|
Resolution number GBI/2017/78
MOVED
by Chairperson I Fordham, seconded by Member S Johnson:
That the Great
Barrier Local Board:
a) Provide
feedback on the following draft positions and recommendations of the
Political Working Party:
Regional policy and decision-making
i. Agree 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 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.
ii. Direct that local boards will be consulted on the
details of these mechanisms prior to implementation.
iii. Note 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.
iv. Agree 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.
v. Agree 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)
vi. Note that an explicit call-in right is not possible
under the Local Government (Auckland Council) Act
vii. Agree 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.
viii. Direct 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
ix. Agree 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 LGA)
x. Note 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
xi. Note that the working party did not reach consensus on
this issue, and will consider the feedback of local boards before making a
recommendation
xii. Agree 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
xiii. Note the critical interface between the local
place-shaping role of local boards and Auckland Transport’s
jurisdiction over the road corridor and transport networks.
xiv. Note that the Governance Manual for Substantive CCOs
requires Auckland Transport, amongst other things, to:
· develop, with local boards, a shared
understanding of local board views and CCO 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 CCOs 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 CCO Governance
and Monitoring Committee.
xv. Direct Auckland Transport to meet all requirements for
local board engagement as set out in the Governance Manual for Substantive
CCOs.
xvi. Direct 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 CCOs, and to
report this monitoring to the governing body at least annually.
xvii. Note 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 NZTA in
decision-making).
xviii. Note 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.’
xix. Note 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
xx. Direct 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
xxi. Direct Auckland Transport to report to the governing
body annually on how it is meeting the directions given under recommendation
xx.
xxii. Note 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.
xxiii. Note that the Local Board Transport Capital Fund is
valued by local boards but that the level of funding means that some boards
are not able to progress meaningful projects, and that improved local
transport outcomes may be achieved if the size of the fund was significantly
increased.
xxiv. Direct 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.
xxv. Direct Auckland Transport to implement a more
systematic work programme approach to assist local boards to identify
potential projects and make decisions.
xxvi. Direct Auckland Transport to actively engage with
governing body members (ward councillors) on transport projects and issues
within their ward areas.
Waiheke Local Board pilot
xxvii. Agree
that the governing body should endorse the Waiheke Local Board pilot project
as set out in the Waiheke Local Board pilot project plan.
xxviii. Note that
as the pilot progresses, other matters beyond the current scope of the
project plan, including matters discussed by the Governance Framework Review
Political Working Party but not currently being progressed, may arise or
merit investigation and agree that these be investigated if appropriate and
support is available
xxix. Note that the Waiheke Local Board will maintain
oversight of local implementation of the pilot.
xxx. Note that regular
reports on the agreed formal RIMU led Waiheke pilot evaluation process will
be reported back to all local boards.
Local boards funding and finance
xxxi. Agree that the enhanced status quo
model be moved to immediately, noting that further work can be progressed
within this framework rather than waiting for further work before
implementing the enhanced status quo.
xxxii. Re-name
the enhanced status quo to be called, “local decision-making within a
funding envelope.”
xxxiii. Provide additional decision-making to local boards by enabling them to increase or
decrease service levels within and across ABS activities provided that the
impact is cost neutral, i.e. within the “funding envelope”.
xxxiv. Agree that
the additional work to support the Enhanced status quo model be undertaken
– framework for service levels and local flexibility, options for
addressing historical uneven funding, improving the information and advice
that is provided to local boards.
xxxv. Agree that
further work on the implications of the local decision making model also be
undertaken for further consideration - modelling of rates implication
following the revaluation, costs to the organisation of supporting more local
decision making etc.
The optimum number of local boards
xxxvi. Agree
that council should undertake no further work on changing the number of local
boards until at least after the governance framework review has been
completed and implemented, and the outcomes of reorganisation proposals that
are underway for North Rodney and Waiheke Island are known.
Methods of electing governing body
members
xxxvii. Agree that a change
to the current system of electing governing body members from existing wards
is not warranted purely to address alignment between governing body members
and local boards.
xxxviii. Note that the
statutory review of representation arrangements for Auckland Council must be
completed by September 2018.
xxxix. Note
that the Local Government Act Amendment Bill No. 2, which proposes a
simplified process for local government-led reorganisation processes, is
currently before Parliament.
xl. Agree that council should continue to advocate to
central government for legislative amendments that would allow changes to the
number of governing body members in line with population changes, and
simplification of the process for changes to numbers and boundaries of local
boards.
b) Support
a delegation to local boards for decision-making for exchanges of reserve
land.
c) Support
the continuation of a joint local board/governing body
forum focusing on matters of governance impacting on both governance arms.
d) Express its
gratitude to John Nash - Relationship Manager Waiheke & Great Barrier for
his valuable work and support on the Governance Framework Review and
representation of the board.
CARRIED
|
