate their local board
priorities and the Council Controlled Organisations communicate how their
current year work programme will contribute to local board priorities’.
· develop, by 31 July each year, an annual local board
engagement plan, which includes a schedule ‘clearly indicat[ing] for
each board, the projects and/or activities that it expects to report on, and
the projects and activities that it expects to consult on, for the following
year. This should be updated annually or more frequently if required’.
·
report against their local board
engagement plan in their quarterly performance reports to the Council Controlled
Organisation Governance and Monitoring Committee.
xvi.
Directs Auckland Transport
to meet all requirements for local board engagement as set out in the
Governance Manual for Substantive Council Controlled Organisations.
xvii.
Directs Auckland Council
officers to monitor Auckland Transport’s compliance with the
requirements for local board engagement, as set out in the Governance
Manual for Substantive Council Controlled Organisations, and to report this
monitoring to the governing body at least annually.
xviii.
Requests inclusion of the
directions and outcomes specified at xvi and xvii above within the Auckland
Transport Statement of Intent;
xix.
Notes that the Mayor’s
2017 letter of expectation to Auckland Transport stipulated that council
expects there to be:
· better and earlier engagement and communication between
Auckland Transport and local boards;
· active consideration by Auckland Transport of which of
its decision-making powers it could delegate to local boards (within the
constraints created by the regulatory environment, safety considerations, the
needs of regional networks and the role played by NZ Transport Agency in
decision-making).
xx.
Notes that the following
activity statement has been included in Auckland Transport’s 2017-2020
Statement of Intent:
‘Participation in the governance
review which is aimed at changing behaviours and processes across relevant
Council family activities, including Auckland Transport, to enable local
boards to give effect to their governance role, particularly around local
place-shaping.’
xxi.
Notes that the Governance
Framework Review has investigated the potential delegation of a range of
Auckland Transport powers and the working party recommends that additional
work be undertaken to identify delegation opportunities
xxii.
Directs Auckland Transport,
in working with local boards, to:
· ensure that local boards have a strong governance role
in determining the ‘look and feel’ of town centres and
streetscapes, in line with their allocation of non-regulatory decision-making
· improve co-ordination between local place-shaping
projects, such as town centre upgrades, and its renewals programmes
· provide more opportunities for local board direction on
the prioritisation of minor traffic safety projects, with the exception of
those which Auckland Transport considers are of critical safety importance
· be more responsive to local place-shaping initiatives
in non-transport parts of the road corridor, including reducing or removing
barriers to community place-making initiatives e.g. looking at ways to reduce
the costs of developing traffic management plans for community events
· take direction from local boards on how and where to
implement community-focused programmes
xxiii.
Directs Auckland Transport
to report to the governing body annually on how it is meeting the directions
given under recommendation xxii.
xxiv.
Notes that the Quality
Advice programme has been working with Auckland Transport to improve the
quality of advice to local boards and will shortly begin regular six monthly
surveys of local board members’ satisfaction with Auckland Transport
advice, engagement and reporting to local boards.
xxv.
Notes that the Local Board
Transport Capital Fund is valued by local boards but that the level of
funding means that some boards have not been able to progress meaningful
projects, and that improved local transport outcomes may be achieved if the
size of the fund was significantly increased.
xxvi.
Notes that Franklin Local
Board would welcome additional funding, given that its existing transport
capital fund for the electoral term has been 100% allocated and that it has
limited funding for rural road improvements such as kerb and channel;
xxvii.
Directs officers to report
to the relevant governing body committee, through the Long Term Plan process,
on options for significantly increasing the Local Board Transport Capital
Fund and the method of allocation of the fund.
xxviii.
Directs Auckland Transport
to implement a more systematic work programme approach to assist local boards
to identify potential projects
to enable appropriate decision
making, advocacy or collaboration;
xxix.
Directs Auckland Transport
to actively engage with governing body members on transport projects
and issues in a consistent manner;
Waiheke Local
Board pilot
xxx.
Agrees that the governing
body should endorse the Waiheke Local Board pilot project as set out in the
Waiheke Local Board pilot project plan.
xxxi.
Notes that the Waiheke Local
Board will maintain oversight of local implementation of the pilot.
xxxii.
Requests that evaluation of
the pilot is reported back to all local boards;
Local boards
funding and finance
xxxiii.
Expresses support for the
Local Decision Making model as the preferred approach for enabling greater
local self-determination and accountability;
xxxiv.
Requests that if the Local
Decision Making model is not the agreed approach, consideration be given to
piloting a local rate option for the Rodney, Franklin and Waiheke local
boards;
xxxv.
Requests that further work
on the implications of the Local Decision Making model be completed within
the next 12 months and commitment given to reconsider the Local Decision
Making model at completion of this work;
xxxvi.
Notwithstanding xxxiii
– xxxv above, agrees that the ‘enhanced status quo’ model
be moved to immediately, noting that further work can be progressed in
parallel, rather than waiting for further work before implementation;
xxxvii.
Agrees that the
‘enhanced status quo’ model be renamed, using a term that clearly
distinguishes it from the ‘local decision making’ model;
xxxviii.
Seeks provision of
additional decision making to local boards by introducing bulk funding of
local services, enabling local boards to increase or decrease service levels
within a funding envelope, both within and across asset based activities,
provided that the impact is cost neutral;
The optimum
number of local boards
xxxix.
Agrees that any decision to review the number of local boards
should not occur until after the Governance Framework Review is completed and
implemented and the outcomes of the re-organisation proposals for North
Rodney and Waiheke are known;
xl.
Requests a process similar to the Electoral Boundaries
Commission be established for Auckland to provide a more agile and responsive
mechanism to assess the representative needs of a rapidly changing Auckland
region;
Methods of
electing governing body members
xli.
Agrees that the election process for the number of governing
body members and wards should remain unchanged, as there is no identified
need to change or to undertake an in-depth review on the election of
governing body members;
xlii.
Notes that the statutory
review of representation arrangements for Auckland Council must be completed
by September 2018.
xliii.
Notes that the Local
Government Act Amendment Bill No. 2, which proposes a simplified process for
local government-led reorganisation processes, is currently before
Parliament.
b)
Provides feedback on whether
decision-making for exchanges of reserve land should sit with the governing
body or local boards
c)
Supports ‘Ward Councillor’
and ‘Local Councillor’ as the naming convention for elected
members of the Auckland Council;
d)
Supports the continuation of a
joint local board/governing body political working party focusing on matters
of governance impacting on both governance arms.
e)
Requests that the governance model of
the Manukau Harbour Forum be reviewed
CARRIED
|
