Agenda of Whau Local Board - 27 September 2017

Whau 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 6

5 Leave of Absence 6

6 Acknowledgements 6

7 Ward Councillor’s Update 6

8 Deputations 6

8.1 Deputation - Inspector Fata Willi Fanene 6

8.2 Deputation - Rhonda Evans 6

8.3 Deputation - Robin Brehmer and Nina Patel 7

9 Public Forum 7

10 Extraordinary Business 7

11 Notices of Motion 8

12 Auckland Transport Report, Whau Local Board, September 2017 9

13 Whau Local Grants, Round One and Quick Response, Round Two 2017/2018 13

14 Relationship Agreement with Mana Whenua 129

15 Public alerting framework for Auckland 147

16 Auckland Plan Refresh - Local Board Engagement 219

17 Remuneration Authority consultation document 231

18 Whau Local Board Input - Feedback to the Tākaro – Investing in Play discussion document 269

19 Governance Forward Work Calendar 277

20 Confirmation of Workshop Records: 16 August 2017 to 13 September 2017 281

21 Panuku Development Auckland - Unlock Avondale update

This report was not available when the agenda was compiled and will be circulated

as soon as possible.

22 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.

Specifically members are asked to identify any new interests they have not previously disclosed, an interest that might be considered as a conflict of interest with a matter on the agenda.

The following are declared interests of the Whau Local Board.

Board Member	Organisation / Position
Tracy Mulholland	· New Lynn Business Association – Business Associate/Contractor
Susan Zhu	· Chinese Oral History Foundation – Committee member · The Chinese Garden Steering Committee of Auckland – Board Member
Derek Battersby	· Whau Coastal Walkway Environmental Trust –Trustee · New Lynn Tennis Club – Patron · West Lynn Gardens – Patron · Tag Out Trust – Chairman · New Lynn Bowling Club - Patron · Avondale RSA - Member
Catherine Farmer	· Avondale-Waterview Historical Society – Member · Blockhouse Bay Historical Society – Member · Portage Licensing Trust – Trustee · Blockhouse Bay Bowls – Patron · Forest and Bird organisation - Member
Duncan Macdonald	· Avondale Business Association – Chairman · Avondale Community Society – Chairman · Avondale RSA – Committee Member · Avondale-Waterview Historical Society - Member · Avondale Jockey Club – Member
Te’eva Matafai	· Pacific Events and Entertainment Trust - Co-Founder · Miss Samoa NZ - Director · Miss World Samoa - Director · Malu Measina Samoan Dance Group - Director/Founder · Pasifika Festival ATEED - Samoa Village Coordinator · Aspire Events - Director
David Whitley	· Rosebank Business Association - Member · Pathways to the future - Past trustee · REINZ - Member · Don Oliver Youth Sports Foundation - Past trustee · Chamber of Trade - Mentor · Lopdell House - Trustee · West Auckland Enterprise, Skills & Training (WEST) - Manager

4 Confirmation of Minutes

That the Whau Local Board:

a) confirm the ordinary minutes of its meeting, held on Wednesday, 23 August 2017, including the confidential section, 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 Ward Councillor’s Update

An opportunity is provided for the Whau Ward Councillor to update the board on regional issues he has been involved with since the last meeting.

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 Whau 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 - Inspector Fata Willi Fanene

Purpose

1. Inspector Fata Willi Fanene will be in attendance to present to the Local Board with respect to the use of Council Community Halls in their ward by members of the public and the resulting public harm issues that emanate from the use and abuse of these halls by some of the hirers.

Recommendation

That the Whau Local Board:

a) receive the deputation from Inspector Fata Willi Fanene and thank him for the presentation.

8.2 Deputation - Rhonda Evans

Purpose

1. Rhonda Evans, an owner of premises at 48A and 52 Rosebank Road, Avondale has run a business for the last 38 years from those locations and is also representing local businesses near and around the now decommissioned toilet facilities following a fire in 2011 at 50A Rosebank Road, will be in attendance to present to the Local Board on the re-establishment of a public toilet/convenience in close proximity to 50A Rosebank Road.

Recommendation

That the Whau Local Board:

a) receive the deputation from Rhonda Evans and thank her for the presentation.

8.3 Deputation - Robin Brehmer and Nina Patel

Purpose

1. Nina Patel of Avondale Community Action and Robin Brehmer will be in attendance to present to the board on the matter of Rosebank's three 80-year-old scheduled pecan trees ID676 which were felled in error on September 6, 2017. The presentation will also cover safeguarding Rosebank's horticultural heritage, ways in which the council can compensate our community, and ways to improve the system to ensure our protected trees remain for generations.

Recommendation

That the Whau Local Board:

a) receive the deputation from Nina Patel of Avondale Community Action and Robin Brehmer and thank them for the presentation.

Attachments

a Deputation - Robin Brehmer - memo.................................................. 305

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.

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

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

There were no notices of motion.

Whau Local Board

27 September 2017

Auckland Transport Report, Whau Local Board, September 2017

File No.: CP2017/19803

Purpose

1. The purpose of this report is to; respond to requests on transport-related matters, provide an update on the current status of Local Board Transport Capital Fund (LBTCF), request approval for new LBTCF projects, provide a summary of consultation material sent to the Board and, provide transport related information on matters of specific application and interest to the Whau Local Board and its community.

Executive summary

2. In particular, this report covers:

· Consultations sent to the Board for comment

· Transport briefings and workshops

· Response to resolutions

· Progress on the Board’s transport capital fund projects

Recommendation

That the Whau Local Board:

a) receive the Auckland Transport Report, Whau Local Board, September 2017.

Comments

Transport meetings:

3. Auckland Transport attended a number of workshops and transport briefings in August 2017. Officers from Auckland Transport briefed Board members on the following:

· Local Board Transport Capital Fund

· Great North Road (between Veronica St and Portage Road in New Lynn) - Mixed Use Arterial Programme

· Rosebank Business Association – Transport Issues

· Footpath renewal – Great North Road

· Updates on other transport matters were also covered in brief.

Response to resolutions

4. Resolution number WH/2017/90 – The Whau Local Board request a full update on Waitahurangi bridge project to come to September board meeting.

5. In August 2016 AT presented an Options Estimate report for the Waitahurangi Bridge on request of the Whau Local Board. The report along with concept plans included 3 different options. The board supported option 3, a 58.4m “curvy” bridge.

6. There are still a number of elements to the design that are unclear. Including: lighting, balustrades, bridge deck and architectural components. This along with whole of life costs and McWhirter Place upgrade are now being investigated.

7. The Concept and preliminary design is being undertaken utilizing the Local Board Transport Capital Fund and will be complete by the end of 2017.

Local Board Capital Projects

8. The Whau Local Board has approximately $550,000 per annum of discretionary funding for transport related capital projects.

9. This money can be used for projects identified by the Local Board, the principal constraints being that the project:

· Will not compromise transport safety;

· Is transport-related;

· Does not compromise the efficiency of the road network.

10. The Local Board’s current Local Board Transport Capital Fund (LBTCF) projects are summarised in the table below:

Project

Description

Status

Projected Cost

Whau Bridge

A footbridge that is 3.5m wide and 76.5 m long. It is separated from the rail bridge, as part of the New Lynn to Waterview shared path.

· Tender for construction to be confirmed late October, 17

· Construction to begin December,17

· Projected completion October,18

$2,000,000 (expended from last terms budget)

Waitahurangi bridge project (McWhirter Bridge)

A footbridge to link Busby and McWhirter Streets in New Lynn

The connection between Mcwhirter Place and Busby Street, New Lynn, was identified in the Whau Greenways Network Plan as a priority.

· Offer of Service received from consultant to prepare Preliminary Design for consultation (approximate cost - $80,000). The plans will include architectural perspective as well as value engineer for all options being considered.

· Expected to be complete by the end of 2017.

$1,034,000

Consideration

Local board views and implications

11. The Board’s views are considered during consultation on proposed project schemes. The following project proposals were consulted and feedback sought by the Local Board August 2017:

· Broken Yellow Lines, Marconi Place, New Windsor

· Bus stop & parking changes in New Lynn

· Broken Yellow Lines, Pinewood Road, Avondale

· Broken Yellow Lines, Coronet Place in Avondale

Māori impact statement

12. No specific issues with regard to impacts on Maori are triggered by this report and any engagement with Maori will be carried out on an individual project basis.

Implementation

13. All proposed schemes are subject to prioritisation, funding and consultation.

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Signatories

Author

Felicity Merrington, Elected Member Relationship Manager, Auckland Transport

Authorisers

Jonathan Anyon, Manager, Elected Member Relationship Unit, Auckland Transport

Glenn Boyd - Relationship Manager Henderson-Massey, Waitakere Ranges, Whau

Whau Local Board

27 September 2017

Whau Local Grants, Round One and Quick Response, Round Two 2017/2018

File No.: CP2017/11820

Purpose

1. The purpose of this report is to present applications received for the Whau Local Grants, Round One 2017/2018 and the Whau Quick Response, Round One 2017/2018. The local board is required to fund, part-fund or decline these applications.

Executive summary

2. The Whau Local Board has set a total community grants budget of $150,000 for the 2017/2018 financial year.

3. Twenty applications were received in the local grants round, requesting a total amount of $166,040. One application was submitted after the Whau grants round had closed, requesting $7,500.

4. A further thirteen applications were received in the quick response round, requesting a total amount of $23,142.

Recommendations

That the Whau Local Board:

a) consider the local grant applications listed in Table One and agree to fund, part-fund or decline each application in this round.

Table One: Applications for the Whau Local Grants, Round One 2017/2018

Application No.	Organisation Name	Project	Total Requested
LG1821-115	Connected Media Charitable Trust	Towards workshop facilitators, digital support, coordinator, project management, promotion and consumables for Outlook for Someday Free One-day Film-making Workshop held between 1 September 2017 to 31 May 2018	$3,162
LG1821-120	Mrs Deahne Lakatani	Towards project management, printing and distribution for the "In our Hood" directory of services in the Whau for young people	$12,000
LG1821-119	Bhartiya Samaj Charitable Trust	Towards volunteer reimbursement, transport reimbursement, venue hire, transport costs for seniors, promotional material and digital camera for the Elder Support Program from November 2017 to December 2018	$5,000
LG1821-116	Kelston Community Hub	Towards facilitator wages, childcare, venue hire, printing, catering, start-up costs for community project at end of course for BOOST - Kelston	$11,488
LG1821-110	Auckland Happy House Incorporated	Towards hall hire and costumes for traditional Chinese dance group - Happy House	$2,000
LG1821-107	Kelston Boys High School	Towards staging and activities for the Kelston Boys High School Whanau Day held November 2017	$4,552
LG1807-111	Royal New Zealand Foundation of the Blind	Towards the purchase of multi-licence digital talking books for people affected by blindness and low-vision.	$2,000
LG1819-101	Rutherford College Community Education	Towards distribution of Continuing Education booklets throughout west Auckland	$1,035
LG1802-119	StarJam Charitable Trust	Cost towards two music workshops (20 participants) in the Devonport-Takapuna area for venue hire and tutor fees.	$3,298
LG1808-101	The Korean Society of Auckland	Towards venue hire, equipment hire and volunteer costs for the 2018 Korean Day	$1,200
LG1821-112	Te Whānau O Waipareira	Towards event costs for Waitangi@Waititi 2018	$5,000
LG1821-114	Sport Waitakere	Towards walking coordinator, promotion and fuel reimbursement for the delivery of Walk With Us in the Whau	$4,320
LG1819-105	Ecomatters Environment Trust	Towards wages for weed advice programme across the three west local boards from 1 October 2017 to 31 March 2018	$2,500
LG1819-111	New Zealand Bird Rescue Charitable Trust	Towards management salary, bird feed, and veterinary expenses for period October 2017 to April 2018 ‍	$9,000
LG1821-118	Lions Club of New Lynn Incorporated	Towards entertainment and services for the New Lynn Lions Christmas Festival held December 2017	$5,000
LG1821-117	Church of the Saviour	Towards covered staging, entertainment, traffic management, advertising and equipment hire for the Christmas at the Beach 2017	$20,441
LG1819-108	Zeal Education Trust	Towards activating the Event Box at schools in the Whau area	$9,924
LG1821-105	Kelston Community Hub	Towards event manager fees, lifeguard, donations to boat clubs, artists and performers, print advertising, promotion, photographer, sound and equipment, refreshments for volunteers, trailer, waste disposal, petrol, stationary for the event Flotilla Whau held March 2018	$11,620
LG1821-111	Avondale College Community Sports Trust	Towards resurfacing the artificial hockey turf at Avondale College	$45,000
		Total requested	$158,540

b) consider the quick response applications listed in Table Two and agree to fund, part-fund or decline each application in this round.

Table Two: Applications for the Whau Quick Response, Round One 2017/2018

Application No.	Organisation Name	Project	Total Requested
QR1821-113	Ruia Taitea Creative Ltd	Towards print costs for the Rangatahi Season 2018	$2,000
QR1821-103	Waitakere Japanese Supplementary School	Towards art materials, stationary and teaching materials for Term 4	$600
QR1821-108	St Mary of the Immaculate Conception Parish Avondale	Towards furniture, projector and screen for the youth centre	$1,920
QR1821-109	Kelston Community Hub	Towards purchasing a BBQ and kitchen equipment for the Kelston Community Hub	$1,269
QR1821-110	Encounter Hope Foundation	Towards shelving for the food bank	$1,720
QR1821-111	May Leaoseve	Towards respite and well-being for carers of children with Bronchiectasis	$2,000
QR1821-112	PHAB Association (Auckland) Incorporated	Towards coordinator and youth worker wages, mobility transport, volunteer expenses, and administration for the Access All project	$2,000
QR1821-120	Community Waitakere Charitable Trust	Towards purchasing sporting equipment, games, food, and BBQ gas for four Block Parties in Kelston	$2,000
QR1821-114	Encounter Christian Centre Trust	Towards decorations, props hire, candy floss and popcorn machines hire, corflute signs and advertising for the event Light Party - A positive alternative to Halloween	$1,673
QR1821-115	Green Bay Community House	Towards purchasing food and beverages for sale, and salaries for local youth for the German Christmas Market in Green Bay	$2,000
QR1821-121	Encounter Christian Centre	Towards hireage of rides and outdoor stage for the Avondale Community Christmas Carnival	$1,960
QR1821-107	Green Bay Community House	Towards koha for student leaders to deliver activities for the Green Bay Unicycle Club between October 2017 to October 2018	$2,000
QR1821-116	Ponsonby Rugby Club	Towards venue hire for the Ponsonby Kelston Broncos Rugby Camp	$2,000
		Total requested	$23,142

c) consider the late application in Table Three and agree to fund, part-fund or decline the application.

Table Three: Late application

Application No.	Organisation Name	Project	Total Requested
LG1811-111	OneTree House Ltd	Towards costs of development of translations and the design requirements for print ready artwork	$7,500
		Total requested	$7,500

Comments

5. The Auckland Council Community Grants Policy supports each local board to adopt a grants programme (see Attachment A).

6. The local board grants programme sets out:

· local board priorities

· lower priorities for funding

· exclusions

· grant types, the number of grant rounds and when these will open and close

· any additional accountability requirements.

7. The Whau Local Board will operate two local grant rounds and three quick response rounds in this financial year. The Whau Local Grants, Round One 2017/2018 closed on 28 July 2017. The Whau Quick Response, Round One 2017/2018 closed on 18 August 2017.

8. The community grant programmes have been extensively advertised through the council grants webpage, local board webpages, local board e-newsletters, Facebook pages, council publications, radio, and community networks.

9. The Whau Local Board has set a total community grants budget of $150,000 for the 2017/2018 financial year. It is recommended that the board consider allocating up to 40% of the budget in the two grant rounds in this report.

10. Twenty applications were received in this round, with a total requested amount of $166,040. One application was submitted after the Whau grants round had closed, requesting $7,500.

11. A further thirteen applications were received in the quick response round, requesting a total amount of $23,142

Consideration

Local board views and implications

12. Local boards are responsible for the decision-making and allocation of local board community grants. The Whau Local Board is required to fund, part-fund or decline these grant applications against the local board priorities identified in the local board grant programme.

13. The board is requested to note that section 50 of the Community Grants Policy states “We will also provide feedback to unsuccessful grant applicants about why they have been declined, so they will know what they can do to increase their chances of success next time.”

14. A summary of each application is attached (see Attachment B, C and D).

Māori impact statement

15. The provision of community grants provides opportunities for all Aucklanders to undertake projects, programmes, activities that benefit a wider range of individuals and groups, including Māori. As a guide for decision-making, in the allocation of community grants, the new community grants policy supports the principle of delivering positive outcomes for Māori. Three applicants applying in this round have identified as a Māori individual or organisation and ten applications have indicated their project targets Māori or Māori outcomes.

Implementation

16. The allocation of grants to community groups is within the adopted Long Term Plan 2015-2025 and local board agreements.

17. Following the Whau Local Board allocating funding for the Local Grants Round One and the Quick Response Round One, Commercial and Finance staff will notify the applicants of the local board’s decision.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Whau Grants Programme 2017/2018	19
b ⇩	Applications - Whau Local Grants, Round One 2017/2018	23
c ⇩	Applications - Whau Quick Response, Round One 2017/2018	87
d ⇩	Applications - Late application	125

Signatories

Author

Caroline Teh - Community Grants Advisor

Authorisers

Fran Hayton - Environmental Funding Advisor

Jennifer Rose - Operations Support Manager

Glenn Boyd - Relationship Manager Henderson-Massey, Waitakere Ranges, Whau

Whau Local Board

27 September 2017

Whau Local Board

27 September 2017

Relationship Agreement with Mana Whenua

File No.: CP2017/18954

Purpose

1. To obtain the Whau Local Board’s approval to adopt a relationship agreement template as the first step towards entering into formal relationships with mana whenua

Executive summary

2. This report recommends that the Whau Local Board approves a relationship agreement template as the basis for discussions with mana whenua.

3. It further recommends that where the agreement remains substantively the same as the template, albeit with the inclusion of information describing the mana whenua party, that it proceed to a formal signing without a further approval process.

4. The Governing Body is also being asked to approve the relationship template to support the expeditious completion of relationship agreements with mana whenua.

5. Auckland Council has an existing range of instruments and mechanisms to recognise and provide for its relationships with mana whenua. There is a strong desire from all parties to formalise the foundational governance relationships through the development of relationship agreements and in some cases acknowledge and build from legacy agreements held with former councils.

6. The mana whenua groups with interests in the Whau Local Board area are:

Iwi / Hapū	Mana whenua representative organisation
Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Whātua	Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Whātua
Ngāti Whātua o Kaipara	Nga Maunga Whakahii o Kaipara Development Trust
Ngāti Whātua o Ōrākei	Ngāti Whātua Ōrākei Whai Maia Ltd
Ngāi Tai ki Tāmaki	Ngāi Tai ki Tāmaki Trust
Te Kawerau a Maki	Te Kawerau Iwi Tribal Authority
Ngāti Tamaoho	Ngāti Tamaoho Trust
Ngāti Te Ata Waiohua	Te Ara Rangatu o Te Iwi o Ngāti Te Ata Waiohua
Te Akitai Waiohua	Te Akitai Waiohua Iwi Authority
Te Ahiwaru Waiohua	Makaurau Marae Māori Trust
Ngāti Paoa	Ngāti Paoa Trust
Ngāti Maru	Ngāti Maru Rūnanga Incorporated
Ngāti Tamaterā	Ngāti Tamaterā Settlement Trust
Waikato-Tainui	Waikato-Tainui Te Kauhanganui Incorporated

7. The final draft agreement for consideration (Attachment A) recognises the two parties, sets out the purpose, aspirations and shared principles, and in particular acknowledges the governance context of Auckland Council through the governing body and the relevant local board(s).

8. There are appendices to the agreement - the administrative provisions, existing and future projects or arrangements, and specific local board arrangements. These appendices are intended to be added to over time without alteration to the main agreement.

9. Discussions have begun with some mana whenua groups who have indicated they are ready to enter into this process.

Recommendations

That the Whau Local Board:

a) approve the relationship agreement template attached to the agenda report at Attachment A as the basis for discussions with mana whenua

b) approve a process of reaching these agreements whereby the agreement may proceed to signing without further approval so long as any inclusions are either descriptive or in the nature of minor drafting changes. For the avoidance of doubt, any changes of substance will be re-presented to the Whau Local Board, other local boards and the governing body, as relevant, for final approval

c) authorise the Chairperson to sign the agreement on behalf of the local board at signing ceremonies arranged between the parties to each agreement.

Comments

10. Since Auckland Council was established, relationships with mana whenua have been sustained in a variety of ways. The demands for information and engagement that the Council family places on mana whenua has led to a range of different approaches and mechanisms to make this efficient and effective for all.

11. A foundation for the interactions is the negotiation of contracts with each mana whenua group to support their capacity to engage with the Council. These contracts specify deliverables which include participation in governance activities with Auckland Council. Additionally, some of the high contact parts of the Council family have set up separate fora to provide for project level engagement.

12. In 2013, the Governing Body, Local Board Chairs and the Independent Māori Statutory Board (IMSB), considered a discussion document about Auckland Council entering into relationship agreements with the nineteen iwi and hapū recognised as mana whenua for Tāmaki Makaurau. As a result, a political working party of governing body and local board members was established that was expected to work on the development of the relationship agreements.

13. Subsequent discussions with mana whenua indicated that they preferred to advance some form of collective body prior to dealing with relationship agreements, negating the need for the working party. This collective body, the Regional Mana Whenua Kaitiaki Forum, has been recently established and is developing a forward work programme at present.

14. At a governance level, opportunities to establish relationships between mana whenua and elected members have included:

· mana whenua leading pōwhiri and the inauguration ceremonies for each new council and local board

· kanohi ki te kanohi / face to face discussions between elected members and mana whenua within major regional planning processes – notably the Auckland Plan, the 2015-2025 Long Term Plan and the Unitary Plan

· at a local level, specific engagement with mana whenua who relate to the local board areas.

15. Since the establishment of Auckland Council a strong desire has been expressed from many mana whenua groups and the Independent Māori Statutory Board to formalise the governance relationships through the development of relationship agreements and, in some cases, to acknowledge and build on legacy agreements held with former councils.

16. Relationship agreements support elements of the Auckland Plan strategic direction to “enable Māori aspirations through recognition of Te Tirit o Waitangi / The Treaty of Waitangi and customary rights” through formal acknowledgement of the mutual interests of council and mana whenua.

17. They are a means of documenting each party’s intention to work together respectfully and positively, and the development of the agreement itself may assist in mutual understanding. Nevertheless, relationship agreements may not be considered necessary by all mana whenua groups or be a current priority for some. Should that be the case, the current arrangements with each group will continue to support the relationship.

Structure and details of Agreement

18. Te Waka Anga Mua, with the support of Legal Services has developed a governance relationship agreement template attached to this report as Attachment A.

19. This agreement has been drafted so as not to be over-prescriptive but containing the essential elements for agreements of this nature.

20. The agreement recognises the two parties to the agreement and, in particular, acknowledges the governance context of Auckland Council by including the governing body and the relevant local boards as the Auckland Council party.

21. The first part of the agreement outlines the purpose, aspirations and shared principles. Any specific commitments, projects and arrangements, engagement and meeting protocols can also be contained, or referred to, within the body of the Agreement.

22. The agreement has appendices - the administrative provisions, existing and future projects or arrangements, and specific local board arrangements – as standard inclusions. Any other relevant departmental and operational documents will be added as schedules to the agreement with the intention that these can be amended as needed without requiring alteration of the main agreement.

Next Steps

23. All mana whenua have been approached regarding a potential relationship agreement. A number of groups have indicated they are ready to progress discussions and these discussions have commenced in some cases.

24. As the agreement is intended to record a mutual intention to form a close working relationship with mana whenua which is already committed to in a range of council’s strategic documents, Whau Local Board is not being asked to approve entering into these relationship agreements. Rather, it is being asked to approve a template agreement which sets out the areas expected to be covered in this relationship agreement which, in general, describes matters of relevance to each of the parties to the agreement.

25. While the details about mana whenua and the arrangements or projects underway will be particular to each agreement it is expected that, in most cases, the agreements will not include any additional detail that requires governing body or local board approval.

26. It is proposed that, where the agreement remains substantively the same as the template, albeit with the inclusion of information describing the mana whenua party, it proceeds to a formal signing without a further approval process.

27. Should any of the mana whenua parties seek inclusion of matters which require new commitment by the council parties, the agreement will be referred back to the governing body and/or the local board(s) for approval on these matters.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

28. Local Boards were presented with the broad approach proposed to relationship agreements in workshops in 2015 and there was general approval of the approach.

29. To expedite the process of negotiating relationship agreements, this report is also being made to each local board for approval, tailored to recognise the iwi / hapū relevant to the local board area.

30. As relationship agreements are developed and signed, arrangements will be made for initial formal meetings with mana whenua representatives to begin new or continue current relationships.

31. The mana whenua groups with interests in the Whau Local Board area are:

Iwi / Hapū	Mana whenua representative organisation
Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Whātua	Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Whātua
Ngāti Whātua o Kaipara	Nga Maunga Whakahii o Kaipara Development Trust
Ngāti Whātua o Ōrākei	Ngāti Whātua Ōrākei Whai Maia Ltd
Ngāi Tai ki Tāmaki	Ngāi Tai ki Tāmaki Trust
Te Kawerau a Maki	Te Kawerau Iwi Tribal Authority
Ngāti Tamaoho	Ngāti Tamaoho Trust
Ngāti Te Ata Waiohua	Te Ara Rangatu o Te Iwi o Ngāti Te Ata Waiohua
Te Akitai Waiohua	Te Akitai Waiohua Iwi Authority
Te Ahiwaru Waiohua	Makaurau Marae Māori Trust
Ngāti Paoa	Ngāti Paoa Trust
Ngāti Maru	Ngāti Maru Rūnanga Incorporated
Ngāti Tamaterā	Ngāti Tamaterā Settlement Trust
Waikato-Tainui	Waikato-Tainui Te Kauhanganui Incorporated

Initial discussions have begun with Te Kawerau a Maki. Once the mana whenua interest in entering into discussions about relationship agreements is more certain, we will update the Board with an indicative timetable.

Māori impact statement

32. Although Auckland Council engages with mana whenua across a wide range of activities currently and has relationships with mana whenua at both governance and operational levels, the establishment of governance level relationship agreements are a further step towards cementing an enduring positive relationship with treaty partners. Entering into relationship agreements will also complete one of the recommendations made in the Independent Māori Statutory Board’s 2015 Treaty Audit.

Implementation

33. In order to finalise the relationship agreements, a formal signing ceremony including the mana whenua group, governing body and the relevant local boards will be arranged at times to suit all parties. Te Waka Anga Mua staff will administer the agreements and maintain oversight of any commitments made within the agreements.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Relationship Agreement with Mana Whenua Template	135

Signatories

Author

Dean Martin - Principle Advisor Maori Relations & Governance

Authorisers

Graham Pryor - GM Maori Responsiveness & Relationships

Glenn Boyd - Relationship Manager Henderson-Massey, Waitakere Ranges, Whau

Whau Local Board

27 September 2017

[Relationship Agreement]

between

[Iwi name]

and

Auckland Council

[Date]

[Iwi name Logo]

logo

[KARAKIA/MIHI]

[IMAGERY]

[IWI NAME]

1. [Insert a description of the Iwi and its rohe].

2. [Insert a description of the Iwi's representative entity].

3. [Insert a description of the current status of Treaty settlements/negotiations for the Iwi].

4. [Insert other relevant background from an Iwi perspective].

AUCKLAND COUNCIL

5. Auckland Council (“Council”) is a territorial and regional authority established under section 6 of the Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009.

6. Council has two complementary decision-making parts, the governing body and local boards. The governing body and the local boards are autonomous and make decisions as Council within their respective areas of responsibility.

7. The governing body consists of the mayor and 20 governing body members. The governing body focuses on the big picture and on region-wide strategic decisions. Each of the 21 local boards has between five and nine members. Local boards represent the communities in their area and make decisions on local issues, activities and facilities.

8. Council's purpose is to enable democratic local decision-making and action by, and on behalf of, communities; and to meet the current and future needs of communities for good-quality local infrastructure, local public services, and performance of regulatory functions in a way that is most cost-effective for households and businesses.

9. The Council has committed to achieving better outcomes for Māori that contribute significantly to lifting Māori economic, social and cultural well-being, strengthen Council’s effectiveness for Māori, and optimise post-Treaty settlement opportunities for the benefit of Māori and the wider public of Auckland. One outcome identified through the Auckland Plan is "A Māori identity that is Auckland's point of difference in the world."

10. These commitments are reflected in, for example, the following Council documents:

(a) the 'Māori Responsiveness Framework';

(b) the Auckland Plan;

(d) the Long Term Plan; and

(e) Local Board Plans.

11. The Council also has an important relationship with the Independent Māori Statutory Board which was established in the Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009.

12. Within that broader context, this Agreement focuses on the individual relationship between [Iwi name] and Auckland Council.

PURPOSE

13. The purpose of this Agreement is to provide a mechanism for the parties to:

(a) acknowledge the mana of [Iwi name] and the role of the Council in Tamaki Makaurau;

(b) develop and enhance a positive and enduring working relationship;

(d) make specific commitments in terms of how they will work together.

ASPIRATIONS

14. The parties both desire to work together in a manner that acknowledges and respects:

(a) the mana of [Iwi name] in Tāmaki Makaurau;

(b) the relationship of [Iwi name] and their culture and traditions with their ancestral lands, water, sites, wāhi tapu and other taonga in Tāmaki Makaurau;

(d) the principles of Te Tiriti o Waitangi / Treaty of Waitangi and the importance of the parties working together in accordance with those principles in a manner consistent with relevant legislation;

(e) the significance of the [record the status of the Treaty settlement process for the Iwi];

(f) the rights and interests of all mana whenua and Māori in Auckland;

(g) the statutory purpose, functions and structure of Auckland Council;

(h) the goals of the Auckland Council's Māori Responsiveness Framework, being to provide for effective Māori participation in democracy; to provide for an empowered Council organisation; and to provide for strong Māori communities;

(i) the drivers of the Auckland Council's Māori Responsiveness Framework, being to enable Te Tiriti o Waitangi/ Treaty of Waitangi outcomes; to enable Māori outcomes; to fulfil statutory Māori obligations; and to value Te Ao Māori;

(j) the role of Council as a steward, and the need for cultural, social, economic and environmental sustainability of Tāmaki Makaurau; and

(k) the interests of all communities, ratepayers, customers, citizens and visitors in Tāmaki Makaurau.

15. [Iwi name] wishes to work more closely with the Council so as to enable [Iwi name] to have more opportunity to contribute to and influence Council decision-making and service delivery, and also provide opportunities for [Iwi name] to improve or expand its own delivery of services to its communities.

16. The Council wishes to work more closely with [Iwi name] for those reasons and to explore and develop the opportunities that a closer relationship between the parties will bring.

17. [Insert any other shared or individual aspirations].

SHARED principles

18. The parties commit to the following shared principles and to working together in a manner that reflects:

(a) a partnership approach based on respect, good faith, integrity, transparency and open and effective communication;

(b) a co-operative, supportive, positive and proactive approach;

(d) a focus on the parties assisting each other to achieve the shared aspirations outlined in this Agreement;

(e) early engagement and the provision of quality information; and

(f) a constructive and timely approach to communicating any issues that may arise in the relationship and an open-minded approach to addressing those issues.

[SPECIFIC COMMITMENTS]

19. [Insert any specific commitment between the parties at this point]

PROJECTS AND ARRANGEMENTS

20. The parties are working together on the current or proposed projects and arrangements:

(a) [Insert current projects and arrangements in Appendix Two].

21. The parties may agree to work together on future projects or arrangements and the parties may agree to include these projects or arrangements in Appendix Three to this Agreement.

ENGAGEMENT AND meetings

22. [example, Iwi representatives, the Mayor and Councillors will meet as mutually agreed but within a 6 month period. Iwi representatives, the Local Board Chairperson, members and Ward Councillor will meet a 6 monthly basis. There will be provision for additional meetings to be held at the request of either party.}

review AND AMENDMENT OF AGREEMENT

23 The parties will meet to discuss the state of the relationship and the implementation of this Agreement at least once each year.

24 The parties will meet to formally review this Agreement at least once every three years.

25 Either party may request an earlier review of this Agreement.

26 Any amendment to this Agreement must be agreed by the parties and recorded in writing.

ROLES AND RESPONSBILITIES PRESERVED

27 The parties acknowledge that nothing in this Agreement restricts, fetters or derogates from the rights or responsibilities of [Iwi name] under the Local Government Act 2002, Resource Management Act 1991 or any other statute or regulation. If anything in this Agreement is inconsistent with any of those rights or responsibilities, then those rights or responsibilities prevail and this Agreement shall be construed and interpreted accordingly.

28 The parties acknowledge that nothing in this Agreement restricts, fetters or derogates from the statutory functions, duties and obligations imposed on the Council by the Local Government Act 2002, Resource Management Act 1991, or any other statute or regulation. If anything in this Agreement is inconsistent with any of the Council’s functions, duties, or obligations pursuant to statute or at law generally, then the functions, duties, and obligations of the Council pursuant to statute or at law generally prevail and this Agreement shall be construed and interpreted accordingly.

ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS

29 Further provisions relating to the administration of this Agreement are included in Appendix One.

EXECUTED on behalf of [Iwi name]

by ______________________________________

CHAIRPERSON

EXECUTED on behalf of AUCKLAND COUNCIL

by ______________________________________

MAYOR

EXECUTED on behalf of [to insert] Local Board

by ______________________________________

CHAIRPERSON

APPENDIX ONE

ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS

KEY CONTACT PERSONS & COMMUNICATION

1. The key contact persons, and contact details for each party at the time of the signing of this Agreement are:

a. [Insert for Iwi]; and

b. [Insert for Council].

2. All formal notices must be sent to the addresses set out above.

Protection of sensitive information

3. The parties acknowledge that some information shared between them will be confidential, but that under the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 the Council may be required to provide requested information.

4. Where a party receives, or has received, whether before or after the commencement date, confidential information from the other party the recipient must, except as required by law:

(a) keep the confidential information confidential;

(b) not use, disclose or reproduce the confidential information for any purpose other than the purpose for which it was provided by the disclosing party;

(c) not, without the disclosing party's prior written consent, disclose the confidential information to any person other than the recipient's employees, subcontractors, agents, officers and representatives who need the information for the purpose for which it was provided by the disclosing party; and

(d) establish and maintain effective security measures to safeguard the confidential information from unauthorised access, use, copying or disclosure.

Issue Resolution

5. Within one month after the commencement date of this Agreement, the parties will agree one person to act as a mediator in the case of any issues between the parties under this Agreement. That person may be replaced from time to time by agreement between the parties.

6. The parties will endeavour to act in good faith to address any issues arising in respect of rights or obligations specified in this Agreement at the immediate time such issues arise.

7. Where an issue cannot be resolved between the parties after 10 working days the issue will be escalated to:

(a) in the case of the [Iwi name] the Chairperson of [Māori entity]; and

(b) in the case of the Council, the Governance Director.

8. Where an issue is still not resolved after one month of having been escalated under clause 7, the issue shall be referred to the mediator agreed under clause 5, who will work with the parties to resolve the dispute.

9. To assist in the ongoing development of a transparent and accountable relationship, Council and [Iwi name] will inform each other of any situation or development which may jeopardise or comprise each party’s commitment to this Agreement and their overall relationship with each other.

Managing Conflicts

10. Council and [Iwi name] representatives will actively manage any conflict of interest that may arise, be they perceived or actual conflicts.

[to discuss other administrative provisions including notice provisions]

Resourcing

Capacity Funding

11. Council recognises that it has a responsibility to enable (Iwi name) to participate and contribute to council decision-making processes. Council will negotiate a capacity funding agreement with the (Entity name) to enable (Iwi name) contribution.

Master Service Agreement

12. Council will require the assistance and information from (Iwi name) through a range of policy planning and service initiatives. Council will negotiate a mater service agreement with the Iwi Trust that will enable departments to seek technical, cultural and professional advice from (Iwi name).

13. Council will encourage Council Controlled Organisations to develop similar instruments to enable more effective engagement with (Iwi name).

APPENDIX TWO

Existing projects or arrangements

[e.g. attach statutory obligations, co-management agreements, other agreements and instruments, iwi/hapu projects of interest to council, engagement protocols for iwi/hapu, local boards and governing body, local board projects of interest to mana whenua, regional projects of interest to mana whenua, resource consent protocols.]

APPENDIX THREE

FURTHER projects or arrangements

[e.g. attach joint work programme, projects or arrangements agreed in the future at the time they are agreed]

APPENDIX FOUR

SPECIFIC LOCAL BOARD ARRANGEMENTS

[Insert any specific arrangements for local boards]

Whau Local Board

27 September 2017

Public alerting framework for Auckland

File No.: CP2017/19753

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.

Recommendations

That the Whau 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.

Implementation

18. Once in-principle support has been achieved, procurement and design of tsunami siren and signage will be undertaken.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Public Alerting Framework	153
b ⇩	GNS Science report	163

Signatories

Author

Celia Wilson, Project Manager

Authorisers

Craig Glover - Head of Strategy and Planning

John Dragicevich - Director Civil Defence and Emergency Management

Karen Lyons - General Manager Local Board Services

Glenn Boyd - Relationship Manager Henderson-Massey, Waitakere Ranges, Whau

Whau Local Board

27 September 2017

Whau Local Board

27 September 2017

Auckland Plan Refresh - Local Board Engagement

File No.: CP2017/18822

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.

Recommendations

That the Whau 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).

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

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	223

Signatories

Authors

Denise O’Shaughnessy - Manager Strategic Advice

Christina Kaiser - Principal Strategic Advisor

Carol Stewart - Principal Policy Analyst

Authorisers

Jacques Victor - GM Auckland Plan Strategy and Research

Karen Lyons - General Manager Local Board Services

Glenn Boyd - Relationship Manager Henderson-Massey, Waitakere Ranges, Whau

Whau Local Board

27 September 2017

Remuneration Authority consultation document

File No.: CP2017/19763

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

That the Whau 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	239

Signatories

Author

Warwick McNaughton - Principal Advisor - Democracy Services

Authorisers

Phil Wilson - Governance Director

Karen Lyons - General Manager Local Board Services

Glenn Boyd - Relationship Manager Henderson-Massey, Waitakere Ranges, Whau

Whau Local Board

27 September 2017

Confirmation of Workshop Records: 16 August 2017 to 13 September 2017

File No.: CP2017/20443

Purpose

1. This report presents records of workshops held by the Whau Local Board on:

o 16 August 2017

o 30 August 2017

o 6 September 2017

o 13 September 2017

Executive Summary

2. At the workshop held on Wednesday, 16 August 2017, the Whau Local Board had briefings on:

· Tākaro - investing in Play

· Environment workshop - Update on pay as you throw Northwest rubbish collection changes

· Local Board Plan discussion

· Governance Framework Review - feedback

· Rec/Pool and Avondale community centre - Confidential

3. At the workshop held on Wednesday, 30 August 2017, the Whau Local Board had a briefing on:

· Pest Free Auckland

· Industrial Pollution Prevention Programme (IPPP)

· Community Groups updates

· GFR Organisational Support Workstream

4. At the workshop held on Wednesday, 6 September 2017, the Whau Local Board had a briefing on:

· Local Board LTP key local initiative update

· Minor Safety Improvements - Great North Road

· Arts Broker Programme

· Panuku Development (bi-monthly)

· Long Term Plan (LTP)

· Saunders Reserve - request to consult with local iwi proposing revocation of the reserve to enable the land to be managed under the LGA

· Waikato-Tainui iwi (LBP submission - 05709)

· Te Kawerau a Maki Relationship Agreement

5. At the workshop held on Wednesday, 13 September 2017, the Whau Local Board had a briefing on:

· Māori naming of parks and facilities

· Parks Sport Rec: NZTA Funds - Whau Specific

· Saunder’s Reserve

· Parks Workshop

· Auckland Plan Refresh Engagement with Local Boards

6. The workshop records are attached to this report.

Recommendation

That the Whau Local Board:

a) confirm the records of the workshops in Attachments A – D held on the following dates:

o 16 August 2017

o 30 August 2017

o 6 September 2017

o 13 September 2017

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Record of Workshop 16 August 2017	283
b ⇩	Record of Workshop 30 August 2017	287
c ⇩	Record of Workshop 6 September 2017	291
d ⇩	Record of Workshop 13 September 2017	297

Signatories

Authors

Riya Seth - Democracy Advisor

Mark Allen - Senior Local Board Advisor

Authorisers

Glenn Boyd - Relationship Manager Henderson-Massey, Waitakere Ranges, Whau

Whau Local Board

27 September 2017

WHAU Local Board Workshop Record

Record of the Whau Local Board workshop held 16 August 2017 at Whau Local Board boardroom, 31 Totara Avenue, New Lynn, Auckland 0600

PRESENT

Chairperson: Susan Zhu (deputy chair)

Members: Catherine Farmer

Derek Battersby, QSM, JP

David Whitley

Te’eva Matafai

Duncan Macdonald (from 11.50, item 1)

Apology: Duncan Macdonald (for lateness), Tracy Mulholland (for absence)

Also present: AC Officers: Mark Allen; Antonina Georgetti, Riya Seth, Glenn Boyd

Notes: Meeting opened by Chair at 11.20am.

Workshop Item

Summary of Discussions

1. Tākaro - investing in Play

Governance role: Input into regional decision-making

Time: 11.30am – 12.00pm

Presenters: Jacqueline Fa'amatuainu Pointon, William Brydon (Project Lead)

Tākaro - investing in Play report came on 26 July agenda asking for board’s feedback to be provided by 21 Aug. The following points were discussed as board’s feedback:

- Inside playgrounds eg malls when wet or cold, should policy cover these areas.

- Social/digital integration into outdoor play.

2. Environment workshop - Update on pay as you throw Northwest rubbish collection changes

Governance role: Keeping informed

Time: 12.00pm – 12.30pm

Presenters: Dil Uppal, Terry Coe, Claire Scott-knight, Clare Strawson, Candice Ho

Backgound - Council’s Waste Management and Minimisation Plan roadmap includes provision of a pay as you throw rubbish collection service for Aucklanders by 2020. Council has taken up the opportunity to reuse the redundant blue 140L recycling bin as a rubbish bin in the North Shore and Waitakere. Positive results from the bin tag trail reassured council to implement a rubbish bin service using tags as a payment methodology.

The following points were discussed:

- Media campaign on changes to rubbish collection in the NorthWest area will be launched on 21 August (central areas of the Whau board will not be receiving that flyer).

- Pay-as-you-throw means residents only pay when they put rubbish out for collection – a system which statistics show is proven to reduce the amount of waste to landfill.

- This is one of the proactive steps being taken by Auckland Council toward meeting its aspirational goal of zero waste to landfill by 2040.

- The team will be providing the local board with facebook communication which the board can then put on its page.

- Paid adverts going to social media.

- Members asked for multi-lingual communication.

- It was noted that its planned for all of Auckland to move towards ‘pay-as-you-throw’ (PAYT) system by 2020. It’s proven to reduce waste to landfill, helping us achieve our goal of zero waste by 2040.

- No charge to order new bins.

- It was noted that rubbish bag service will continue in rural areas.

- Waste Management and Minimisation Plan (WMMP) will be going out to public for consultation soon and then to governing body for adoption by next year.

- Members raised concerns around theft and vandalisaion of tags; one of the option to get around that is writing property address on the tag before putting it on the bin.

- There is more information available on the website along with ‘how to’ videos.

3. LBP workshop

Governance role: Local initiative / preparing for specific decisions

Time:1.10pm – 1.50pm

Presenters: Glenn Boyd, Mark Allen

Various issues for community were discussed with members; these will inform the amendments (if any) to the draft local board plan.

Avondale preschool – in response to members’ question as to whether a preschool could be included in the new Avondale facility; staff advised that provision of pre-school facility is not council policy.

Greenbay Community Centre – opportunity to strengthen the relationship.

Migrant population in Whau – significant percentage of Whau residents were born overseas; members would like to reflect this group’s interest in the plan.

Scheduled tress – members would like to put more emphasis on this issue in board area.

Implementation of New Lynn Urban Plan was noted as still being a priority for the board (extention of Memorial Drive).

Rosebank Tunnel –traffic has improved but still a lot needs to be done towards better bus/train time alignment.

Distances to bus stops – an issue in Blockhouse Bay (particularly for older people).

Homeless people – temporary/emergency housing was also discussed.

5. Governance Framework Review – feedback

Governance role: Input to regional decision-making

Time: 1.50pm – 2.45pm

Presenters: Glenn Boyd , Mark Allen

Various issues around Financial work stream of GFR were discussed with board members. It was noted that a report will be coming to board meeting in August asking for board’s feedback on the draft positions of the Governance Framework Review’s Political Working Party. Proposed options (from the report) were discussed with members. It was noted that local boards now have the ability to ring-fence earnings from sale of local board area property to be invested back in the board area.

4. Rec/Pool and Avondale community centre

Governance role: Engagement

Time: 2.55pm – 3.55pm

CONFIDENTIAL

This item was discussed in confidential part of the workshop.

Whau Local Board

27 September 2017

Whau Local Board Workshop Record

Record of the Whau Local Board workshop held 30 August 2017 at Whau Local Board boardroom, 31 Totara Avenue, New Lynn, Auckland 0600

PRESENT

Chairperson: Tracy Mulholland

Members: Susan Zhu (Deputy Chair)

Catherine Farmer

Derek Battersby, QSM, JP (from 11.10am, item 1)

David Whitley

Apologies: Duncan Macdonald, JP (for absence), Te’eva Matafai (for absence)

Also present: AC Staff: Mark Allen; Antonina Georgetti, Riya Seth, Glenn Boyd

Notes: Meeting opened by Chair at 11.06am.

Workshop Item

Summary of Discussions

1. Pest Free Auckland

Governance role: Keeping Informed

Time: 11.06am – 11.35am

Presenters: Brett Butland, Candice Ho

Members received an update on the Pest Free Auckland programme, including council’s role to increase and support community-led conservation on private and public land.

Pest Free Auckland is a community-led conservation programme, facilitated by council, to eradicate invasive ecosystem transforming plants, animals and pathogens and concurrently restore the region’s native ecosystems. Partnerships with community groups, mana whenua, landowners, schools, council, Department of Conservation, and private and philanthropic sectors are the key to the success of this programme.

The following points were discussed:

 It was noted that weeds around Blockhouse Bay, Avondale and Whau River are the problem areas for this local board.

 Staff made aware of a land locked area in Avondale which might have pest problem.

 Board expressed support for pest removal and support to community group.

2. Industrial Pollution Prevention Programme (IPPP)

Governance role: Oversight and monitoring

Time: 11.35am – 12.00pm

Presenters: Simon Wilkinson, Cushla Barfoot, Libby Cladwell, Candice Ho

Members received an update on the Industrial Pollution Prevention Programme in the board area. This is a successful educational programme (towards pollution prevention) for local businesses funded by the board. The following points were discussed:

 The programme is funded by by the board and current uptake of the programme is around 95%.

 “Drains only for Rain” – the sign could be installed besides stormwater drains to remind people.

 100 local businesses could be covered within this year’s programme funding. It was noted that the board would like for this programme to cover Glendene as key target area in this year’s budget.

 Local board requested an update on the programme to come to future workshop. This to include if the businesses in Glendene area have any desire to come together as voice of Glendene.

3. Community Groups updates

Governance role: Keeping Informed

Time: 12.35pm – 2.45pm

Community Waitakere 2016/2017 work programme (Presenters: Charlie Moore (CEO) Community Waitakere and staff Shalema Wanden-Hanny and Kinstry Smythe, Pepe Sapolu-Reweti)

Annual report from the group was presented to the board.

These are the 2017/18 action points for Community Waitakere:

 Continue the neighbourhood placemaking and Community events;

 Focus in Glenavon to increase participation and membership of Trust;

 Develop youth initiative in Kelston (Brains Park)

 NDA 2018 in Whau LB

 Support community engagement with planned development in Avondale

 Maximise benefits for Whau of West Auckland-wide CW engagement e.g.Ethkick West –2018; Maori networking/engagement

 “Governance Training for Whau Community Groups” – the board was in support of this programme.

Neighbours Day (Presenters: Charlie Moore (CEO) Community Waitakere and staff Shalema Wanden-Hanny and Kinstry Smythe)

 Members recived an update on Neighbours Day 2017 which had 27 events as part of this.

Whau Youth Development (Presenters: Jo Noema - Generation Ignite manger, Pepe Sapolu-Reweti)

 Members recieved 2016/17 report on Whau youth development.

 It was noted that Chair Mulholand and Member Matafai will be discussing support to Whau Youth Development with Generation Ignite as the programme will not be lead by them next year.

 Members requested an update to come back to the board on resourcing for the programme.

Youth Week Whau (Presenters: Jo Noema - Generation Ignite manger, Pepe Sapolu-Reweti)

 It was noted that there was 20+ events hosted under this programme and 10,500+ young people engaged under the programme.

Kai Whau (Presenters: Emily Harris, Pepe Sapolu-Reweti)

 2016/17 annual report was presented to the board.

Community Response – Kelston Hub (Presenters: Angela Calvert and Melanie Hutton - Civil Defence senior advisor resilience, Pepe Sapolu-Reweti)

 Members received an update on New Lynn flood response.

 It was noted that further discussions on the issue to raise awareness is needed. A generator at BHB community centre could be a part of this response,

 New Lynn business association identified as having a likely interest and possible contribution to make to the programme.

4. GFR Organisational Support Workstream

Governance role: Input to regional decision-making

Time: 2.45pm – 3.30pm

Presenters: Lou Lennane

To discuss Organisational Support Workstream of the Governance Framework Review with the board members.

Note: The Organisational Support Workstream is one of four workstreams that sit under the Governance Framework Review.

 A members only discussion was held with presenters.

Whau Local Board

27 September 2017

Whau Local Board Workshop Record

Record of the Whau Local Board workshop held 06 September 2017 at Whau Local Board boardroom, 31 Totara Avenue, New Lynn, Auckland 0600

PRESENT

Chairperson: Tracy Mulholland

Members: Susan Zhu (Deputy Chair) (until 1.30pm, item 5)

Catherine Farmer

Derek Battersby, QSM, JP (until 1.55pm, item 7)

Duncan Macdonald, JP

Apologies: David Whitley (for absence), Te’eva Matafai (for absence)

Also present: AC Staff: Antonina Georgetti, Riya Seth, Glenn Boyd, David Rose, Pepe Sapolu-Reweti

Notes: Meeting opened by Chair at 11.20am.

Workshop Item

Summary of Discussions

1. Local Board LTP key local initiative update

Governance role: Input to regional decision-making

Time: 11.20 am – 11.55am

Presenters: Christine Watson, Ben Brooks

Members received an update around development of business case to support the board’s primary key initiative through long term plan process. The following points were noted:

 The intent is to present each Local Board initiative in a consistent format to the Governing Body.

 The initiative is still being developed and delivery dates can not be given with any degree of certainty. Funding will be allocated to match the anticipated draw down of funds.

Sept/Oct - Mayors office briefed on overall funding requirements

30 October - Pre workshop briefing on with Chairs and nominees

2 November - Presentation to the Governing Body workshop

 Local board congratulated staff on their thorough work on the Whau facilities project.

2. Administration

Members agreed for this item to come on each board workshop programme and will include:

 Board administration and upcoming events/meeting

 Context setting of today’s items

 Last workshop’s draft record

3. Minor Safety Improvements - Great North Road

Governance role: Engagement

Time: 12.00pm – 12.30pm

Presenters: Patrick Chan (AT), Catherine Yung (AT), Felicity Merrington (AT)

Safety improvement for the section of Great North Road between Memorial Dr and Portage Road in New Lynn was discussed. The Auckland Transport Road Safety Team is currently looking at the section of Great North Road between Memorial Dr and Portage Road in New Lynn as part of their Minor Safety Programme to improve road safety along the route. The following points were discussed:

 This section is chosen to increase pedestrian safety (few serious injury accindents have been reported in this section of the GNR).

 Possibility of one way traffic was discussed as one of the option around this area.

 Signalised pedestrian lights could be one of the options to increase safety.

 Members asked for a site-visit with Auckland Transport staff to understand the massive development planned for the New Lynn area which will affect traffic flow. Felicity Merrington will be arranging a site visit for the chair inviting all local board members.

4. Arts Broker Programme

Governance role: Oversight and monitoring

Time: 1.00pm – 1.15pm

Presenters: Melissa Laing, Philippa Wilkinson, Pepe Sapolu-Reweti

Members received an update on 16/17 arts broker work programme. The following points were discussed:

 In total 20 different initiatives were supported by the Whau Local Board through this role. Many of these projects involved extensive collaborations with other artists, community facilities and organisations, schools, businesses and local residents. 15 of these projects were community led and the other 5 were managed by the Whau Community Arts Broker.

 The 2016/17 programme supported a breadth of performing arts activities from dance opportunities for children and theatre made by youth to award-winning Auckland Fringe Festival productions and pop up performances in local laundromats and the New Lynn Transport Centre.

 It was noted that the arts broker has received 23 proposals via open call for proposals for 17/18 year including theatre, music, dance, street art, jewellery, writing, virtual reality,contemporary art, documentary photography, community well-being, mental health network building, ecological action, street and park activations and workshops etc.

5. Panuku Development (bi-monthly)

Governance role: Engagement

Time: 1.15pm – 1.30pm

Presenters: Marieke Numan

It was noted that Panuku team will be updating the board on the OAGs building including façade of this building.

A report on unlock Avondale will be going to governing body in September; Panuku will advise the board members of date and time to enable them to advocate for Avondale at that meeting.

7. Long Term Plan (LTP)

Governance role: Input to regional decision-making

Time: 1.30pm – 1.55pm

Presenters: David Rose

Members received information and context about the LTP and on the role of local boards in the LTP. This is to ensure that boards make informed decisions on key issues in upcoming LTP decision making meetings.

 It was noted that LTP is a statutory requirement under Section 93 of the Local Government Act 2002 and the purpose of a Long-term Plan is to:

 “describe the activities of the local authority”

 “describe the community outcomes of the local authority’s district or region”

 “provide integrated decision-making and co-ordination of resources”

 “provide a long-term focus for decisions and activities”

 “provide a basis for accountability of the local authority to the community”

Roles and responsibilities:

 Mayor

o lead the development of the Long-term plan

o ensure there is effective engagement

 Finance and Performance – provide political direction and decisions on regional issues

 Local boards – make local decisions and provide input into the regional issues when it impacts local boards

 Timeline for Whau initiative “Whau Pool and Recreation Centre – Seeking funding for a Whau pool and recreation centre in next long-term plan” was noted.

Overall process and timeline for this project:

 Quality advice provision (May – August)

 Budget provisioning (September)

 Political prioritisation (November 2^nd - workshop)

 Planning and integration (November – June)

9. Saunders Reserve - request to consult with local iwi proposing revocation of the reserve to enable the land to be managed under the LGA

Governance role: Local initiative / preparing for specific decisions

Time: 2.20pm – 2.30pm

Presenters: Dave Bayley

Members discussed the proposal of revoking of reserve status of Saunders Reserve. This will enable the land to revert to being held by the council under the Local Government Act 2002 (LGA). This will allow the council to administer the property more easily and enable the council to grant a new lease under the LGA to the West End Community Charitable Trust who occupy and operate a rowing club on the property.

It was noted that the board will receive a report on board meeting agenda after staff consulting this with Iwi.

Members sought assurance from officers that any future lease to the rowing club will ensure continued full public access to the reserve.

6. Waikato-Tainui iwi (LBP submission - 05709)

Governance role: Engagement

Time : 2.30pm – 2.45pm

Presenters: Huriwai Paki (Waikato-Tainui iwi)

Members received a verbal presentation from Huriwai Paki (representing Waikato-Tainui iwi) regarding their submission to local board plan.

It was noted that Waikato-Tainui iwi would like to partner with all local boards surrounding Manukau Harbour (including Manukau Harbour Forum).

Part of Manukau Harbour is one the unstelled claims for Waikato-Tainui iwi and they would like to engage with Auckland Council and staff as governance to governance and staff to staff engagement.

8. Te Kawerau a Maki Relationship Agreement

Governance role: Engagement

Time: 2.45pm – 3.15pm

Presenters: Dean Martin, Edward Ashby

Members were in favour of establishing and furthering the relationship with Te Kawerau a Maki and working towards developing an agreement. This will be a moral agreement which will not be legally biniding.

Te Kawerau a Maki is a west Auckland based mana whenua, a map will be emailed to the members showing area for this hapu.

A report will come to future board meeting to adopt relationship agreement template.

Whau Local Board

27 September 2017

Whau Local Board Workshop Record

Record of the Whau Local Board workshop held 13 September 2017 at Whau Local Board boardroom, 31 Totara Avenue, New Lynn, Auckland 0600

PRESENT

Chairperson: Tracy Mulholland

Members: Catherine Farmer

Derek Battersby, QSM, JP

Duncan Macdonald, JP

Te’eva Matafai

David Whitley

Apology: Susan Zhu -Deputy Chair (for absence)

Also present: AC Staff: Antonina Georgetti, Glenn Boyd

Notes: Meeting opened by Chair at 11.00am. Chair: Intro Maori language week – Chair welcomed first item with Maori self-introduction

Workshop Item

Proposed Outcome/s

1. Māori naming of parks and facilities

Governance role: Local initiative / preparing for specific decisions

Time: 11.10am – 11.50am

Presenters: Jacky Bartley, Thomas Dixon, Nikora Wharerau

 $10k allocated in 2017/18 budget from Whau – for investigations of Maori places naming [no budget for actual signage at this point]

 Acknowledge Whau past constructive support of Maori identification in area

 Project team working with Mana Whenua

 Four Naming options: Mono-lingual (English); Bi-lingual (translation) or dual naming (two separate meaning names Maori & English); Mono-lingual (Maori)

 Not looking to gazette via Geographic Board at the moment

 Referencing existing maps. Started methodology – start with “function of place” or “significance of location or place”.

 There are obvious possibilities – eg some named after roads. Noted to show respect to Maori by not delivering a token project, but to be meaningful by delivering names of special significance.

 Noted - currently three registered Maori iwi (have reached crown settlement) in Whau.

 Names will be put forward with narrative provided.

 Project team has set target of 80% of all parks to have Maori names.

 A report will be coming to October board meeting.

Feedback from board members:

 Clear support for project given by all members present

 Discussion about of setting specific target rather than an outcome with, some support of specific target with wider discussion around aiming for quality rather than quantity.

 Asked staff to be sure that IMSB are aware of this project.

 Identfied that both English & Maori heritage and history respected:

o Board suggest that officers work with local Historian, Lisa Truttman, of Avondale Waterview Historical Society.

 It was noted that Whau has a significant European history which also needs preserving

 Support for Maori naming particularly where there is significance to Maori heritage & history. Noted to show respect to Maori by not delivering a token project, but to be meaningful by delivering names of special significance.

 Ease of pronunciation should be taken into consideration in order to avoid easy/lazy reversion to English.

 Request for more information from project team via report to board.

2. Parks Sport Rec: NZTA Funds - Whau Specific

Governance role: Keeping informed

Time: 11.50am -

Presenters: Annette Campion, PSR NZTA Funds, Helen Biffin, Pippa Sommerville

2.1: SH16/20 WATERVIEW MITIGATION TO WHAU:

 Working with Panuku; yet to determine mitigation funding coming to Whau LB to allocate.

 NZTA survey reveals that not as much land needed as initially signalled and not as much money might be coming to board [$660K instead of expected 800k]. Note valuations were done four years ago - new values to be agreed.

 Unlikely all Whau identified projects deliverable within projected timeframe.

 Need to reassess and get definitive decision on which projects proceed. Will be guided by Parks Investigation & Design report. Sandy Lane walkway could be pushed out as land earth needs to resettle post-development.

2.2 SH16/20 CORRIDOR – JOINT MITIGATION BUDGET WITH ALBERT/EDEN LOCAL BOARD – VALUE $364K – projects CAPEX + OPEX.

 Parks had met with Albert-Eden LB

 A/ELB list of proposed projects tabled – total value $:200k

 50/50 budget split a consideration

 Joint Boards workshop in October

Feedback from board members:

 Whau endorsed Albert-Eden Projects [$200K Value] tabled at the workshop – under the understanding that Whau will get joint acknowledgement and participation where appropriate.

 Staff will email members to seek input to possible Whau projects with $164k balance for for NZTA Joint funds

 Work to a report in October 2017 board meeting – outlining direction proposed and why. To enable board to pass resolution adopt revised work programme.

Saunder’s Reserve

Item had been initially withdrawn .

Governance role: Local initiative / preparing for specific decisions

Time: 12.20pm – 12.25pm

This item was initially discussed at the last week’s workshop where board had given direction.

Feedback from board members:

On reflection further information on this matter is now being requested by members

o Officers come back with more information to give a clearer picture on the difference between “reserve” and “parks” status.

o In light of potential community interest/effect, board seeks very clear indication what no longer being a “reserve” would mean for Saunders Reserve specifically. Questions raised: would this affect public accessibility to the grounds; would the lease be able to lock pedestrians out of the grounds thereby affecting access to public walkways; could the rowing club still operate as a going concern if the reserve status was revoked – are there other avenues that could be pursued to get better outcome for all parties?

3. Parks Workshop

Governance role: Keeping Informed

Time: 12.25pm – 12.50pm

Presenters: Pippa Sommerville, Thomas Dixon

The following points were discussed:

 Brains concept; design team engaged – workshop with board November 2017. Consult with Kelston community Nov/Dec

 Crum concept; architect engaged Green Bay comm engagement back to board Oct/Nov – public consult Nov/Dec

 Motu Manawa walkway; Holly To Heron on way. Next stage Holly St all way up to motorway – Frame Group engaged. Draft plan and high level finding workshop w board in December 2017.

 Encroachment investigation; desktop analysis underway – focus esplanade reserves; board update on key focus areas and methods of communicating with encroaching landowners in November 2017. Parallel process with Healthy Waters – industrial businesses encroachment in waterways.

 Green Bay Open Space & Activation: Comm Corner; Godley Green; Barron Green; Green Bay Domain. Landscape Arch; GBCC engagement; Coming back to board Feb 2018 with draft plan and activation programme.

 Arthur Currey Property divestment: service property is optimised. Reinvestment within New Windsor community – as outlined in material circulated to board.

 - Reiterate, divestment of house only. Retain green space.
- Requirement of Optimisation = must address PREVIOUSLY identified plans.
- Waitati Reserve –.comment very low value to the community -Chair – request bring Waitati Reserve considerations to board.
- Working with Panuku – looking at valuation of property. Until this is clearer, won’t be able to move forward. List of staff ideas as tabled has been accepted by members. Members welcome to give any new (different) ideas via email to staff within the coming week.

Introduced new Sport and Recreation Advisor for Rua, Sunny Karan. Gave brief self intro to members.

Chair acknowledged Nick Harris’s (current Sport and Recreation Advisor for Rua) hard work and valued input with the Whau Local Board and well wishes for new position in Toru.

6. Auckland Plan Refresh Engagement with Local Boards

Governance role: Engagement

Time : 1.10pm- 1.25pm

Presenters: Glenn Boyd

Members received an update on the Auckland Plan refresh work since the previous engagement. The following points were discussed:

 Been in place for six years and now coming through for refreshment.

 Report coming to WLB September 2017. Table provided for members to read and prepared for discussion.

 Auckland key GDP influence over rest of country – unprecedented and reason to be responsible.

 Key themes: skills and jobs; protect and enhance nature; belonging; access and connect; homes and places; development strategy.

Note:

o relationship with Maori as tangata whenua

o Role for central/local government collaboration

o Governance Review has not recommended any changes to existing governance structure.

Feedback from board members:

 Infrastructure provision – with focus on and increase in residential construction Auckland Council needs to clarify standards and expectations.

 Members given time to consider material [provided at workshop and make the connection to the Whau Local Board Plan and bring comments back to LBS staff (at next workshop)

 September meeting will ENDORSE the document giving feedback.

Note: LBP workshop (Item 5) was cancelled due to no major changes projected for Whau LBP after receiving public feedback.

[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	Tracy Mulholland
Deputy Chairperson	Susan Zhu
Members	Derek Battersby, QSM, JP
	Catherine Farmer
	Duncan Macdonald, JP
	Te'eva Matafai
	David Whitley

Author	Riya Seth - Democracy Advisor
Authoriser	Glenn Boyd - Relationship Manager Henderson-Massey, Waitakere Ranges, Whau