|
Resolution number HB/2017/149
MOVED
by Chairperson J Parfitt, seconded by Member G Holmes:
That the
Hibiscus and Bays 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. 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. 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
b. Earlier
and more joint engagement between local boards and the Governing Body in
regional decision-making processes
c. 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
d. Specified
criteria for categorising the potential local impact and local board interest
of regional decisions
e. 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
f. Specified
methods for engagement and communication with local boards at all stages of
the decision-making process,
noting that some timeframes e.g central government submissions, are outside council’s
control and the methods may not be able to be implemented in all cases
ii. Direct that local boards will be consulted on the
details of these mechanisms prior to implementation
iii. Request
sufficient capacity for development of policy that is a priority for multiple
local boards
iv. 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
v. 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
vi. 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)
vii. Note that an explicit call-in right is not possible
under the Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009
viii. 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
ix. 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
x. 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:
a. declaration
b. classification
c. reclassification
xi application
for revocation of reserve status (limited to when there is a desire by a
local board to manage open space under the LGA)
xii. Note that officers’ advice on decision-making for
exchanges of reserve land was exchanges of reserve land should remain with
the Governing Body, with the relevant local board consulted on these
decisions
xiii. Note that the political working party did not reach
consensus on exchange of reserve land issue, and will consider the feedback
of local boards before making a recommendation
xiv. 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
xv. 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
xvi. Note that the Governance Manual for Substantive Council
Controlled Organisations requires Auckland Transport, amongst other things,
to:
a. 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’
b. develop
by 31 July each year an annual local board engagement plan, which includes a
schedule ‘clearly indicating for each board, the projects and
activities that Auckland Transport 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’
c. report against the Auckland Transport
local board engagement plan in their quarterly performance reports to the
Council Controlled Organisation Governance and Monitoring Committee
xvii. Direct Auckland Transport to meet all requirements for
local board engagement as set out in the Governance Manual for Substantive
Council Controlled Organisations
xviii. 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 Council Controlled
Organisations, and to report this monitoring to the Governing Body at least
annually
xix. Note that the Mayor’s 2017 letter of expectation
to Auckland Transport stipulated that council expects there to be:
a. better
and earlier engagement and communication between Auckland Transport and local
boards
b. 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 the New Zealand Transport Agency in decision-making)
xx. 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’
xxi. 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
xxii. Direct Auckland Transport, in working with local
boards, to:
a. 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
b. Improve
co-ordination between local place-shaping projects, such as town centre
upgrades, and Auckland Transport’s renewals programmes
c. 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
d. 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
e. Take
direction from local boards on how and where to implement community-focused
programmes
xxiii. Direct Auckland Transport to report to the Governing
Body annually on how it is meeting the directions given under recommendation
a) xxii
xxiv. 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
xxv. Note that the Local Board Transport Capital Fund is
valued by local boards but that the level of funding means that some local
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
xxvi. Supports
Local Board Transport Capital Fund Option 2 to increase the size of the Local
Board Transport Capital Fund from $11 million to $20 million to provide local
boards with a more systematic work programme approach to managing projects
xxvii. Direct officers to report to the relevant council
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. Direct Auckland Transport to implement a more
systematic work programme approach to assist local boards to identify
potential projects and make decisions
xxix. 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
xxx. Agree that the Governing Body should endorse the
Waiheke Local Board pilot project as set out in the Waiheke Local Board pilot
project plan
xxxi. Note that the Waiheke Local Board will maintain
oversight of local implementation of the pilot
xxxii. Request
that evaluation of the Waiheke Local Board pilot is reported back to all
local boards
Local boards
funding and finance
Note; refer to
clause xxxix which was voted on at the end of the item
The optimum
number of local boards
xxxiii. Agree
that there is no need to change the current number of local boards as at this
time as there is no overwhelming need to change
xxxiv. Agree
that any decision to review the numbers 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
Methods of
electing governing body members
xxxv. Agree
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 undertake
an in-depth review on the election of Governing Body members
xxxvi. Note that the statutory review of representation arrangements
for Auckland Council must be completed by September 2018
xxxvii. 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
xxxviii. Support Auckland Council advocating to central
government for legislative amendments that would allow for future changes to
the number of governing body members in line with population change and to
simplify the process for changes to the numbers and boundaries of local
boards and the creation of Maori wards in Auckland
Note: Refer to clause xl which
was voted on at the end of the item
b) supports decision-making for exchanges of reserve
land sitting with local boards
c) supports
the continuation of a joint local board/Governing Body political working
party focusing on matters of governance impacting on both governance parts of
council.
CARRIED
|
