Agenda of Albert-Eden Local Board

Albert-Eden Local Board

27 September 2017

ITEM TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE

1 Welcome 5

2 Apologies 5

3 Declaration of Interest 5

4 Confirmation of Minutes 5

5 Leave of Absence 5

6 Acknowledgements 5

7 Petitions 5

8 Deputations 5

8.1 Deputation - Stephen Jones, Stakeholder Communications Manager, Auckland War Memorial Museum 5

8.2 Deputation - Andrew Dixon, Gribblehirst Hub 6

9 Public Forum 6

9.1 Public Forum - 'The Outlook for Someday' project 6

9.2 Public Forum - New Zealand Choral Federation 7

10 Extraordinary Business 7

11 Notices of Motion 8

12 Notice of Motion - Member Watson - Protection of coastal and riparian margins 9

13 Adoption of the Albert-Eden Local Board Plan 2017 11

14 Albert-Eden Community Arts Broker Programme 2016/2017 55

15 Albert-Eden Local Grants, Round One 2017/2018 community grant application 71

16 New community lease for rooms at Ferndale House, Ferndale Park, 830 New North Road 81

17 New lease for the Gribblehirst bowling greens at 225 Sandringham Road, Mt Albert. 91

18 Remuneration Authority consultation document 99

19 Auckland Plan Refresh - Local Board Engagement 137

20 Albert-Eden Local Board objection to an off-license application made by Pt Chev Organic Wines 149

21 Public alerting framework for Auckland 157

22 Governance Forward Work Calendar 229

23 Governing Body Members' update 237

24 Chairperson's Report 239

25 Board Members' Reports 241

26 Albert-Eden Local Board Workshop Notes 261

27 Consideration of Extraordinary Items

1 Welcome

2 Apologies

At the close of the agenda no apologies had been received.

3 Declaration of Interest

Members are reminded of the need to be vigilant to stand aside from decision making when a conflict arises between their role as a member and any private or other external interest they might have.

4 Confirmation of Minutes

That the Albert-Eden Local Board:

a) confirm the minutes of its ordinary meeting, held on Wednesday, 23 August 2017, as a true and correct record.

5 Leave of Absence

At the close of the agenda no requests for leave of absence had been received.

6 Acknowledgements

At the close of the agenda no requests for acknowledgements had been received.

7 Petitions

At the close of the agenda no requests to present petitions had been received.

8 Deputations

Standing Order 3.20 provides for deputations. Those applying for deputations are required to give seven working days notice of subject matter and applications are approved by the Chairperson of the Albert-Eden Local Board. This means that details relating to deputations can be included in the published agenda. Total speaking time per deputation is ten minutes or as resolved by the meeting.

8.1 Deputation - Stephen Jones, Stakeholder Communications Manager, Auckland War Memorial Museum

Purpose

1. To deliver a presentation to the board during the Deputation segment of the business meeting.

Executive summary

2. Stephen Jones, Stakeholder Communications Manager, Auckland War Memorial Museum, will be in attendance to present a Deputation presentation outlining some of the upcoming changes at the museum as part of its Future Museum programme.

Recommendation/s

That the Albert-Eden Local Board:

a) Thanks Stephen Jones, Stakeholder Communications Manager, for his attendance and Deputation presentation.

8.2 Deputation - Andrew Dixon, Gribblehirst Hub

Purpose

1. To deliver a presentation to the board during the Deputation segment of the business meeting.

Executive summary

2. Andrew Dixon, Gribblehirst Hub, will be in attendance to present a Deputation presentation regarding the group’s proposal to administer the use of the greens, formerly associated with the Edendale Bowling Club.

Recommendation/s

That the Albert-Eden Local Board:

a) Thanks Andrew Dixon, Gribblehirst Hub for his attendance and Deputation presentation.

9 Public Forum

A period of time (approximately 30 minutes) is set aside for members of the public to address the meeting on matters within its delegated authority. A maximum of 3 minutes per item is allowed, following which there may be questions from members.

9.1 Public Forum - 'The Outlook for Someday' project

Purpose

1. To deliver a presentation to the board during the Public Forum segment of the business meeting.

Executive summary

2. David Jacobs and Chris Widdup, ‘The Outlook for Someday’ project, will be in attendance to present a Public Forum presentation regarding their group’s planned Free Filmmaking Workshop in 2018 and to seek the board’s support.

Recommendation/s

That the Albert-Eden Local Board:

a) Thanks David Jacobs and Chris Widdup, ‘The Outlook for Someday’ project, for their attendance and Public Forum presentation.

Attachments

a 'The Outlook for Someday' project introduction.................................. 275

9.2 Public Forum - New Zealand Choral Federation

Purpose

1. To deliver a presentation to the board during the Public Forum segment of the business meeting.

Executive summary

2. Grant Hutchison, Chief Executive - New Zealand Choral Federation, and Rowena Janes-Post, Member - New Zealand Choral Federation, will be in attendance to present a Public Forum presentation outlining their group’s community work and to express interest in continuing their lease of the Kimberley Room, at the corner of Gillies Avenue and Kimberley Avenue, Epsom.

Recommendation/s

That the Albert-Eden Local Board:

a) Thanks Grant Hutchison, Chief Executive - New Zealand Choral Federation, and Rowena Janes-Post, Member - New Zealand Choral Federation, for their attendance and Public Forum presentation.

10 Extraordinary Business

Section 46A(7) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 (as amended) states:

“An item that is not on the agenda for a meeting may be dealt with at that meeting if-

(a) The local authority by resolution so decides; and

(b) The presiding member explains at the meeting, at a time when it is open to the public,-

(i) The reason why the item is not on the agenda; and

(ii) The reason why the discussion of the item cannot be delayed until a subsequent meeting.”

Section 46A(7A) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 (as amended) states:

“Where an item is not on the agenda for a meeting,-

(a) That item may be discussed at that meeting if-

(i) That item is a minor matter relating to the general business of the local authority; and

(ii) the presiding member explains at the beginning of the meeting, at a time when it is open to the public, that the item will be discussed at the meeting; but

(b) no resolution, decision or recommendation may be made in respect of that item except to refer that item to a subsequent meeting of the local authority for further discussion.”

11 Notices of Motion

Under Standing Order 2.5.1 (LBS 3.11.1) or Standing Order 1.9.1 (LBS 3.10.17) (revoke or alter a previous resolution) a Notice of Motion has been received from <Member Names> for consideration under item 12.

Albert-Eden Local Board

27 September 2017

Notice of Motion - Member Watson - Protection of coastal and riparian margins

File No.: CP2017/20448

Executive summary

1. Member Watson has given notice of a motion that the member wishes to propose.

2. The notice is signed by Member Watson and Member Corrick as seconder.

Motion

That the Albert-Eden Local Board:

a) urge Auckland Council to require the full 20m esplanade strip contribution on subdivision of land on coastal boundaries or on riparian margins where a creek is on average 3m or greater in width, in line with the Reserves Act 1977.

b) urge Auckland Council to ensure all new buildings requiring consent are set back at least 10m from all streams, whether permanent or intermittent, less than 3m wide and all coastal edges to maintain water quality and provide protection from natural hazards, in line with rules contained within the Unitary Plan

c) request a meeting with the Resource Consenting and Community Facilities staff to discuss subdivision and consenting issues related to esplanade reserve and riparian margins within the Albert-Eden Local Board area.

d) Request feedback from staff on how the Albert-Eden Local Board resolution AE2012/267 from 07 November 2012 have been acted upon.

a) Request this Notice of Motion and the resolutions be circulated to all Local Boards for their information.

Background

Esplanade reserves and strips play a valuable role by:

· Contributing to the protection of conservation values, including the natural functioning of the sea, river or lake, water quality, aquatic habitats, and other natural values; or

· Mitigating natural hazards; or

· Enabling public access to any sea, river or lake; or

· Enabling public recreation use of the esplanade reserve or esplanade strip and adjacent sea, river or lake (where compatible with conservation values).

Tools to protect the conservation values, ensuring public access and mitigate natural hazards along these margins include The Reserves Act, 1977 and The Auckland Unitary Plan.

Section 230 of the Reserves Act, 1977 requires the creation of a 20m esplanade strip on land parcels at subdivision where the lot is adjoining either the coastal area or a creek that is 3m or greater in width. Historically, council has not taken up this strip or has decreased the width of the strip required.

Subdivision creates the ability to increase housing supply. However, there are concerns that such subdivision without the creation of the full, 20m esplanade strip undermines future generations ability to create walkways along reserve lands or riparian edges, increases the impervious surfaces adjacent to riparian areas decreasing soakage, increases stormwater runoff, decreases water quality and decreases opportunities for ecological corridors to be created, amongst others. Erosion and future sea level rise contribute to issues along the margin so that strips of 20m at creation will be expected to decrease in width over time as the landward boundary does not change as the water boundary erodes.

Section 237E of The Reserves Act, 1977, states that no compensation for esplanade reserves or esplanade strips shall be payable for any area of land within 20 metres from the mark of mean high water springs of the sea or from the bank of any river or from the margin of any lake, as the case may be” where an allotment less than 4 hectares is created when land is subdivided.

Land prices make the acquisition of new public open space in the Albert-Eden Local Board area unlikely. In addition, the Albert-Eden Local Board area of Auckland Council has the lowest ratio of public open space (reserves and parks) per 1,000 people in the Auckland region. The addition of all available esplanade strips on subdivision, at no cost to Council, will benefit future generations and the environment.

The Auckland Unitary Plan (Mixed Housing Suburban zone) rule H4.6.7 requires any buildings to be set back a minimum depth of 10m, from the edge of all permanent or intermittent streams even if a stream is less than 3m wide. This same 10m setback applies to the coastal protection yard as well. The same setback rules apply to Mixed Housing Urban Zone under rule H5.6.8. Many applicants seek to build within the riparian yard which undermines the functions of open space and the protection such rules afford.

In addition, rules H4.6.8 and H5.6.9 of the Auckland Unitary Plan protects the environment by setting the maximum impervious area on a residential site. The purpose being:

· to manage the amount of stormwater runoff generated by a development, particularly in relation to the capacity of the stormwater network and potential flood risks;

· to support the functioning of riparian yards, lakeside yards and coastal yards and water quality and ecology.

The maximum impervious area must not exceed 60 per cent of site area. In particular, the maximum impervious area within a riparian, lakeside or the coastal protection yard must not exceed 10 per cent of that yard.

Breaches of the setback rules and the impervious area rules do not support the functioning of the ecosystem and should be avoided during consenting.

Albert-Eden has a coastal strip along Pt Chevalier peninsula and the Waterview coast as well as 2 large streams being Te Auaunga-Oakley Creek and Te Waititiko-Meola Creek. Recent housing development in line with the Unitary Plan’s rules, including increased density in Residential Mixed Suburban and Urban zones, creates pressure on the sensitive coastal and riparian margins.

The Albert-Eden Local Board raised similar issues in 2012 under resolution AE2012/267. Feedback on those resolutions in addition to these recommendations would be helpful.

The Albert-Eden Local Board would request that Auckland Council uses all their available tools to ensure the protection of the margins and yards from inappropriate development and to facilitate the creation of all possible esplanade strips for future generations.

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Signatories

Author

Margi Watson – Member, Albert-Eden Local Board

Albert-Eden Local Board

27 September 2017

Adoption of the Albert-Eden Local Board Plan 2017

File No.: CP2017/19880

Purpose

1. To adopt the final version of the Albert-Eden Local Board Plan 2017.

Executive summary

2. Under the Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009 each local board is required to adopt a local board plan by 31 October 2017.

3. The Act also requires local board plans to be developed using the special consultative procedure. The consultation period for the 2017 local board plans ran from 22 May to 30 June 2017.

4. The local board has considered submissions received and feedback gathered from the consultation period. As a result of this consideration, the following key changes are proposed to be included in the plan:

· adding a joint approach with neighbouring local boards to managing and protecting shared waterways, in particular Te Auaunga-Oakley Creek and Waititiko-Meola Creek

· adding the management of weeds in parks and street corridors through alternative chemical-free weed management methods

· highlighting the need for a dedicated art space/facility in Albert-Eden

· strengthening safer community initiatives and acknowledging the need to support those experiencing hardship in the community.

5. A number of minor changes were made throughout the document, as proposed by submitters or for the purposes of clarification.

6. The Albert-Eden Local Board Plan 2017, which includes proposed changes, is attached to this report.

7. Pending adoption of the plan, photos and other design features will be added to prepare it for publication.

Recommendation/s

That the Albert-Eden Local Board:

a) approves the following key changes to the draft Local Board Plan 2017 following community engagement and consultation:

i. adding a joint approach with neighbouring local boards to managing and protecting shared waterways, in particular Te Auaunga-Oakley Creek and Waititiko-Meola Creek

ii. adding the management of weeds in parks and street corridors through alternative chemical-free weed management methods

iii. highlighting the need for a dedicated art space/facility in Albert-Eden

iv. strengthening safer community initiatives and acknowledging the need to support those experiencing hardship in the community.

b) subject to recommendation a), adopts Attachment A as the final Albert-Eden Local Board Plan 2017.

c) delegates authority to the Chair to approve any minor edits that may be necessary.

Comments

8. The Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009 (the Act) requires local boards to adopt a local board plan by 31 October 2017. This means that the Albert-Eden Local Board Plan 2017 must be adopted by 31 October 2017.

9. Local board plans are strategic plans for the following three years and beyond. The plans reflect the priorities and preferences of the community. They guide how the local board:

· makes decisions on local activities and projects

· provides input into regional strategies and policies.

10. The plans form the basis for development of the annual local board agreement for the following three financial years and subsequent work programmes. They also inform the development of council’s 10-year budget.

11. Under section 20 of the Act local boards are required to prepare a draft local board plan, then and consult on it using the special consultative procedure as set out in section 83 of the Local Government Act 2002. The consultation period ran from 22 May to 30 June 2017.

12. Submissions were made through the following channels and coded together:

· online form available on the Shape Auckland website

· hard copy form included in the household summary document

· via email or post.

13. In total 1326 submissions were received on the draft Albert-Eden Local Board Plan 2017. In addition, 76 people provided 229 pieces of feedback at five Have Your Say engagement events. 33 pieces of feedback were gathered through the Board’s Facebook page and 45 pieces of online feedback were posted on the Albert-Eden Youth Board’s Facebook page.

Consideration of submissions and feedback

14. The board has considered the submissions and feedback gathered. Board members received data analysis reports and all submissions and feedback to read on 1 August 2017 and held workshops to discuss this on 23 and 29 August 2017. Advice has been sought from staff on matters raised in the consultation period and this is reflected in the table included later in this report.

15. Public feedback on the draft plan was generally positive. The majority of submitters were supportive of the plan, its direction and the themes covered. Key feedback points are outlined in the table below. Analysis of these points, and any resulting substantive proposed changes to the outcome chapters, are outlined in the corresponding columns.

Key public feedback points

Analysis

Proposed changes

St Lukes Environmental Protection Society (STEPS) is a respected and long-standing volunteer group caring for Meola Creek. The group’s submission requested the Board to work with Waitematā and Puketāpapa boards to protect Meola Creek and the Western Springs-Meola-Three Kings aquifer.

STEPS also asked the Board to advocate for stormwater infrastructure to help reduce pollution in the stream and waterways.

Over the last seven years the Board has been providing grants for planting and restoration work in the two urban streams. Now the Board wants to work with its neighbouring local boards to support projects that will restore and protect the urban streams that flow through their common board boundaries.

The draft plan was not strong on providing support specifically for Meola Creek and the underlying aquifer.

Staff propose an initiative under Outcome 7 ‘We respect and protect our environment’:

Work with volunteer groups and other local boards to develop a joint approach to managing and protecting shared waterways:

· Puketāpapa and Whau local boards for Te Auaunga/Oakley Creek

· Waitematā and Puketāpapa local boards for Waititiko/Meola Creek and its underlying aquifer.

48 proforma submissions and 32 comments in other submissions requested the halting of chemical spray usage in parks and streets in Albert-Eden.

The Board finalised its approach to chemical-free weed management during the development of council’s new maintenance contracts for buildings, parks and open spaces in July 2017.

The draft local board plan did not have any mention of chemical spraying.

Outcome 7 ‘We respect and protect our environment’:

Staff propose adding to the text:

‘You have told us you are concerned about chemical usage in our parks and street corridors. We will continue to work with our maintenance contractors to manage weeds by implementing Auckland Council’s Weed Management Policy and look for alternative chemical-free weed management methods where appropriate.’

At the Arts and Heritage focused ‘Have Your Say’ event, as part of the Local Board Plan engagement, arts groups present told the Board that there is currently a lack of space for an arts hub, gallery and workshops. An arts facility would help groups to connect, network and share resources.

The Board outlined the need for an arts facility in Albert-Eden in its 2014 Local Board Plan.

As a result the facility is included in the council’s Community Facilities Network Plan but is a low priority.

Staff propose an initiative under Outcome 1 ‘Albert-Eden has a strong sense of community’:

‘Assess community needs for a dedicated art space which could be shared by groups and would provide a setting to create, learn, perform and exhibit in.’

Some submitters said they wanted to see a clear plan for safety in the community. Others said there was a need for more emphasis on supporting those less fortunate members of the community.

The text relating to community safety in Outcome 1 ‘Albert-Eden has a strong sense of community’ needs to be strengthened and staff propose adding the following:

‘We will support initiatives that focus on crime prevention and safer communities in our local area as a priority.’

Staff propose the following addition to the Challenges section of Outcome 1 ‘Albert-Eden has a strong sense of community’ :

‘There are members of our community who are vulnerable and we need to look at ways to support them.’

Changes to the Albert-Eden Local Board Plan 2017

16. The Albert-Eden Local Board Plan 2017, with proposed substantive changes to the outcome chapters as described in the above table, is attached to this report.

17. A number of minor changes were made throughout the document, as proposed by submitters or for the purposes of clarification.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

18. The local board’s views have driven the development of the plan attached to this report.

19. In developing the plan, the board considered:

· what it already knows about its communities and what is important to them

· the priorities and learnings of the board over the last seven years, as outlined in the two previous local board plans

· submissions received via online forms, hardcopy forms, emails and post as well as feedback provided by people at engagement events and gathered through Facebook

· staff advice

· stakeholder views from forty organisations and community groups, mana whenua and mataawaka.

Māori impact statement

20. As part of developing the plan, the board has:

· considered views expressed by mana whenua authorities at a sub-regional governance level hui and local level one-on-one hui

· considered pre-existing feedback from Māori within the local board area

· engaged with mataawaka at a hui hosted by Te Kura Kaupapa Māori O Ngā Maungarongo on 29 June 2017 where members of the community and people associated with the Kura could attend and give feedback on both the Albert-Eden and Puketāpapa draft plans.

21. The Albert-Eden Local Board Plan 2017 promotes issues of importance to Māori through all outcome areas, but in particular:

Outcome 6: Our natural and cultural heritage is valued.

· Sensitive management of the three maunga in Albert-Eden and rare lava forests

· Learning about culturally significant places and features in our area so that we can take steps to protect them

· Recording our history and celebrating our heritage

· Creating more heritage trails and add signs in parks and on walkways to include Māori language and heritage information.

Outcome 7: We respect and protect our environment:

· Working with partners to manage and protect shared waterways, particularly Te Auaunga/Oakley Creek and Waititiko/Meola Creek

· Supporting restoration initiatives and local sustainability programmes.

Implementation

22. Pending adoption of the plan, minor edits may be necessary. This report recommends that responsibility for approving these are delegated to the Chair.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Albert-Eden Local Board Plan 2017	17

Signatories

Author	Robyn Allpress - Local Board Advisor
Authoriser	Adam Milina - Relationship Manager - Albert-Eden & Orakei Local Boards

Albert-Eden Local Board

27 September 2017

Albert-Eden Community Arts Broker Programme 2016/2017

File No.: CP2017/17394

Purpose

1. To present the Albert-Eden Local Board with the Albert-Eden Community Arts Brokers report for 2016/2017.

Executive summary

2. The Albert-Eden Local Board allocated $70,000 to the Community Arts Broker Programme for 2016/2017. The programme, launched in late 2015, supports creative people and communities across the local board area. Arts brokers assist individuals and groups with projects, mentoring, targeted activities and promotion and awareness of opportunities available.

3. Fourteen projects were delivered between August 2016 and June 2017:

· Labyrinth: Chris O’Connor (Rocket Park)

· Active Arts: Fiona Mogridge and Nina Burchett (Selwyn Village, Point Chevalier)

· Bloom: Various local residents (Sandringham Reserve)

· White Night: Balmoral Road, Dominion Road and Kingsland Business Associations (Balmoral Road, Dominion Road and Kingsland)

· The Creativity Collective Aotearoa: Heather Lyall (Owairaka and Mt. Albert)

· Creative Music Group: Māpura Studios (Morningside)

· Out The Back: Anna Harding and Jessie Casson (across Albert-Eden)

· Neighbourhood Carols: Jared Diprose (Morningside)

· Mind You: Hank Snell and Yung Chen (Sandringham)

· Improv Masters: Mark Scott (Selwyn Village, Point Chevalier)

· Creative Kids on Air: Ronnie Mackie

· A Journey of a Thousand Miles Begins with One Step: Tiffany Singh

· Backstory: Shriya Bhagwat-Chitale

· MADE, Mt. Albert and Design Exhibition Ron Crummer

4. This report presents the local board with the Albert-Eden Community Arts Brokers report containing full details of the projects delivered (attachment A).

Recommendation/s

That the Albert-Eden Local Board:

a) note the Albert-Eden Community Arts Brokers report.

Comments

5. The Albert-Eden Community Arts Broker programme was introduced in late 2015 with the purpose of broadly supporting local creative projects within community settings across the local board area. Too Bee Limited, run by Bronwyn Bent and Sally Barnett, were contracted to deliver the programme on behalf of the local board. These arts brokers work with creative individuals and organisations in the local board area and ensure Albert-Eden communities have access to and can participate in the arts.

6. As part of the 2016/2017 Arts, Community and Events Work Programme, the local board allocated $70,000 to the broker programme. The 2016/2017 programme consisted of the following broad work strands:

a) A curated series of community arts projects.

b) Meeting with a wide variety of artists and organisations to discuss their needs and offer mentoring support where required, for example assistance with funding applications, assistance with council processes for using public spaces such as parks, making connections with participants, organisations, venues or exhibition opportunities.

c) Developing a sense of the current gaps in arts offers and participation within the local board area, and targeting activities to address these.

d) Utilising social media and targeted Albert Eden Neighbourhood Arts e-newsletter to create awareness of projects, events, funding, and professional arts opportunities both in and outside of the local board area.

7. Fourteen projects were delivered between August 2016 and June 2017:

· Labyrinth: Chris O’Connor (Rocket Park)

· Active Arts: Fiona Mogridge and Nina Burchett (Selwyn Village, Point Chevalier)

· Bloom: Various local residents (Sandringham Reserve)

· White Night: Balmoral Road, Dominion Road and Kingsland Business Associations (Balmoral Road, Dominion Road and Kingsland)

· The Creativity Collective Aotearoa: Heather Lyall (Owairaka and Mt. Albert)

· Creative Music Group: Māpura Studios (Morningside)

· Out The Back: Anna Harding and Jessie Casson (across Albert-Eden)

· Neighbourhood Carols: Jared Diprose (Morningside)

· Mind You: Hank Snell and Yung Chen (Sandringham)

· Improv Masters: Mark Scott (Selwyn Village, Point Chevalier)

· Creative Kids on Air: Ronnie Mackie

· A Journey of a Thousand Miles Begins with One Step: Tiffany Singh

· Backstory: Shriya Bhagwat-Chitale

· MADE, Mt. Albert and Design Exhibition Ron Crummer

Consideration

Local board views and implications

8. The arts broker programme is aligned with the local board outcome area Proud, Connected and Secure Communities. It ensures a diverse range of arts events/activities are spread geographically across the local board area, thus enabling access for everyone. Arts brokers also support and build capacity and capability with local people and groups to manage and deliver events which are low cost and bring the community together.

Māori impact statement

9. During 2016/2017 a relationship was established between the programme and local school, Te Kura Kaupapa Māori O Nga Maungarongo. They are currently working on a whānau workshop project, to occur later in 2017.

Implementation

10. There is no implementation to be considered in association with this report.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Albert-Eden Community Arts Brokers Report	59

Signatories

Author

David Hebenton - Arts and Culture Advisor (Central)

Authorisers

Graham Bodman - General Manager Arts, Community and Events

Adam Milina - Relationship Manager - Albert-Eden & Orakei Local Boards

Albert-Eden Local Board

27 September 2017

Albert-Eden Local Grants, Round One 2017/2018 community grant application

File No.: CP2017/18452

Purpose

1. The purpose of the report is to the present an application received for Albert-Eden Local Board local grants round one 2017/2018. The local board is requested to fund, part-fund or decline the application.

Executive summary

2. The Albert-Eden Local Board has set a total community grants budget of $108,000 for the 2017/2018 financial year.

3. The Albert-Eden Local Board allocated a total of $14,052.00 in quick response round one leaving a remaining budget $93,948.00. There are a further two quick response rounds and two local grant rounds for the financial year 2017/2018.

4. One local grant application has been received within the closing date for Local Grants Round One 2017/2108, however, the event will occur before the approved project date for this round. Therefore the local board is requested to accept and consider this application at the September 2017 business meeting.

Recommendation/s

That the Albert-Eden Local Board:

a) accept the application from Eden Arts in Local Grants Round One 2017/2108 for consideration

b) consider the application listed in Table One and agree to fund, part-fund or decline this application.

Table One: Albert-Eden Local Grants, Round One grant application Eden Arts

Application ID	Applicant	Main focus	Project	Amount requested	Eligibility
LG1801-124	Eden Arts: Maungawhau Mount Eden Community Arts Trust	Arts and culture	Towards advertising and promotional costs for the Mount Eden Chamber Music Festival.	$6,000.00	Eligible
Total				$6,000.00

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Albert-Eden Grants Programme 2017/2018	73
b ⇩	Albert-Eden Local Grants Round One 2017/2108 grant application	77

Signatories

Author

Erin McVeigh - Community Grants Coordinator

Authorisers

Marion Davies - Community Grants Operations Manager

Jennifer Rose - Operations Support Manager

Adam Milina - Relationship Manager - Albert-Eden & Orakei Local Boards

Albert-Eden Local Board

27 September 2017

New community lease for rooms at Ferndale House, Ferndale Park, 830 New North Road

File No.: CP2017/19048

Purpose

1. To advise on the outcome of the expressions of interest process regarding the community lease for offices three and four within Ferndale House, Ferndale Park, 830 New North Road.

2. Approve the grant of a new community lease to the successful applicant for offices three and four at Ferndale House.

Executive summary

3. Ferndale House is located at Ferndale Park 830 New North Road, Mt Albert. The house has four offices and a shared lounge, kitchen and bathroom.

4. Two of the four offices are currently occupied by The UMMA Trust (office one) and the New Zealand Nepal Society Incorporated (office two). The remaining two rooms (offices three and four) were previously occupied by the Haemophilia Foundation New Zealand. The foundation surrendered its lease in December 2016. This vacancy triggered the requirement for an expression of interest process.

5. The expression of interest process commenced in early May 2017. Six applications were received by the 26 June 2017 closing date. One application was subsequently withdrawn on 15 August 2017.

6. A comprehensive assessment and ranking of applications was undertaken on all six applications received and has informed the recommendation.

7. Two groups ranked first in the assessment but the space can only be given to one group.

8. Council staff are recommending that the Board grant a new community lease for offices three and four to The Combined Beneficiaries Union Incorporated. The reasons for this are that this group would provide a variety of uses from Ferndale House, their use would be complimentary to the existing tenants and the anticipated usage would be less likely to put excessive demand on the common areas.

9. Public notification of a new lease on land classified as local purpose reserve is not required as the community use at Ferndale House conforms to the provisions of the Reserves Act 1977.

Recommendation/s

That the Albert-Eden Local Board:

a) grant a new community lease to Combined Beneficiaries Union Incorporated to occupy office three and office four at Ferndale House, 830 New North Road (Attachment A) subject to the following terms and conditions:

i) term - one year commencing 1 December 2017 with a right of renewal for one year

ii) rent - $1.00 plus GST per annum if requested

iii) operational charge - $25 per square metre plus GST per annum.

b) approve all other terms and conditions to be in accordance with the Auckland Council Community Occupancy Guidelines July 2012 and the Reserves Act 1977.

c) Delegate authority to the appropriate local board member to approve a community outcomes plan (to be negotiated with the new lessee) to be attached as a schedule to the deed.

Comments

Land and building

10. Ferndale House is located at Ferndale Park 830 New North Road, Mt Albert. The land is legally described as Part DP 2174 and Part Lot 3-4 DP 29193. The property comprises a total area of 8385 square metres and is all contained in NA982/52 (Attachment B).

11. The land comprising Ferndale Park is held in fee simple by Auckland Council as a classified local purpose (community buildings) reserve and subject to the provisions of the Reserves Act 1977. The use conforms to the provisions of the Reserves Act 1977, so public notification of a new lease on land classified as local purpose reserve is not required.

12. Ferndale House functions as a shared community premises and as such, council staff recommend a short term lease of one year be offered to the successful applicant. The rationale for the short term lease is to ensure the activities and use of the premises by the new lessee is complementary with the incumbent lessees and to ensure the group is sustainable.

The expression of interest process

13. Advertisements calling for expressions of interest for the lease of offices three and four were published in the Central Leader and Harbour News on Wednesday 24 May 2017. The closing date for applications was 26 June 2017.

14. The advertisement was forwarded to all those groups listed on the community leasing interest register. The advertisement was also forwarded to the local board advisor and strategic broker to be disseminated to various community networks.

15. An ‘open home’ was held on 31 May 2017 and 1 June 2017. Key representatives of two community groups took the opportunity to inspect the premises.

16. Council staff received applications from six organisations providing a range of activities and services. Three applicants provide services to refugees, of which two focussed predominantly on women while the other focussed on activities for youth. The other three applications were from entities focussing on; assisting marginalised persons in the community, a historical society and therapy for older persons.

17. The application from the Therapy Box was withdrawn on 15 August 2017. The applications received are listed below:

i. Affirming Works Ltd

ii. Combined Beneficiaries Union Incorporated

iii. Mt Albert Historical Society Incorporated

iv. NZ Ethnic Women Incorporated

v. The Therapy Box

vi. The UMMA Trust.

Overview of applicants

18. While the activities of all the groups are different, they all offer good outcomes that will be of value to the community.

NZ Ethnic Women Incorporated

19. NZ Ethnic Women Incorporated is an incorporated society with charitable status and has been operating since 2001. It began as the New Zealand Somali Women Association which was established due to growing need within the community. The group supports women of all ethnicities, a high proportion of these being from refugee backgrounds.

20. The society offers a range of services and activities to encourage the development of women’s skills and confidence to assist in their successful settlement in New Zealand. NZ Ethnic Women Incorporated funds its activities by grants from private companies and local boards. It also raises funds by selling clothing made by students at weekly markets and by taking catering orders from local businesses for events. It is anticipated that the offices at Ferndale House will be used by their part-time staff and volunteers.

Combined Beneficiaries Union Incorporated

21. The Combined Beneficiaries Union Incorporated was founded in 1978 and was registered as an incorporated society in 1982. Its principal activity is the provision of advice, assistance and representation to persons on benefits and pensions. The union receives grants from funding organisations, donations and fees paid by members. The group envisage that the rooms will be used by the administration staff and volunteer advocates on Monday through to Friday.

The UMMA Trust

22. The UMMA Trust is a charitable trust set up to support refugee families settle successfully in the Albert-Eden/Puketāpapa/Waitematā areas of Auckland. Currently the trust leases one of the rooms (office one) at Ferndale House. This space is used by staff and volunteers to manage the refugee programmes that are run in the local community. In the last two years, UMMA Trust has increased the number of programmes offered. This extended reach and demand for its services has led it to apply for the lease of the additional rooms (offices three and four) at Ferndale House. The trust has indicated that the offices would be used by their additional staff and volunteers.

Mt Albert Historical Society Incorporated

23. Mt Albert Historical Society Incorporated was set up in May 2006. Its activities include local historical visits, lectures and guided walks. These activities are open to the general public. The group envisage using the offices at Ferndale House for archiving materials, research work and committee meetings.

The Therapy Box

24. The Therapy Box withdrew its application on the 15 August 2017 citing that offices three and four at Ferndale House were insufficient for its needs.

Affirming Works Ltd

25. Affirming Works Ltd will hold the lease and is the umbrella group for the Refugee Muslim Youth Collective who will use the offices at Ferndale House should it be the successful applicant. Affirming Works is a not-for-profit company established in 2001 with the mission of equipping young people to fulfil their potential through innovative mentoring and education. Affirming Works Ltd is not a charitable trust and does not meet the eligibility criteria as per the Auckland Council Community Occupancy Guidelines 2012.

Assessment of Applicants

26. All applicants were assessed using a tool to rate a range of criteria including:

· the alignment with local board plan outcomes,

· identified need and conversely, existing service provision in the locality,

· organisational structure,

· partnership opportunities,

· hours of use and staff numbers,

· sharing opportunities and synergies with the existing lessees.

27. The analysis and assessment was undertaken by the Albert Eden Local Board senior advisor, strategic broker and community lease advisors at a meeting held on 26 July 2017.

28. Applying the criteria in the assessment process, both the Combined Beneficiaries Union and the NZ Ethnic Women Incorporated scored the highest equal, with The UMMA Trust being ranked the next highest

29. The applicants and assessment results were discussed with the Board at a workshop on 16 August 2017. A full set of applications was provided to local board members for review.

30. Council staff are recommending that the Board grant a new community lease for offices three and four to The Combined Beneficiaries Union Incorporated. The reasons for this are:

· This group would ensure a variety of community uses from Ferndale House.

· The anticipated use of the space by the Combined Beneficiaries Union, while providing a different service, will still be complimentary to the existing tenants.

· The anticipated hours and staff numbers stated on their application would fit well with the use of the existing tenants and is less likely to put pressure on the demand for the common areas.

31. The Combined Beneficiaries Union Incorporated has not held a community lease with Auckland Council prior to this application.

32. This report recommends a lease term to the successful applicant for an initial period of one year with a renewal of one year for either of these groups. This term is described in the criteria of the Auckland Council Community Occupancy Guidelines 2012 and the Albert Eden Local Board Community Occupancy Policy 2016.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

33. The applications were assessed against the local board plan outcomes. The applications were discussed with the local board at its workshop on 16 August 2017.

34. The local board plan outcomes that were of relevance were:

· Proud, Connected And Secure Communities

· Our Heritage is Cherished and Protected.

Māori impact statement

35. In accordance with section 4 of the Conservation Act 1987, engagement with iwi identified as having an interest in land in the Albert-Eden Local Board geographical area should be undertaken with regard to any new lease.

36. Engagement is routinely undertaken by council staff when a new community lease is at the proposal stage. However in this instance (as staff cannot determine which entity will be granted the lease until the local board resolves on the options) staff will engage with iwi as soon as practicable after the local board meeting.

37. Engagement will involve email contact containing detailed information on the successful applicant and inviting iwi representatives to hui and or for a kaitiaki site visit to comment on any spiritual, cultural or environmental impact with respect to the new lease. Should mana whenua representatives make any recommendations, these may be included in targets set in the community outcomes plan and or in any additional conditions to the standard deed of lease.

38. Council staff will attend the Mana Whenua Forum central to be held on 25 October 2017. Relevant information regarding the new community lessee will be included on the agenda and council staff will present their agenda item to iwi representatives.

Implementation

39. Subject to the local board grant of a new community lease to the successful applicant and delegating authority to a nominated local board member to approve a community outcomes plan, council staff will work with the lessee to negotiate a community outcomes plan to be appended as a schedule to the new community lease.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Ferndale House Floor Plan	87
b ⇩	Ferndale Park Land Aerial	89

Signatories

Author

Andrea Aranha - Community Lease Advisor

Authorisers

Rod Sheridan - General Manager Community Facilities

Adam Milina - Relationship Manager - Albert-Eden & Orakei Local Boards

Albert-Eden Local Board

27 September 2017

New lease for the Gribblehirst bowling greens at 225 Sandringham Road, Mt Albert.

File No.: CP2017/19051

Purpose

1. To grant a new community lease to The Gribblehirst Community Hub and carry out related procedural matters for the former bowling green space at Gribblehirst Park, 225 Sandringham Road, Mt Albert.

Executive summary

2. During 2014 the lease with the Edendale Bowling Club was terminated. The membership of the club had fallen and bowling activities had almost ceased with the building being used as a social centre.

3. In March 2015, an expression of interest process commenced to enter a new lease. A new lease for the former bowling club building was granted to the Community Shed. The lease was for the building and the bowling greens were excluded as the local board wished to explore other options for the use of this space.

4. An expression of interest process for the lease of the bowling greens commenced at the beginning of May 2017. An advertisement calling for applications was put in the Central Leader and Harbour News on the 7 June 2017.

5. The Gribblehirst Community Hub Trust was the only application received by the 14 July 2017 closing date. The Gribblehirst Community Hub Trust is the occupant of the upper floor of the former bowling club building adjacent to the bowling greens.

6. The two bowling greens comprise part of Gribblehirst Park which is classified as recreation reserve and subject to the provisions of the Reserves Act 1977. This land classification does not legally support the local purpose activities of the community hub. As such, council staff must publicly notify and engage with iwi about the proposed new lease.

7. The local board could seek further applications from other parties if they consider it appropriate to do so.

8. This report recommends a lease be granted to the Gribblehirst Community Hub Trust following completion of all statutory requirements.

Recommendation/s

That the Albert-Eden Local Board:

a) approve the granting of a lease to The Gribblehirst Community Hub Trust for the two bowling green spaces at Gribblehirst Park, 225 Sandringham Road subject to public notification and iwi consultation pursuant to the provisions of the Reserves Act 1977and Conservation Act 1987, and with no objection, on the following terms and conditions;

i. Term – Three year term with 1 x three (3) year right of renewal.

ii. rent - $1.00 per annum if requested

iii. operational charge - $1000 plus GST per annum

b) Apply section 73 (3) of the Reserves Act 1977, to allow the greens to be leased for a purpose other than as a recreation reserve, as an alternative to reclassifying the land and amending the management plan.

c) Appoint a hearings committee if required to consider and hear any submissions resulting from the public notification and iwi consultation.

d) Delegate authority to the appropriate local board member to approve a community outcomes plan (to be negotiated with the new lessee) to be attached as a schedule to the deed.

e) Approve all other terms and conditions to be in accordance with the Auckland Council Community Occupancy Guidelines July 2012.

Comments

Background

9. Gribblehirst Park is classified as Recreation Reserve. The land was originally gifted by the Gribble and Hirst families on the proviso that it “be used at all times as and for the purpose of a public park and recreation reserve”.

10. There is a management plan in place that is prescriptive in nature. This plan predates the Auckland Council, being prepared by the former Mt Albert City Council in 1981. The management plan describes the rugby and bowling clubs and other small areas set aside for public toilets and children’s playground. It also indicates that when the areas set aside for private use (rugby and bowling clubs) are not being used for that purpose, those areas of the park are available for use by the public.

11. The excerpt from the Reserves Act relating to recreation reserves is;

….In relation to reserves classified as recreation reserves, for the purpose of providing areas for the recreation and sporting activities and the physical welfare and enjoyment of the public, and for the protection of the natural environment and beauty of the countryside, with emphasis on the retention of open spaces and on outdoor recreational activities…..,

12. Under section 73(3) of the Act , when the use of a space is not consistent with the classification of the reserve or management plan public notice of the intent to lease is required.

13. Subject to local board approval to the public notification process, council staff will prepare a public notice for publishing in The Central Leader and The Harbour News. Submitters will be allowed one calendar month to make submissions or objections to the proposal to grant a new community lease to the hub.

14. If any submissions and or objections are received during the public notification process, this may lead to a hearing process. If this occurs a hearings committee will need to be appointed.

15. In accordance with section 4 of the Conservation Act 1987, iwi consultation is required.

The Expression of Interest Process

16. Advertisements’ calling for expressions of interest in the lease of the bowling greens were placed in the Central Leader and Harbour News on 7 June 2017. The closing date for applications was 14 July 2017.

17. The advertisement was forwarded to all those groups listed on the community leasing interest register. The advertisement was also forwarded to the local board advisor, strategic broker and local board communications staff, to be disseminated to various community networks.

18. Staff were available on site to answer queries on 30 June 2017 and 6 July 2017. There was no response from any community groups on either of these days.

Overview of Application

19. At the end of the notification period one application was received. This application was comprehensive and was submitted by the Gribblehirst Community Hub Trust.

20. The Gribblehirst Community Hub Trust was incorporated on the 18 February 2016.

21. A copy of the application was provided for to local board members for their review.

22. The Gribblehirst Community Hub (‘the Hub’) is the current occupant of the upper floor of the ex-Edendale Bowling Club building adjacent to the two bowling greens. They are currently considering the provisions of the draft community lease for those premises. They have expressed an interest in leasing the bowling greens to expand the activities currently supported from the building. (Attachment A)

23. The membership of the Hub is diverse, and their mission is to encompass a range of casual, active and recreational activity on the greens. The proposal is to develop a “big back yard” in two zones. One zone will be dedicated to growing and gathering and the other zone will be used for a range of activities and events including markets, community garage sales, repair cafes, outdoor movies as well as other recreation and sport.

24. The greens space will also be open to the wider public for casual use and to participate in events organized by the Hub.

25. The Hub’s vision is “to grow an inclusive place within the community for getting together to make, create, share skills, repair, recycle, upcycle and hatch ideas.”

26. The Hub shares their current facilities with Kai Auckland, Gecko Bags, Eco Maildrop, Lucky Penny, Delicious Dishes, Catalyse Network and Meshed. These organisations have expressed an interest in sharing the greens space and have provided letters of support to the Gribblehirst Hub application.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

27. The use of this space and the Gribblehirst Community Hub application was discussed with the local board on 16 August 2017.

28. The comprehensive application submitted aligns with several outcomes in the Albert-Eden local board as listed below –

· Albert-Eden has a strong sense of community

· Our parks are enjoyed by all

· Our community spaces are well-used by everyone

· Albert-Eden has thriving town centres and a growing local economy

· Travelling around Albert-Eden is safe and easy

· Our natural and cultural heritage is valued

· We respect and protect our environment.

Māori impact statement

29. Community leases generally support a wide range of activities and groups and are awarded based on an understanding of local needs, interest and priorities. As such, they are designed to create local benefits to many communities, including Māori.

30. If the board chooses to use s73(3) of the Reserves Act to lease the greens for a purpose other than as a recreation reserve, iwi consultation will occur in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Conservation Act 1987.

31. Engagement will involve email contact containing detailed information on the successful applicant and inviting iwi representatives to hui and or for a kaitiaki site visit to comment on any spiritual, cultural or environmental impact with respect to the new lease. Should mana whenua representatives make any recommendations, these may be included in targets set in the community outcomes plan and or in any additional conditions to the standard deed of lease.

32. Council staff will attend the Mana Whenua Forum (central) to be held on 25 October 2017. Relevant information regarding the new community lessee will be included on the agenda and council staff will present their agenda item to iwi representatives.

Implementation

33. The activities proposed by the Community Hub are not contemplated in the management plan. Following the board’s decision to grant a lease to this group, there is a requirement for public notification of the board’s intention to grant a lease to the Community Hub.

34. The costs associated with public notification and engagement with iwi about council’s intention to grant a new community lease is approximately $1300.00. This cost will be borne by the Community Facilities Department. Should there be any submissions and or objections received during the public notification process, this may lead to a hearing process which in turn, may incur additional cost.

35. As part of the next steps prior to formalising this lease, there is also a requirement for iwi consultation.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Proposed Leased Area	95
b ⇩	Aerial of Gribblehirst Park	97

Signatories

Author

Andrea Aranha - Community Lease Advisor

Authorisers

Rod Sheridan - General Manager Community Facilities

Adam Milina - Relationship Manager - Albert-Eden & Orakei Local Boards

Albert-Eden Local Board

27 September 2017

Remuneration Authority consultation document

File No.: CP2017/19614

Purpose

1. To provide comments on the Remuneration Authority’s Consultation Document “Local Government Review” by 15 December 2017.

Executive summary

2. The Remuneration Authority is consulting local authorities on proposals in its consultation document “Local Government Review”. Feedback is due by Friday 15 December 2017. The Remuneration Authority wants to discuss the proposals with Local Government New Zealand (LGNZ) zone meetings.

3. The Authority has noted that they are seeking the views of councils, not individual elected members or staff. All local boards are being provided the opportunity to respond as is the governing body.

4. The Authority proposes the following long-term changes to the way in which remuneration is decided:

(i) each council is sized according to proposed factors such as population

(ii) a remuneration pool for the council is determined based on the size

(iii) the mayor’s salary is determined by the Authority

(iv) the council then proposes how to allocate the total pool (after the mayor’s salary is deducted) among elected members to recognise positions of responsibility

(v) there is relativity between mayors and MPs, with the Auckland mayor being paid no more than a cabinet minister.

5. The consultation document sets out the proposals and asks for feedback in regard to specific questions.

6. The proposals do not impact on expenses policies or meeting fees for resource management hearings.

7. The body of this report summarises the content of each section of the document and quotes the questions. Comments from staff highlight issues the local board might wish to consider. The document is in Attachment A and provides the full details of the proposals.

8. The proposal to provide each council with a remuneration pool gives councils more flexibility to recognise varying responsibilities among members, but it puts elected members in the position of making decisions about their own salaries.

9. The consultation document does not discuss local boards. In other councils, community board salaries would be funded from the council pool, unless they were funded by a targeted rate. Local boards are very different from community boards and local boards should make their comments in the context of their role and responsibilities within Auckland Council. Local boards may wish to comment on how, if the remuneration pool concept proceeds, the remuneration of local boards should be decided.

Recommendation/s

That the Albert-Eden Local Board:

a) provide its comments on the Remuneration Authority’s Consultation Document Local Government Review.

Comments

Introduction

10. The Remuneration Authority has circulated a discussion document with a request for comments by 15 December 2017. This is appended in Attachment A. The Authority states that a separate consultation document will be circulated for Auckland Council but that the principles in the current document will apply to Auckland Council.

11. The Authority has noted that they are seeking the views of councils, not individual elected members or staff. All local boards are being provided the opportunity to respond as is the governing body.

12. Currently, the key aspects for setting remuneration for councils other than Auckland are:

(i) a size index for each council based on population and expenditure

(ii) job-sizing council positions in sample councils

(iii) assessing the portion of full-time work

(iv) the Authority’s pay scale

(v) a pool equivalent to one member’s salary for recognising additional positions of responsibility

(vi) a loading of 12.5% for unitary councils

(vii) hourly rates for resource consent hearings.

13. The report summarises the content of each section of the discussion document and quotes the questions. Comments from staff highlight issues the local board might wish to consider. The document is in Attachment A and provides the full details of the proposals.

Council size

14. The discussion document defines council size as “the accumulated demands on any council resulting from its accountability for its unique mix of functions, obligations, assets and citizenry”. It proposes a number of measures on which to base council size such as:

(i) population

(ii) operational expenditure

(iii) asset size

(iv) social deprivation

(v) guest nights.

15. For regional councils, social deprivation would not be used to assess size, but land area would be.

16. For unitary councils, land area would be added to all other factors in order to recognise regional responsibilities. The previous 12.5% loading would not apply.

17. Detailed explanations about why these factors were chosen are in the discussion document.

18. Remuneration Authority questions on sizing factors:

With regard to the proposed factors to be used for sizing councils

· Are there significant influences on council size that are not recognised by the factors identified?

· Are there any factors that we have identified that you believe should not be used and why?

· When measuring council assets, do you support the inclusion of all council assets, including those commercial companies that are operated by boards?

· If not, how should the Authority distinguish between different classes of assets?

19. Comments:

(i) It is noted that prior to 2013, the Authority took population growth into account. The councils experiencing higher growth might be expected to be faced with more complex issues to resolve than councils with stagnant growth.

(ii) In a review conducted in 2012, the Authority stated:

The adjustment for ‘abnormal population growth’ has been discontinued, because it is felt that such growth will be reflected in a council’s expenses

Weighting

20. The discussion document proposes weighting the factors slightly differently for different types of council.

Territorial authorities:

Population, operational expenditure

Assets

Deprivation index, visitor nights

Regional councils:

Operational expenditure, geographic size

Assets, population

Visitor nights

Unitary authorities:

Population, operational expenditure, geographic size

Assets

Deprivation index; visitor nights

21. Remuneration Authority questions on weighting:

· Are you aware of evidence that would support or challenge the relativity of the factors for each type of council?

· If you believe other factors should be taken into account, where would they sit relative to others?

22. Comments:

(i) Staff do not see any issues with this proposal.

Mayoral remuneration

23. Mayors are considered to be full-time positions. The discussion document states that a base rate would be determined and additional amounts would be based on the size of the council as assessed above. The Remuneration Authority would set the mayor’s salary.

24. Remuneration Authority questions on Mayoral remuneration:

· Should mayor/chair roles should be treated as full time?

· If not, how should they be treated?

· Should there be a “base” remuneration level for all mayors/chairs, with additional remuneration added according to the size of the council?

· If so, what should determine this “base remuneration”?

25. Comments:

(i) For Auckland Council, the roles of the mayor, councillors and local board chairs have all been treated as full-time. There has been no diminution in role responsibilities since that was determined. There is no rationale for change.

Councillor remuneration

26. A total remuneration pool would be set for each council and each council would decide how to distribute the pool among elected members (after the mayoral salary has been deducted). A 75% majority vote would be required. The Remuneration Authority would receive each council’s decisions and would then make formal determinations.

27. The pool could be used to recognise additional workload arising from appointments to external bodies.

28. Remuneration Authority questions on councillor remuneration:

· Should councillor remuneration be decided by each council within the parameters of a governance/representation pool allocated to each council by the Remuneration Authority?

· If so, should each additional position of responsibility, above a base councillor role, require a formal role description?

· Should each council be required to gain a 75% majority vote to determine the allocation of remuneration across all its positions?

29. Comments:

(i) Setting a remuneration pool for an entity with the entity then responsible for deciding how it is allocated among members, is a valid remuneration practice.

(ii) One issue to consider relating to the pool proposal is that the size of the pool, once determined, is fixed. If a pool is determined for each local board, then if the number of members on a board is increased or decreased, say by a review of representation arrangements, the amount that each member is paid will decrease or increase accordingly. This issue is acknowledged in paragraphs 102 and 103 of the discussion document.

(iii) In view of this, the local board might wish to consider its view on the assumption that the governance responsibility can be represented by a fixed pool.

(iv) A further issue to consider is that elected members would need to debate how to allocate the pool. The Remuneration Authority currently fully sets Auckland Council’s elected member remuneration. Council has not had to debate how remuneration might be apportioned among governing body and local board members. This would be a major change.

(v) Staff do not see any issues with the proposals for role descriptions and a 75% majority vote.

External representation roles

30. The Authority notes that elected members are increasingly being appointed to represent councils on various outside committees and bodies.

31. Remuneration Authority questions on external representation roles:

· Should external representation roles be able to be remunerated in a similar way to council positions of responsibility?

32. Comments:

(i) There are many bodies such as trusts and co-governance entities to which Auckland Council elected members are appointed. These appointments are currently treated as part of the role of being an elected member.

(ii) If the pool proposal allows councils to recognise additional responsibilities (or workload) attached to representation on external organisations, an issue to consider is whether such recognition of additional workload might then extend to internal committee membership, including the number of committees a member is part of. The issue is how granular the recognition of responsibilities should be.

Appointments to CCOs

33. The Authority notes that some councils make appointments of elected members to CCOs.

34. Remuneration Authority questions on appointments to CCOs:

· Do the additional demands placed on CCO board members make it fair for elected members appointed to such boards to receive the same director fees as are paid to other CCO board members?

35. Comments:

(i) Auckland Council cannot legally appoint elected members to substantive CCOs, other than Auckland Transport.

(ii) In the current term, Auckland Council has not appointed elected members to Auckland Transport, but in previous terms the two appointees received directors’ fees.

Community boards

36. The discussion document includes proposals and questions regarding community boards. Auckland Council does not have community boards and we recommend this is clearly stated in any local board response.

37. Community board salaries would either come from the council pool or be separately funded by way of a targeted rate.

38. Remuneration Authority questions on community boards:

· Should community board remuneration always come out of the council governance/representation pool?

· If not, should it be funded by way of targeted rate on the community concerned?

· If not, what other transparent and fair mechanisms are there for funding the remuneration of community board members?

Local Boards

39. The discussion document does not mention local boards.

40. Most local boards are larger or similar in size to other councils in New Zealand.

41. Local boards have decision-making and governance responsibilities over $500million per annum

Comments:

Local boards should comment

(i) On the merits or otherwise of a bulk funding approach

(ii) If the Remuneration Authority does decide on a bulk funding approach

a. Should the governing body determine remuneration for each local board or

b. Should the Remuneration Authority determine separate bulk funding for the governing body and each local board.

Local government pay scale

42. The discussion document discusses how the role of elected members might compare to other roles and other entities for the purposes of setting a pay scale. It considers local government managers, central government managers and boards of directors. These are not elected member roles.

43. The document then considers parliamentary elected member salaries for comparison.

44. Remuneration Authority questions on local government pay scale:

· Is it appropriate for local government remuneration to be related to parliamentary remuneration, but taking account of differences in job sizes?

· If so, should that the relativity be capped so the incumbent in the biggest role in local government cannot receive more than a cabinet minister?

· If not, how should a local government pay scale be determined?

45. Comments:

(i) The Authority suggests in the document that mayor/chair salaries are related to MPs. The question refers to the “biggest role in local government” which would be the Auckland mayor. By setting the salary of the Auckland mayor to that of a cabinet minister, other mayors would be scaled accordingly.

Timetable

46. A determination setting councils’ remuneration pools will be made around 1 July in each election year. Following the elections, each council is to resolve its remuneration policy on the allocation of the pool for the triennium. In the years between elections, adjustments will be made based on published “Labour Market Statistics”.

Conclusion

47. These proposals constitute a major change for Auckland Council. From its inception, the salaries of Auckland Council elected members have been fully determined by the Remuneration Authority.

48. The remuneration pool proposal provides councils with more flexibility to recognise varying responsibilities among members, but this puts elected members in the position of making decisions about their own salaries.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

49. This report seeks the local boards’ views on the proposals contained in the Remuneration Authority’s discussion document. Local board views will be reported individually to the Remuneration Authority.

Māori impact statement

50. The level at which elected members are remunerated does not impact differently on Māori as compared with the wider community.

Implementation

51. Feedback from the local board will be communicated to the Remuneration Authority.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Local Government Review	107

Signatories

Author

Warwick McNaughton - Principal Advisor - Democracy Services

Authorisers

Marguerite Delbet – General Manager Democracy Services

Adam Milina - Relationship Manager - Albert-Eden & Orakei Local Boards

Albert-Eden Local Board

27 September 2017

Auckland Plan Refresh - Local Board Engagement

File No.: CP2017/19616

Purpose

1. To seek local board feedback on draft Auckland Plan content to inform the final draft of the refreshed Auckland Plan.

Executive summary

2. In June and July 2017 the Auckland Plan refresh team provided all local boards with summaries of the strategic themes and focus areas for the refreshed Auckland Plan for their consideration.

3. Resolutions and feedback from local boards over June and July, and feedback from stakeholders informed the further development of the content and development of the strategic framework. The framework was approved in principle by the Planning Committee on 1 August 2017. A summary of the feedback from local boards accompanied the report to the Planning Committee.

4. A further update on the Auckland Plan refresh was sent by memo to local boards on 16 August. This memo highlighted next steps, in particular that there would be further engagement with local boards in September 2017.

5. Local boards are scheduled to hold workshops during September 2017 to review the Auckland Plan package of materials, including content across the six outcome areas and the Development Strategy. This report seeks formal feedback on this content which will be considered as part of the proposed Auckland Plan.

6. Further Planning Committee meetings will be held in October and November to finalise draft content for the proposed Auckland Plan prior to public consultation in early 2018.

Recommendation/s

That the Albert-Eden Local Board:

a) provide feedback, including any specific feedback on the package of materials across the six outcome areas and the Development Strategy (attachment A to the agenda report).

b) note that the resolutions of this meeting will be reported back to the Planning Committee for consideration in the drafting of the refreshed Auckland Plan.

Comments

Background

7. Auckland Council is required under the Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009 to develop and review a spatial plan for Auckland. The Auckland Plan refresh provides an opportunity to revisit Auckland’s most challenging issues, to ensure the plan continues to be a useful guiding document for Auckland.

8. On 28 March 2017, the Planning Committee endorsed a streamlined spatial approach for the refresh of the Auckland Plan. The refreshed plan is intended to be more focused and structured around a small number of inter-linked strategic themes that address Auckland’s biggest challenges. The plan is also intended to have a greater focus on the development strategy.

Local Board involvement in the refresh

9. Local board chairs have been invited to all Planning Committee workshops on the Auckland Plan during 2017. Throughout these workshops, chairs (or their representatives) have provided early input into opportunities and challenges for Auckland over the next 30 years and feedback on the proposed strategic framework for the refreshed Auckland Plan. This input was the views of chairs only and does not represent formal local board feedback.

10. At local board cluster briefings in February and April 2017, local board members gave feedback and information which was used to refine the scope of strategic themes and focus areas.

11. A report on the Auckland Plan Refresh was considered at local board business meetings in June and July. Local boards were invited to consider their formal position on the themes and focus areas and provide further feedback.

12. Local board cluster briefings were also held in April and July on the Development Strategy which is a core component of Auckland Plan.

13. Resolutions and feedback from local boards over June and July informed the further development of a draft strategic framework. This was approved in principle by the Planning Committee on 1 August. A summary of the feedback from local boards accompanied this report to the Planning Committee.

14. A further update on the Auckland Plan refresh was sent by memo to local boards on 16 August 2017. This memo highlighted next steps, in particular that there would be further engagement with local boards in September 2017.

15. Local boards are scheduled to hold workshops during September 2017 to review the Auckland Plan package of materials, including content across the six outcome areas and the Development Strategy. This report seeks formal feedback on this content which will be considered as part of the proposed Auckland Plan.

16. Further Planning Committee meetings will be held in October and November to finalise draft content for the proposed Auckland Plan prior to full public consultation in early 2018.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

17. Local board feedback on the package of engagement material is being sought in this report.

18. Local boards play an important role in relation to the content of the Auckland Plan through communicating local views to the governing body and providing input to regional strategies, policies, and plans.

Māori impact statement

19. The council is required to provide opportunities for Māori engagement and to support Māori capacity to participate in decision-making. When making significant decisions in relation to land or a body of water, the council must take into account the relationship of Māori and their culture and traditions with their ancestral land, water, sites, waahi tapu, valued flora and fauna and other taonga.

20. Staff from the Independent Māori Statutory Board (IMSB) provided guidance on the strategic themes of the plan. The IMSB’s Māori Plan for Tāmaki Makaurau was a guiding document underpinning the development of the strategic themes and focus areas.

21. The strategic themes acknowledge and celebrate Māori culture as Auckland’s point of difference, and Māori as Treaty partners in Auckland.

22. Māori Identity and Wellbeing is one of the six outcomes of the plan. The outcome describes the application of Te ao Māori values to the region, acknowledges the unique role of mana whenua as kaitiaki of Tāmaki Makaurau and acknowledges the foundational role of Te Tiriti o Waitangi.

23. Engagement with mana whenua, mataawaka, and relevant Māori community groups has been undertaken to develop the draft plan.

Implementation

24. Feedback from the local boards will be summarised and provided to the Planning Committee for consideration in the drafting of the refreshed Auckland Plan.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Auckland Plan Draft Content Package	141

Signatories

Author

Christina Kaiser - Principal Strategic Advisor

Authorisers

Jacques Victor – GM Auckland Plan Strategy and Research

Adam Milina - Relationship Manager - Albert-Eden & Orakei Local Boards

Albert-Eden Local Board

27 September 2017

Public alerting framework for Auckland

File No.: CP2017/19612

Purpose

1. To provide information on the Public Alerting Framework for Auckland. The report also provides the results of an analysis carried out by GNS Science, identifying communities at risk from tsunami across Auckland.

2. In addition, the report also seeks in-principle support for the proposed enhancement of Auckland’s tsunami siren network.

Executive summary

3. In February 2017, the Auckland Civil Defence and Emergency Management (CDEM) Group Committee endorsed the draft Public Alerting Framework for Auckland.

4. Following on from this, crown research agency, GNS Science was commissioned to provide an analysis of those communities most at risk from tsunami within the orange and red tsunami evacuation zones.

5. The GNS report and the Public Alerting Framework was presented to local boards in workshop sessions. Auckland Emergency Management is asking local boards for in principle support for the Public Alerting Framework and for an enhanced tsunami siren network.

6. Next steps involve procurement and design of tsunami siren and signage. Further information will be presented to local boards in due course.

Recommendation/s

That the Albert-Eden Local Board:

a) note the approach to public alerting as outlined in the Public Alerting Framework for Auckland (Attachment A).

b) provide in-principle support for the development of an enhanced and expanded regional tsunami siren network, noting that further information on design, placement and other considerations for the network will be reported in due course.

Comments

Tsunami risk for Auckland

7. A tsunami is a natural phenomenon consisting of a series of waves generated when a large volume of water in the sea, or in a lake, is rapidly displaced^{^[1]}. Tsunami threats pose a risk to New Zealand and to Auckland. Occurrence rates of tsunami are higher in the Pacific than for other oceans because of the "Ring of Fire".^{^[2]} Tsunami waves are most commonly caused by underwater earthquakes. In addition, these events have the potential to cause multiple other hazards including but not limited to; fire, fault line ruptures, coastal inundation, landslides, lifeline utility failures and serious health issues.^{^[3]}The Tonga-Kermadec trench is one of the Earth’s deepest trenches, and is Auckland’s highest risk for tsunami. Auckland is susceptible to regional and distant source tsunami, that is, tsunami generated from earthquakes in and around the Pacific Rim with travel time more than 1 hour as well as locally generated tsunami. Tsunami can be categorised as local, regional or distant based on their travel time or distance to the Auckland coastline.

· Local source – less than 1 hour travel time. These tsunamis can be generated by offshore faults, underwater landslide or volcanic activity.

· Regional source – Earthquakes in and around the Pacific Islands and the Tonga-Kermadec Trench 1 to 3 hours travel time to Auckland

· Distant source – Commonly generated by a large earthquake from any location around the Pacific Rim including but not limited to South America, Japan, the Aleutian Islands and Alaska. The travel time to Auckland will be 3 hours or greater. ^{^[4]}

Figure 1. This map shows the position of New Zealand in the Pacific Ocean within an area of intense seismic activity called the ‘Ring of Fire’. Source: GNS Science

Tsunami sirens

5. Currently, Auckland has 44 fixed tsunami warning sirens across nine sites in legacy Rodney and Waitakere. These sirens were installed in 2008 and 2010 and do not meet current government technical standards^{^[5]} for tsunami warning sirens. All new and existing siren installations will need to meet these standards by June 2020.

6. Auckland Emergency Management is currently investigating the upgrading of its existing siren network from ‘tone-only’ sirens to those with PA/voiceover loudspeaker capability. The sirens have a strong immediate effect and can prompt immediate action to seek further information. There are valuable benefits in using tsunami sirens, in particular, sirens can be used when other communications (e.g. cell phones and radio broadcasting) may not have the maximum reach or be as effective. It is commonly accepted across the emergency management sector that effective public alerting systems are those that take a holistic view. This being said, public alerting needs to be well planned, understood, and in conjunction with effective public education information and campaigns. This is imperative for a regionally consistent approach to public alerting that communities can use and understand.

7. The limited locations of the present tsunami siren systems have been identified as a gap in the public alerting capabilities of Auckland region. Presently, Auckland is not well represented by tsunami sirens with the estimated reach of Auckland’s current sirens being only eight per cent of the ‘at-risk’ population. Auckland’s tsunami siren network is currently being considered for enhancement and expansion through the delivery of the Public Alerting Framework

Public Alerting Framework

8. Auckland Council has recognised the need for a regionally consistent approach to public alerting through the adoption of the Public Alerting Framework. The Framework, which was approved for consultation with local boards in February 2017, has been designed to:

· explain what public alerting in a CDEM sense is, what it can and cannot do;

· give detail on the range of channels for public alerting currently available in Auckland;

· highlight the advances being taken with regards to public alerting at a national level;

· provide some commentary on tsunami sirens, their uses and limitations; and

· assist with decisions taken by the Auckland CDEM Group Committee, local boards and partners and stakeholders with regards to the prioritisation of budgets and options for enhancing public alerting across the Auckland region.

9. Auckland Council recognises the need to enhance the public alerting network, and as such, has allocated funds from the Long-Term Plan for this venture. This funding provides a starting point for consultation on the future of Auckland’s tsunami siren network and the enhancement of public alerting.

10. It is important to understand that no one public alerting system is without fault. The Public Alerting Framework focusses on the use of multi-platforms, understanding that a holistic approach is one that maximises the reach of public alerting in an emergency or hazard event. Through this project, prioritised public education is critical. Without effective public education and engagement activities, sirens alone are not considered a standalone approach to public alerting.

GNS Science report

Introduction and methodology

11. Following the endorsement of the Public Alerting Framework, crown research agency GNS Science was contracted to complete an independent analysis (see Appendix B) of those communities most at-risk of tsunami.

12. A GIS based analysis was used to calculate the number of exposed residents in communities. The analysis used 2013 census population data to identify the number of residents located in the red and orange tsunami evacuation zones. (see Figure 2.) For further detail on the evacuation zones and the methodology please see Appendix B.

Figure 2. Auckland red and orange tsunami evacuation zones as used in the GNS Science analysis

Results

13. The results of the analysis carried out by GNS Science identified 217 communities at-risk from tsunami. For all 217 communities modelled, there are a total of 49,853 people at-risk from tsunami in the orange and red evacuation zones. For detailed information on the results of this analysis including detail on those communities at risk of tsunami please refer to the report from GNS Science at Appendix B.

Next steps

14. Workshops have been held with local boards across the region in order to share the results of the GNS Science report and the intention to implement an enhanced and expanded regional tsunami siren network. This report seeks in-principle support for this enhanced and expanded network. More information on design, placement and other considerations for the network will be reported in due course

Consideration

Local board views and implications

15. Workshops on tsunami risk were held with local boards in 2016. Following the development of the Public Alerting Framework further information on tsunami risk, including the results of the GNS Science report, were shared with local boards between July and October 2017. Local boards were told that in-principle support for the enhanced and expanded tsunami siren network would be sought at formal business meetings of local boards.

16. As key decision makers representing local communities, local board input into this important project will continue.

Māori impact statement

17. There are no particular impacts on Maori communities which are different from the general population arising from this report. The Public Alerting Framework for Auckland notes the importance of community resilience, of reaching all members of the community and of having systems in place to ensure that public alert messages are understood and ubiquitous.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Public Alerting Framework	163
b ⇩	GNS Science report	173

Signatories

Author

Celia Wilson - Project Manager

Authorisers

Craig Glover, Head of Strategy and Planning

John Dragicevich, Civil Defence Emergency Management Director

Adam Milina - Relationship Manager - Albert-Eden & Orakei Local Boards

Albert-Eden Local Board

27 September 2017

[1] Berryman, K. et al. (2005) Review of Tsunami Hazard and Risk in New Zealand. Dunedin, Institute of Geological and Nuclear Sciences Limited.

[2] GNS Science, Tsunami in New Zealand data accessed on 26th June 2017 from https://www.gns.cri.nz/Home/Our-Science/Natural-Hazards/Tsunami/Tsunami-in-New-Zealand

[3] ACDEM (2016), Auckland Civil Defence and Emergency Management Group Plan 2016-2021

[5] [5] MCDEM (2014), Tsunami Warning Sirens Technical Standard [TS 03/14]

Chairperson	Peter Haynes
Deputy Chairperson	Glenda Fryer
Members	Lee Corrick
	Graeme Easte
	Rachel Langton
	Ben Lee
	Jessica Rose
	Margi Watson

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Albert-Eden Local Board Workshop Notes - 16 August 2017	263
b ⇩	Albert-Eden Local Board Workshop Notes - 30 August 2017	265
c ⇩	Albert-Eden Local Board Workshop Notes - 6 September 2017	267
d ⇩	Albert-Eden Local Board Workshop Notes - 13 September 2017	269

Author	Michael Mendoza - Democracy Advisor
Authoriser	Adam Milina - Relationship Manager - Albert-Eden & Orakei Local Boards