I hereby give notice that an ordinary meeting of the Whau Local Board will
be held on:
|
Date:
Time:
Meeting Room:
Venue:
|
Wednesday, 13
December 2017
6.00pm
Whau Local
Board Office
31 Totara Avenue
New Lynn
|
|
Whau Local Board
OPEN AGENDA
|
MEMBERSHIP
|
Chairperson
|
Tracy Mulholland
|
|
|
Deputy Chairperson
|
Susan Zhu
|
|
|
Members
|
Derek Battersby, QSM, JP
|
|
|
|
Catherine Farmer
|
|
|
|
Duncan Macdonald, JP
|
|
|
|
Te'eva Matafai
|
|
|
|
David Whitley
|
|
(Quorum 4 members)
|
|
|
Glenn Boyd
(Relationship Manager)
Local Board Services (West)
Tua Viliamu
Democracy Advisor
06 December 2017
Contact Telephone: (09) 813 9478
Email: tua.viliamu@aucklandcouncil.govt.nz
Website: www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz
|
|
Whau Local
Board
13 December
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 - Dean and Colleen Jamieson 6
8.2 Deputation: Ageing - A growing
Reality 6
8.3 Deputation: The Auckland Performing
Arts Centre 7
9 Public
Forum 8
10 Extraordinary Business 8
11 Notices of Motion 8
12 Disposal recommendation
report 9
13 SH16/20 joint budget
expenditure plan 15
14 Landowner approval for
construction of the Central Interceptor sewer tunnel in Miranda Reserve 17
15 Whau Heritage activities
update 23
16 10-year Budget 2018-2028
consultation 27
17 Decision-making allocation
update 35
18 LB feedback on Rates
remission and postponement policy review 53
19 Governance Forward Work
Calendar 87
20 Confirmation of Workshop
Records: 15 & 29 November 2017 91
21 Consideration
of Extraordinary Items
PUBLIC EXCLUDED
22 Procedural
Motion to Exclude the Public 99
18 LB feedback on Rates remission
and postponement policy review
d. All community and sporting
remissions by local board area 99
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, 22 November 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
- Dean and Colleen Jamieson
|
|
Purpose
1. Dean and Colleen Jamieson will be in attendance to present a pump track
proposal for the Akatea Road reserve to the board.
|
|
Recommendation
That the Whau Local Board:
a) receive
the deputation from Dean and Colleen Jamieson on a pump
track proposal for Glendene and thank them for the
presentation.
|
|
8.2 Deputation:
Ageing - A growing Reality
|
|
Purpose
1. An opportunity for Kevin Lamb to provide an overview of Age
Concern Auckland, their service, issues and trends observed in the last year,
with a focus on how we envisage working with the local board to empower vulnerable
older Aucklanders.
2. Proposed Outcome - Local Body Engagement- areas they would like to
work on with the Local Body, specifically to support lonely, isolated and
vulnerable over 65s.
Executive summary
3. Most
over 65s in Auckland are fine. They are engaged in society and living
fulfilled lives. However, almost 20,000 Aucklanders aged over 65 are lonely
and isolated. Loneliness and isolation confers vulnerability, and if not
combated early on, can create environments that enable elder abuse.
4. The
council and local boards invest significantly in activities and
infrastructure to support over 65s, however, most of this is aimed at those
who are already engaged.
5. We
would like to highlight ways in which those vulnerable can be empowered.
Additionally, we would like to highlight the occurrence of Elder Abuse,
Loneliness and isolation across the population, to create a sense of
responsibility and action. We are planning a few projects towards these
outcomes, and will touch on these during the presentation.
|
|
Recommendation/s
That the Whau Local Board:
a) receive
the deputation from Kevin Lamb – CEO of Age Concern Auckland and thank
him for attending the Whau Local Board meeting.
|
|
8.3 Deputation:
The Auckland Performing Arts Centre
|
|
Purpose
1. Tricia
Reade, the chair of TAPAC (The Auckland Performing Arts Centre), and
Sally-Anne Kerr requested an opportunity to present information about TAPAC
and the issues it currently faces over its ongoing sustainability seeks a closer, supportive relationship with the Whau Local Board.
Executive summary
2. TAPAC
is a unique performing arts hub, comprised of 4 studios and a professional
theatre. Our 3 core activities centre on Education, Community and
Performance.
3. TAPAC’s
mission is to offer high-quality performing arts programmes and theatre to
the Auckland community at affordable costs. TAPAC was built in 2003 to be a
community hub, giving people of varied backgrounds the opportunity to engage
with and participate in the performing arts. It is an inclusive, heavily used
space where everyone is welcomed and encouraged to explore the performing
arts. Many of our venue users and participants come from the Whau area.
|
|
Recommendation/s
That the Whau Local Board:
a) receive
the submission from Sally-Anne Kerr and Patricia Reade from The Auckland
Performing Arts Centre and thank them for attending the Whau Local Board
meeting.
|
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
13 December
2017
|
|
Disposal
recommendation report
File No.: CP2017/15538
Purpose
1. This
report seeks the Whau Local Board’s endorsement for Panuku Development
Auckland (Panuku) to recommend to the Finance and Performance Committee the
disposal of the council owned property at 156
Blockhouse Bay Road, Avondale.
Executive summary
2. The council-owned site at 156 Blockhouse Bay
Road, Avondale is vacant land that has been
identified as potentially surplus to council requirements through a review
process. Consultation with council departments and CCOs,
Iwi authorities and the Whau Local Board has now taken place. No
alternative service use has been identified for this site through the
rationalisation process. Due to this, Panuku recommends disposal of the
site. A resolution approving the disposal of the subject site is
required from the Finance and Performance Committee before the proposed
divestment can be progressed.
|
Recommendation/s
That the Whau Local Board:
a) endorse Panuku Development Auckland’s recommendation to the Finance and Performance Committee to
dispose of 156 Blockhouse Bay Road, Avondale.
|
Comments
3. Panuku
and Auckland Council’s Stakeholder and Land Advisory team in Community
Facilities work jointly on a comprehensive review of council’s property
portfolio. One of the outcomes of the review process is to identify properties
in the council portfolio that are potentially surplus to requirements and may
be suitable to sell. The subject site was identified as potentially
saleable through the review process.
4. Once
a property has been identified as potentially surplus, Panuku engages with
council and its CCO’s through an expression of interest process, to
establish whether the property must be retained for a strategic purpose or is
required for a future funded project. Once a property has been internally
cleared of any service requirements, Panuku then consults with local boards,
mana whenua and ward councillors. All sale recommendations must be
approved by Panuku’s Board before it makes a final recommendation to
council’s Finance and Performance Committee.
Property information
5. 156
Blockhouse Bay Road, Avondale is a narrow strip of land comprising 103m2
remaining from a larger section that was acquired by the former Auckland City
Council in 1950 for street widening purposes and to prevent building which
would obstruct visibility at the intersection.
6. In
2015 Auckland Transport released 156 Blockhouse Bay Road, Avondale as not
required for its future service needs and having no strategic purpose requiring
retention. It was subsequently transferred to Panuku for rationalisation.
7. The
Unitary Plan zoning of 156 Blockhouse Bay Road,
Avondale is Terrace Housing and Apartment
Buildings. It has a 2017 capital value of $65,000.
Internal
consultation
8. The
rationalisation process commenced in July 2017. No expressions of
interest were received during the internal consultation.
Consideration
Local board views and implications
9. Local
boards are informed of the commencement of the rationalisation process for
specific properties. Following the close of the expression of interest
period, relevant local boards are engaged with.
10. Panuku provided an information memorandum to the Whau Local Board advising of the proposed
disposal in August
2017. No issues were raised
regarding the proposed disposal.
11. This
report provides the board with an opportunity to formalise its views regarding
the subject site.
Māori impact statement
12. 14
mana whenua iwi authorities were contacted regarding the potential sale of 156 Blockhouse Bay Road, Avondale. The
following feedback was received.
a) Te
Runanga o Ngati Whatua
No feedback received for this site.
b) Ngāti
Whatua o Kaipara
No feedback received for this site.
c) Ngāti
Whatua o Orakei
No feedback received for this site.
d) Te
Kawerau ā Maki
No feedback received for this site.
e) Ngāi
Tai ki Tāmaki
No feedback received for this site.
f) Ngāti
Tamaoho
No feedback received for this site.
g) Te
ākitai - Waiohua
No feedback received for this site.
h) Ngāti
Te Ata - Waiohua
No feedback received for this site.
i) Te
Ahiwaru
No feedback received for
this site.
j) Ngāti
Pāoa
No feedback received for this site.
k) Ngāti
Whanaunga
Ngāti Whanaunga
expressed commercial interest in the property should it become available.
If approved for disposal, Panuku will follow up on potential commercial
opportunities.
l) Ngāti
Maru
No feedback received for
this site.
m) Ngāti
Tamaterā
No feedback received for
this site.
n) Waikato-Tainui
No feedback received for
this site.
Implementation
13. It
is unlikely that the offer back obligations to the former owners under section
40 of the Public Works Act 1981 are relevant, as due to the size and shape of
the subject site it could only be amalgamated with adjoining land if disposed
of. The adjoining land owner has registered interest in acquiring this
site.
14. The
terms and conditions of any disposal would be approved under appropriate financial
delegation.
Attachments
|
No.
|
Title
|
Page
|
|
a⇩ 
|
Images of 156 Blockhouse Bay Road, Avondale
|
13
|
Signatories
|
Authors
|
Anthony Lewis - Senior Advisor Portfolio Review
|
|
Authorisers
|
Letitia Edwards - Team Leader Portfolio Review, Panuku
Development Auckland
Glenn Boyd - Relationship Manager Henderson-Massey,
Waitakere Ranges, Whau
|
|
Whau Local
Board
13 December
2017
|
|
|
Whau Local Board
13 December
2017
|
|
SH16/20 joint budget expenditure plan
File No.: CP2017/25190
Purpose
1. To
confirm the expenditure plan for the SH16/20 joint budget.
Executive summary
2. The
SH16/20 joint budget associated with the NZTA Waterview connection project has
provided funding to the Whau and Albert-Eden Local Boards from occupation fees
and land sales in the Alan Wood corridor.
3. The
final revenue from NZTA has been received and the remaining budget of $364,000
requires formal allocation from the local boards.
4. A
list of projects was workshopped with both local boards in September and
October 2017. At the workshops both local boards indicated support for
the funding contributing to: the Holly Street to Heron Park boardwalk; Anderson
Park improvements; development of a Te Auaunga (Oakley Creek) middle catchment
action plan and its implementation; a summer carnival event at Kukuwai Park;
and weed control on the shared path by Albie Turner Field.
5. This
report seeks approval by the board and allocation of funding from the joint
SH16/20 fund for the delivery of these projects.
|
Recommendation/s
That the Whau Local Board:
a) confirm
the allocation of the SH16/20 Joint Budget, as agreed with the Albert-Eden
Local Board, as follows:
i) Holly
Street to Heron Park boardwalk top-up - $164,000
ii) Anderson
Park improvements top-up - $100,000
iii) development
of a Te Auaunga (Oakley Creek) middle catchment action plan - $10,000
iv) contribution
to the implementation of the Te Auaunga (Oakley Creek) middle catchment
action plan - $60,000
v) a
summer carnival event at Kukuwai Park - $20,000
vi) weed
control on the shared path by Albie Turner Field - $10,000.
|
Comments
6. The
Whau and Albert-Eden Local Boards have jointly managed a fund
of $3.6M that came for the NZTA’s occupation of land within the Alan Wood
corridor and the sale of the land above the tunnel entrance.
7. Initial
decisions on the allocation of this funding were made back in October 2013,
including the purchase of properties to enhance Valonia Reserve and
contributing to the development of a connection of the shared path to Trent
St.
8. A
further report on 16 September 2015 provided a contribution to the Valonia
ablution block, provision for play equipment and other improvements in Alan
Wood Reserve and funded a naming project for the reserves and new bridges in
the Alan Wood corridor. In addition the Whau and
Albert-Eden Local Boards agreed to allocate $400,000 to each board from the
joint budget, with Whau assigning their share to the Holly St the Heron Park
boardwalk project.
9. At this time it was agreed the allocation of the remaining funding
would be undertaken once the final figure was determined. The final
figure for the occupation agreements has been confirmed with NZTA and following
discussions and workshops with both local boards it has been agreed the
remaining $364,000 will be allocated to the list of projects as set out in the
recommendations.
Consideration
Local
board views and implications
10. This
report follows the local board workshop on 13 September and discussions with
board members following a proposal put up by the Albert Eden Local Board
subsequent to their workshop on 10 October 2017. The Whau Local Board has
signalled their support for the list of projects in the
recommendations.
Māori impact statement
11. Engagement with mana whenua with an interest in the Whau area has
been undertaken through the delivery of specific projects, such as the naming
of the parks and bridges in the Alan Wood corridor.
12. It is anticipated mana whenua will have an interest and seek to be
engaged on the Te Auaunga project and the delivery of improvements in the
creek. They were previously engaged and provided input into the lower
catchment action plan.
13. In regard to the other remaining expenditure this is assisting to
fund projects already in delivery or of such a minor nature that engagement
will not be required.
Implementation
14. The projects funded by this revenue
will largely be delivered by Community Facilities. The Holly Street to Heron
Park boardwalk project is underway with the physical works anticipated to
commence in the near future. Improvements in Anderson Park have also been
progressed and this additional funding will assist in completing the
project.
15. The Te Auaunga (Oakley Creek)
middle catchment action plan will
be developed this financial year and it is anticipated that once this is
completed that the $60,000 of funding will assist in the delivery of actions in
the plan in FY2018/2019. Contractors will be employed to deliver the weed
control in this financial year.
16. The Kukuwai Park event will be arranged
for this summer and will involve input and acknowledgement of both local
boards.
Attachments
There are no attachments for
this report.
Signatories
|
Authors
|
Annette Campion - Policy Advisor
|
|
Authorisers
|
Rod Sheridan - General Manager Community Facilities
Glenn Boyd - Relationship Manager Henderson-Massey,
Waitakere Ranges, Whau
|
|
Whau Local
Board
13 December
2017
|
|
Landowner approval for construction of the Central
Interceptor sewer tunnel in Miranda Reserve
File No.: CP2017/25279
Purpose
1. To
request Land Owner Approval be granted subject to certain conditions being met
by Watercare Services Ltd (Watercare) for the temporary occupation and granting
of easements for infrastructure in a local park in the Whau Local Board area
through which the Central Interceptor sewer tunnel will be constructed.
Executive summary
2. The
Central Interceptor is a new sewer tunnel to be constructed commencing 2019
between Western Springs and the Mangere Wastewater Treatment Plant. The tunnel
will be approximately 13 kilometres in total length and will lie between 15 and
110 metres below ground level. The route was designated and project consented in
2013.
3. Watercare
has a designation and resource consent to excavate a shaft in Miranda
Reserve. Watercare are seeking Land Owner Approval from the Whau Local
Board to undertake the works. The shaft is a critical part of building
and operating the Central Interceptor.
4. Staff
have negotiated with Watercare conditions for the Land Owner Approval of the
construction. This report sets out the conditions for formal approval by
the Whau Local Board.
5. Staff
have endeavoured to inform the Local Board of the above ground requirements
through various workshops with Watercare staff in attendance.
|
Recommendation/s
That the Whau Local Board:
a) approves
the Land Owner Approval conditions for the Central Interceptor project works
within Miranda Reserve as set out in the body of this report, and
b) grants
Land Owner Approval to Watercare Services Ltd for temporary occupation and
any easements required for permanent infrastructure and future access for the
Central Interceptor project works within Miranda Reserve as set out on
the plans appended to this report.
|
Comments
6. The
Central Interceptor is needed to ensure there is sufficient capacity in the
sewer network to meet planned population growth and development in Auckland.
More overflows of sewerage into the waterways and harbours will occur if the
Central Interceptor is not built.
7. Staff
have negotiated with Watercare conditions for the Land Owner Approval
(LOA). This report sets out the conditions for Miranda Reserve. The
conditions will be integrated into the LOA documents that will be issued by
Community Facilities.
8. Watercare
has a designation on the reserve to enable the infrastructure to be constructed
and operated. Watercare has a resource consent which imposes conditions
on the tunnel to avoid, remedy, or mitigate environmental effects of the
construction and operation of it.
9. The
LOA conditions seek to resolve outstanding matters for the board following the
granting of the designation and resource consent. The outstanding matters
relate to the implications for some board assets, some effects on park users,
and integration with the board’s future development plans for the
reserve.
10. The
conditions require Watercare to submit temporary park service provision plans
and reinstatement plans to the board for approval.
11. The
temporary park service provision plan will set out how Watercare will provide
for the current park services during construction e.g. path connections.
Due to the scale of the project, some services will be compromised and will
only be provided to the extent that is safe and feasible.
12. The
reinstatement plan will set out how Watercare will complete the construction of
the Central Interceptor to provide for the agreed permanent park services e.g.
replacement playground and path connections.
13. Staff
have negotiated to ensure that visible infrastructure is integrated into the
reserve. To achieve this, staff have proposed using a Public Arts led
process to create visible infrastructure which is appropriate for the parks.
Land Owner Approval (LOA) conditions
The Grantor refers to Auckland Council
and the Grantee refers to Watercare.
· The Grantee to provide the same quantity of
safe play provision in the local area during construction. The Grantee should
fund the Grantor to fulfil this condition, provided always that the parties
(acting reasonably) shall set the scope and agree the terms and funding before
any commitments are made.
· The Grantee to submit design and
construction documentation for any play facilities, bridge, paths, or park
reinstatement to Whau Local Board for approval.
· The Grantee to maintain walking and cycling
connection through the Park and provide temporary access routes for the
duration of the Works.
· The Grantee to submit temporary park
service provision plan for the duration of the Works to Whau Local Board for
approval.
· The Grantee to submit park reinstatement
plans to Whau Local Board for approval.
· The appearance of Pump Station 25 shall be
improved. The appearance should be designed by a suitably experienced
artist(s) working with the project’s architect and engineer.
Reasonable costs are to be met by the Grantee and the Public Art team will lead
the integrated art component and provide advice to the Grantee throughout the
project to ensure a successful design outcome is achieved.
|
Design Process
|
Responsibility
|
|
Brief Creation
|
Public Art Team
|
|
Project Proposal
|
Public Art Team
|
|
Concept Development
|
Selected artist(s)
|
|
Developed Design
|
Selected artist(s), Public Art Team, the
Grantee
|
|
Detailed Design
|
Selected artist(s), the Grantee
|
|
Manufacturing/Build
|
|
Installation
|
The Grantee
|
Consideration
Local board views and implications
14. Staff
initiated negotiations with Watercare on the board’s behalf. Staff
workshopped the issues requiring negotiation with the board on 15 March
2017. Following the workshop, staff drafted LOA conditions and then undertook
negotiations across the whole project which crosses 5 local board areas.
Staff then workshopped the conditions with the board on 11 October 2017.
The board’s views were integrated into the final conditions recommended
in this report.
Māori impact statement
15. Watercare
is engaging with Mana Whenua on the Central Interceptor. The Land Owner
Approval conditions have been developed to support the board to respond to the
Central Interceptor in so far as it affects the reserve in its area.
16. The
Public Arts led process to integrate visible infrastructure into the park will
involve Mana Whenua engagement.
Implementation
17. Community
Facilities staff will complete the negotiations with Watercare to resolve
further detail and appropriate wording of the conditions. Community
Facilities staff will seek further approval from the board for any significant
changes that become necessary during the finalisation of formal documentation.
The agreement between the parties is to be in the form of an agreement to grant
easement and will include the temporary occupation terms and conditions.
18. Watercare
will present the temporary park service provision plan and reinstatement plan
to the board for approval. Parks Services and Community Facilities staff
will review the plans and advise on the appropriateness for approval.
Attachments
|
No.
|
Title
|
Page
|
|
a⇩
|
Miranda Reserve
|
21
|
Signatories
|
Authors
|
Allan Walton - Principal Property Advisor
|
|
Authorisers
|
Kim O’Neill - Head of Stakeholder and Land
Advisory
Glenn Boyd - Relationship Manager Henderson-Massey,
Waitakere Ranges, Whau
|
|
Whau Local
Board
13 December
2017
|
|
|
Whau Local Board
13 December
2017
|
|
Whau Heritage activities update
File No.: CP2017/23110
Purpose
1. The
purpose of this report is to provide an update on the heritage outcome in the
board’s local board plan and outline activities that have been supported
over the first six months of the 2017/18 allocation.
Executive summary
2. The
Whau Local Board has allocated the sum of $20,000 from the Locally Driven Initiatives
budget toward delivery of minor heritage related activities that increases
awareness of the history of the area.
3. Whau
communities have the opportunity to take ownership of their local history;
preserve the knowledge in various forms, and share beyond the borders both now
and in generations to come.
|
Recommendation/s
That the Whau Local Board:
a) receive
the Whau Heritage activities update report.
|
Comments
4. Heritage
adds value as a point of difference for any given area; potentially stimulating
local sense of ownership and pride, and also drawing in outside interest, and
the related positive effects.
5. The
Whau has a rich and wide ranging historical legacy. From the Whau River as a
key portage channel for both Maori and later, European settlers, travelling
coast to coast; the flight path of the godwit or kuaka; the clay industry and
the now iconic Crown Lynn ceramics; the market gardeners; and European entrepreneurial
settlement of Avondale with its built homes, popular racecourse and race day
outings via rail, the missionaries’ presence and establishment of
parishes in the area, right down to the River Whau itself. A waterway that
undoubtedly has numerous related historical stories.
6. The
local board does not have the resources to undertake major projects such as the
preservation of heritage buildings or sites, or the erection of
monuments. It looks instead to deliver or support minor projects or
activities that serve to gather / preserve / share / promote knowledge and
understanding, both locally and further afield. The board has signalled
it is particularly keen to support the community or external organisations to
deliver for themselves such activities or projects and has allocated $20,000 to
heritage in 2017/18 to enable it to respond to local opportunities.
7. The
Whau Local Board is aware that without regional Auckland Council funding, the
preservation of built heritage in the Whau is reliant on private or independent
parties’ goodwill and investment. Four such current key sites of
interest are:
· St
Andrew’s Church Hall in Margan Avenue: the local board heritage lead
has been supporting the New Lynn Protection Society’s ongoing attempts at
seeking co-operation from the private land owner to save this crumbling
historic building from ruin.
· Row
of historic shops in Totara Avenue: the local board investigated possible
preservation of the remnants of the original stand of New Lynn shops. Due to
the condition and the seismic/structural safety standard requirements, the cost
of preservation is beyond the means of the board or Auckland Council. No
private interest has been shown.
· Congregational
Church building, 3034 Great North Road: A privately owned heritage listed
structure, currently in reasonable condition. The Heritage Lead is
supporting the private owners as they work to proactively address any
structural weakness.
· Hollywood
Cinema in Avondale: Private owner has retained the heritage value of this
Avondale icon; recent community activation in Whau Pacific Festival.
8. Recent
activations with a heritage flavour in the Whau area include:
· Te
rerenga Whau – hikoi along the Whau River portage with artists,
discovering Maori history and ecology through dance and storytelling
· West Auckland Heritage Conference “The People of the
West” – series of talks and presentations and storytelling
hosted by the Waitakere Ranges Local Board
· Whau Heritage plaque series – work is currently ongoing to
deliver informative, pictorial and non-intrusive plaques at a dozen
historically significant locations in the Whau – delivered in
collaboration with the Avondale-Waterview Historical Society.
· Reprint of Amanesco House history book.
· Commission: Research into New Lynn clay history self-guided
walks brochure.
· Investigations
into Maori or bilingual or dual naming of parks or sites of significance to
Maori. An Auckland Council project supported by the board (Parks budget).
· Te Toi Uku (the art of clay) and the old kiln on site – continued
support for this unique museum which promotes the heritage of clay works and
Crown Lynn ceramics. Arguably, the Whau’s biggest heritage draw
card for external visitors – especially during Auckland’s annual
Heritage Festival
Te
Toi Uku Iconic
Crown Lynn swans, Te Toi Uku collection
Consideration
Local board views and implications
9. The
local board has allocated $20,000 as part of its 2017/18 work programme to
enable it to support minor heritage activities.
10. Staff receive
board direction from the lead and work to deliver projects which clearly
support the heritage initiatives aligned the last local board plan.
|
Topic
|
2017/18
activities
|
Estimated
costing
|
|
Response
funds
|
· Amenesco
House Books
· “The
People of the West” Heritage Festival
· Printing
Heritage Walks in NL
|
5,000
|
|
Plaques and
Interpretive signage
|
· Refresh
of series of plaques in Gardner Reserve
· Top
up Research & installation plaque series – including purchasing
photo rights
|
10,000
|
|
Assistance
for Structural Engineering assessments
|
· Investigation
of heritage built structures
|
5,000
|
11. Projects and
activities that are being scoped at the time of writing this report include:
· restoration
of heritage Potters Post sign
· maintenance
of heritage interpretive signs in Gardner Reserve
· maintenance
of heritage murals in Avondale township
· support
proactive structural assessment of New Lynn Congregational Church
· investigate
adding Maori pou of significance to Rewrewa Stream when redeveloping flood
damaged site in New Lynn town centre.
12. In the process of consulting with the public
on the 2017 – 2020 Local Board Plan, the feedback to the board was that,
whilst keen to ensure the continued preservation of the heritage of the area,
this outcome was not rated as a top priority for rate revenue expenditure by
the majority of respondents. The two initiatives which scored significantly
higher than the others were:
· Great
neighbourhoods with strong community connections capacity and voices and
· Well
planned towns, facilities and housing
Both these outcomes could be enhanced by adding a heritage element.
13. The recently
adopted local board plan again has a specific outcome on heritage and has
proposed a number of activities within the outcome description and supporting
objective table.
|
Outcome 6: Our heritage is known, protected and our stories are shared
|
|
Objective
|
Key initiative
|
|
We celebrate and support protection from a strong research foundation
|
Refresh Māori heritage sites list
|
|
Refresh the heritage buildings list
|
|
Gather & Share historical knowledge
|
Deliver a programme of heritage festival activities
|
|
Record and share our heritage through film, literature, urban art,
sculptures and festivals
|
|
Preservation of our places and stories
|
Promote the protection of Māori heritage sites and historic
buildings
|
|
Expand our oral history programme
|
A work
programme will be developed for 2018/19 and presented to the local board for
consideration in mid-2018.
Māori
impact statement
14. The
Whau Board has given staff a clear direction of its intention to respect Maori
as tangata whenua and that it is mindful of promoting both Maori and European
heritage. The diverse communities of the Whau have much to gain by
learning and taking ownership of all heritages – built, cultural or
environmental - old and recent – indigenous and extraneous.
Implementation
15. Staff
will provide updates to the local board through the quarterly reporting
process. There is also an expectation that the elected member Heritage lead
will also keep the board informed via workshops in the spirit of the
“no-surprises” rationale adopted by the current local board.
16. The
local board has noted and acknowledged the Whau Community Arts Broker’s
delivery of community based activities, many of which have had heritage value
and will continue to work with them and other key community partners and
stakeholders.
Attachments
There are no attachments for
this report.
Signatories
|
Authors
|
Antonina Georgetti - Local Board Advisor
|
|
Authorisers
|
Glenn Boyd - Relationship Manager Henderson-Massey,
Waitakere Ranges, Whau
|
|
Whau Local Board
13 December
2017
|
|
10-year Budget 2018-2028 consultation
File No.: CP2017/25908
Purpose
1. To
agree local engagement events, and adopt local content and supporting
information for consultation as part of the 10-year Budget 2018-2028 process.
Executive summary
2. Consultation
on the 10-year Budget 2018-2028 (long-term plan) will take place from 28
February – 28 March 2018. Local boards will be consulting on their areas
of focus and advocacy for their 2018/2019 Local Board Agreement. The Local
Board Agreement is part of the budget setting process for the first year of the
10-year Budget 2018-2028.
3. There will also be concurrent consultation on the Auckland Plan
Refresh (APR), Regional Land Transport Plan (RLTP), Regional Pest Management
Plan (RPMP) and the Waste Management and Minimisation Plan (WMMP).
4. This
report seeks agreement from local boards on spoken interaction events that will
be held in their local board area during the consultation period and to adopt
their local content and supporting information for consultation, including:
· areas
of focus for 2018/2019
· the
key advocacy project.
5. The
governing body will agree regional items for consultation on 11 December and
local boards will agree their items by 14 December. The regional and local
consultation items will then be incorporated into the consultation document and
supporting information, which will be adopted by the governing body on 7
February 2018.
|
Recommendation/s
That the Whau Local Board:
a) agree, subject to
approval by the governing body, to hold at least one spoken interaction
events during the consultation period (activity type, date, and venue to be
identified).
b) delegate
to the following elected members and staff the power and responsibility to
hear from the public through “spoken/NZ sign language interaction”
in relation to the local board agreement at the council’s public
engagement events during the consultation period for the 10-year Budget
2018-2028:
i) Local
Board Members and Chair
ii) General
Manager Local Board Services, Local Board Relationship Manager, Local Board
Senior Advisor, Local Board Advisor
iii) any
additional staff approved by the General Manager Local Board Services or the
Chief Financial Officer
c) adopt
local content for consultation and local supporting information for
consultation, including their key advocacy project (to be tabled).
d) delegate
authority to the local board chair to approve any final minor changes
required following review by council’s legal team and/or Audit NZ, of
the local consultation content for the 10-year Budget 2018-2028 prior to
publication, including online consultation content, and should any changes be
made they are to be reported to the next business meeting.
|
Comments
6. The
10-year Budget sets out the priorities and funding for council activities that
are planned over a 10-year period. It includes financial and non-financial
information for the whole Auckland Council group. The Long-term Plan is
reviewed and consulted on every three years.
7. As
part of the 10-year Budget 2018-2028 process, the council is required to
produce a consultation document. This will cover any significant or important
issues proposed to be included in the 10-year Budget 2018-2028. The
consultation document and supporting information will also include information
on local board issues and priorities.
8. As
part of the consultation on the 10-year Budget 2018-2028, local boards will
consider and be consulting on their areas of focus and advocacy for their
2018/2019 Local Board Agreement. The Local Board Agreement is part of the
budget setting process for the first year of the 10-year Budget 2018-2028.
9. Public
consultation on the 10-year Budget 2018-2028 will take place from 28 February
– 28 March 2018.There will also be concurrent
consultation on the Auckland Plan Refresh (APR), Regional Land Transport Plan
(RLTP), Regional Pest Management Plan (RPMP) and the Waste Management and
Minimisation Plan (WMMP).
10. Aucklanders
will be able to provide feedback during the consultation process through a
variety of channels which include verbal (or face to face), written, social
media and digital. A report on how council will receive verbal feedback from
the public was considered by the Finance and Performance Committee on 21
November 2017. At a high level, the report outlines several
different types of events which are planned for specific audiences and
communities as well as those planned for general Auckland residents. At that
meeting, the Finance and Performance Committee resolved to:
a) approve
the approach…to receive all feedback from Aucklanders on the Long-term
Plan and Auckland Plan from 28 February 2018 to 28 March 2018 comprising of:
· up to 25 Have Your Say events targeting general Auckland residents
are held in local board areas across the region;
· four regional stakeholder events (traditional hearing style);
· an independently commissioned quantitative survey;
· community specific events to collect feedback from different
demographic and interest groups. Demographic events will target Youth, Seniors,
Pacific, Ethnic, Rainbow and Disability communities;
· hui with mana whenua and mataawaka.
and
c) require the Mayor and Councillors to attend a minimum of
three Have Your Say events each to hear the views of Aucklanders and all
regional stakeholder events.
11. The
final consultation process for the 10-year Budget 2018-2028 will be approved by
the governing body on 7 February 2018.
12. Spoken
interaction constitutes any opportunity where Aucklanders have a dialogue with
decision makers or their official delegations on the themes relating to the
consultation. The spoken interaction events recommended to be held in the Whau
Local Board area were not available at time of writing this report.
13. Local
boards are requested to agree their key priorities and key advocacy project for
2018/2019 and adopt their local content and supporting information for
consultation, as attached in Attachments A and B.
14. Any
new local BID targeted rates must be consulted on before they can be
implemented. Local boards are therefore also requested to agree any new
proposals for consultation.
Consideration
Local
board views and implications
15. Local
board decisions are being sought in this report.
16. Local
boards will have further opportunities to provide information and views as
council progresses through the 10-year Budget 2018-2028 process.
Māori impact statement
17. Many
local board decisions are of importance to and impact on Māori.
Local board agreements and the 10-year Budget are important tools that enable
and can demonstrate council’s responsiveness to Māori.
Local board plans, which were adopted in September and October of 2017, form
the basis for local priorities.
18. Bespoke
consultation materials for the Māori community are being developed. These materials will explain how the
LTP and APR are relevant for them. Engagement advisors will have access to this
collateral to support local engagement.
19. Specific
regionally supported local engagement with Māori is being targeted for south and west Auckland.
20. An
integrated approach to mana whenua engagement is being taken, with LTP and APR
discussions already happening through the Mana Whenua Kaitiaki Forum.
21. There
is a need to continue to build relationships between local boards and iwi, and
where relevant the wider Māori community. Ongoing
conversations will assist local boards and Māori
to understand each other’s priorities and issues. This in turn can
influence and encourage Māori participation in
council’s decision-making processes.
Implementation
22. The
governing body will approve the consultation document, supporting information
and consultation process for the 10-year Budget 2018-2028 on 7 February 2018.
23. Following
consultation, the governing body and local boards will make decisions on the
10-year Budget 2018-2028 and Local Board Agreements 2018/19 respectively.
Attachments
|
No.
|
Title
|
Page
|
|
a⇩
|
Local content for consultation
|
31
|
|
b⇩
|
Local supporting information for consultation
|
33
|
Signatories
|
Authors
|
Christie McFayden - Graduate Advisor
|
|
Authorisers
|
Carol McKenzie-Rex - Relationship Manager
Glenn Boyd - Relationship Manager Henderson-Massey,
Waitakere Ranges, Whau
|
|
Whau Local
Board
13 December
2017
|
|
Placeholder for Attachment 1
. 10-year Budget 2018-2028 consultation.DOC
Local content for consultation
|
Whau Local Board
13 December
2017
|
|
Placeholder for Attachment 2
. 10-year Budget 2018-2028 consultation.DOC
Local supporting information for consultation
|
Whau Local Board
13 December
2017
|
|
Decision-making allocation update
File No.: CP2017/25893
Purpose
1. This report seeks local board input on the allocation of
non-regulatory decision-making as part of the 10 Year Budget 2018-2028.
Executive summary
2. The
Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009 requires the Governing Body to
allocate decision-making responsibility for non-regulatory activities either to
the Governing Body or to local boards. This must be undertaken in accordance
with certain legislative principles and after considering the views and
preferences of each local board. There is a presumption that local boards will
be responsible for making decisions on non-regulatory activities except where
decision-making on a region-wide basis will better promote the wellbeing of
communities across Auckland because certain criteria are satisfied.
3. Each
long-term plan and annual plan must identify the non-regulatory activities
allocated to local boards.
4. A
significant review of this decision-making allocation was undertaken during the
2015-2025 Long-term Plan (LTP) cycle. The allocation was also recently
considered during the Governance Framework Review over the period 2016-2017. A
comprehensive review is thus not being undertaken this LTP cycle.
5. One
substantive change to the allocation is proposed in order to implement a policy
decision from the Governance Framework Review: allocating certain local service
property optimisation decisions to local boards. There are various other minor
wording amendments in order to improve clarity and consistency.
6. Local board feedback is sought on this proposed allocation. It will
be considered by the Governing Body during its adoption of the 10 Year Budget
2018-2028.
|
Recommendation/s
That the Whau Local Board:
a) endorse the proposed allocation of non-regulatory decision-making
as attached to this report.
|
Comments
Background
7. The Local Government
(Auckland Council) Act 2009 sets out the functions and powers of the Governing
Body and local boards. Local board functions and powers come from three
sources:
· those directly conferred by the Local Government
(Auckland Council) Act 2009;
· non-regulatory activities allocated by the
Governing Body to local boards;
· regulatory or non-regulatory functions and
powers delegated by the Governing Body or Auckland Transport to the local
boards.
8. The Auckland Transition Agency (ATA) was given the task of
determining the initial allocation of the council’s non-regulatory
activities using the Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009 (the Auckland
Council Act). In undertaking this exercise, the question considered by ATA was
not “why should the activity be allocated to local boards?” but
“why not?” This was in line with the Auckland Council Act.
9. The non-regulatory decision-making allocation has been reviewed
twice since the ATA first developed it, as part of the Long-term Plan 2012-2022
and the Long-term Plan 2015-2025.The
current non-regulatory decision-making allocation was determined as part of the
2015-2025 Long-term Plan. It is written on an inclusive basis; it does not
contain an exhaustive list of all elements that might make up an allocated
activity.
10. A significant review of the allocation was
undertaken during the 2015-2025 Long-term Plan. The
review concluded that a number of clarifications and text changes were required
but no substantive changes were needed to the allocated responsibilities. The
review also concluded that the then allocation had worked well and there had
been a growing understanding and increasing sophistication of how to use it.
11. The 2016 independent Governance
Framework Review report also considered the decision-making allocation as part
of the respective roles of the Governing Body and local boards, and what is
working well and not working well in Auckland Council’s governance. As
with the Long-term Plan 2015-2025 review the Governance Framework Review found
that the current allocation is well understood, sensible, and generally works
well. It did recommend that one minor technical change be made to the
allocation to more accurately describe the current practical limitations of
local board roles in park acquisitions. Further analysis and consultation
demonstrated that this recommended change was not necessary.
12. In responding to the Governance
Framework Review report and considering how local boards could be further
empowered, the Governing Body decided on a policy change that requires the
allocation table to be amended. This is described below.
13. Local boards were extensively
consulted during the Governance Framework review.
14. Due to the recent timing of the
Governance Framework Review and the consideration of the allocation of
non-regulatory decision-making as part of it, no comprehensive review of the
allocation table is being undertaken this Long-term Plan cycle.
15. The Governance Framework Review
did identify other decision-making opportunities for local boards, e.g. around service levels. No change is required to the allocation table
to provide for this; local boards already have the necessary responsibilities
allocated to them. Rather the organisation needs to be in a position to provide
local boards with quality advice when making those decisions.
Summary of proposed amendments
16. The
current allocation with proposed amendments is attached as Attachment A.
17. The
only substantive amendment to the allocation is to allocate decision-making for
disposal of local service properties and reinvestment of sale proceeds to local
boards where this falls within the service property optimisation policy. This
policy was adopted in 2015 by the Governing Body and sets out the purpose and
principles for optimisation of underperforming or underutilised service
property. A key element is that sale proceeds from underperforming service
property are locally reinvested to advance approved projects or activities on a
cost neutral basis.
18. Under
the current allocation the Governing Body makes the final decision on disposal
and acquisition of all property assets, including local service properties that
may be optimised. Through the Governance Framework Review process the
Governing Body agreed that these local service property optimisation decisions
should be made by local boards.[1]
This amendment to the allocation implements this decision. This issue was
canvassed with local boards during consultation on the Governance Framework
Review and they were supportive of local boards holding this decision-making.
19. The
current allocation has one specific allocation for the Governing Body on
acquisition and disposals - ‘acquisition and divestment of all park land,
including the disposal of surplus parks.’ This was introduced to the
allocation table in 2012 to provide clarity of decision-making responsibility
in this space. This allocation would conflict with the new allocation given to
local boards (disposal and reinvestment of property assets in line with the
Service Property Optimisation Policy). In order to retain clarity an amendment
has been made to the parks allocation to make it clear that the Governing
Body’s responsibility for acquisition and divestment of parks does not
apply in the case of the Service Property Optimisation Policy applying.
20. Other
minor changes to wording include:
· Amending ‘Auckland-wide’ to ‘regional’ in
several instances to maintain consistency throughout the allocation table.
· Updating various names (such as Panuku Development Auckland and
various parks and maunga) to bring them into line with Auckland Council style.
· Updating descriptions of governance arrangements for several
reserves to more accurately describe the current arrangements.
· Renaming themes and activity groups to bring them in to line with
the new LTP nomenclature.
· Updating the planning language to bring it in line with Auckland
Plan refresh nomenclature.
21. Whilst not part of the allocation of decision-making, the preamble
to the allocation table that describes what powers have been delegated to local
boards has also been updated to note the recent decision to delegate certain
Reserves Act powers to local boards. This delegation was an outcome of the
Governance Framework Review.
Consideration
Local board views and implications
22. Local
board views on the proposed allocation are being sought via this report.
23. There
was extensive consultation with local boards about their decision-making roles
and powers during the Governance Framework Review. This included:
· workshops with each local board during the independent review phase;
· workshops and one business meeting with each local board during the
response phase.
24. The
review found that the allocation table was generally working well and no
substantive changes to the allocation were recommended. This was specifically
discussed with local boards during workshops. Feedback from local boards was
generally supportive of this position.
Māori impact statement
25. There are no particular impacts to Maori in relation to this report.
Implementation
26. As the changes proposed to the decision-making allocation are not
significant it is not necessary to publicly consult on them. Local board
feedback will be reported to the Governing Body in 2018. Changes to the
allocation would come into effect on 1 July 2018.
Attachments
|
No.
|
Title
|
Page
|
|
a⇩
|
Allocation of decision-making for Local Board feedback
|
39
|
Signatories
|
Authors
|
James Liddell - Portfolio Manager
|
|
Authorisers
|
Carol McKenzie-Rex - GM Local Board Services
Glenn Boyd - Relationship Manager Henderson-Massey, Waitakere
Ranges, Whau
|
|
Whau Local
Board
13 December
2017
|
|
|
Whau Local Board
13 December
2017
|
|
LB feedback on Rates remission and postponement policy
review
File No.: CP2017/25903
Purpose
1. Seek
preliminary feedback from local boards on the review of the rates remission and
postponement policy and in particular the legacy schemes. Feedback will be
considered by Finance and Performance Committee when agreeing a rates remission
and postponement policy, and any options, for consultation.
Executive summary
2. The
council is required to review its rates remission and postponement policy every
six years.
3. Rates
remissions are a reduction in rates, usually by a set percentage. Rates
postponement defers the payment of rates to a future point in time, usually the
sale of the property.
4. The
current policy includes six regional schemes and eleven legacy schemes
inherited from the former councils that are only available within the former
districts. Only minor changes are proposed to the regional schemes.
5. Officers
recommend Option 1 that the legacy schemes (excluding the postponement for
Manukau sports clubs) be replaced with grants because:
· funding
decisions are more transparent
· spending
for each activity is within an annual budget
· level
of support for each organisation is more visible.
6. A
three year transition is proposed for current recipients during which they will
receive their current funding via a grant. At the end of transition they would
need to apply for renewal.
7. Current legacy remissions and postponements funding would move to
grant budgets:
a) regional
grants programmes: remissions for natural heritage and community/sporting
remissions for regional/sub-regional facilities
b) local
board grants programmes: all other legacy remissions in the relevant area and
the Great Barrier Island postponements.
8. Each
board will be funded to provide the same level of grants as is presently
provided in b) above. After three years boards can choose to continue the
grants if they wish. While some boards will get more funding than others, this
will be smoothed over time by the local board funding policy.
Alternative options
9. The
other three options were considered and rejected because:
· Option
2: keeping the current remissions schemes is inequitable
· Option
3: extending the remissions in their current form is costly and does not
provide the same level of transparency and oversight as is achieved with grants
· Option
4: removing the schemes with no replacement could present some
ratepayers/community groups with affordability issues.
10. Local boards feedback on the review will be included in the report
to the Finance and Performance Committee in February. Public consultation on
the proposed Rates remission and postponement policy and any options will occur
in April. Local boards will be able to consider public feedback, and provide
their formal views on the proposed policy at their May meetings. Local board
and public feedback will be reported to the 31 May meeting of the Finance and
Performance Committee when the adoption of the policy will be considered.
|
Recommendation/s
That the Whau Local Board:
a) resolve
feedback on the options to address the legacy council remission and
postponement schemes.
|
Comments
Background
11. The current
Rates remission and postponement policy includes:
· 6
regional schemes available to all ratepayers with the objectives to:
o provide
ratepayers with some financial or other assistance where they might otherwise
have difficulty meeting their obligations
o address
circumstances where the rating system results in anomalies in the incidence of
rates.
· 11
legacy schemes supporting community objectives set by the former councils and
only available in some areas:
o five
remission schemes for natural and in some cases historic heritage
o six
remission schemes for community and sporting organisations
o a
rates postponement scheme for sports clubs in Manukau
o a
rates postponement scheme for businesses on Great Barrier Island.
12. A summary of the regional and legacy schemes and the amount of
remission or postponement granted in 2016/2017 is in Attachment A. The full
rates remission and postponement policy is in Attachment B.
Assessment
of Regional Schemes
13. Officers have reviewed the regional schemes and identified that the
schemes are operating in accordance with expectations. The only amendment
proposed to the regional schemes is to simplify the remission scheme for rates
penalties. This amendment will be designed to maintain ratepayers’
existing level of access to penalty remissions.
Assessment
of Legacy Schemes
14. Four
options were considered for the legacy schemes:
1. integrate
with grants schemes with three year transition for current recipients
2. retain
the status quo
3. extend
to entire region
4. remove.
15. A summary of the options can be found in Table 1 at the end of this
report.
16. The
following criteria were used to assess options for the legacy remissions and
postponements policies.
· equity
– same treatment for all ratepayers in all areas across Auckland
· transparency
· cost
· minimise
the effects of change
· administrative
simplicity.
Option 1:
Integrate remissions and postponements with grants schemes with three year
transition (excluding the Manukau postponement scheme for sports clubs)
17. This option would remove the present remission and postponement
schemes. Up to the current amount equivalent of the 2018/2019 remission
would be transferred to grants expenditure in the relevant areas over the next
three years. The amount of grants will be adjusted for the increase in
rates in the subsequent two years.
18. This
option will increase the council’s grants and other budget lines by
$900,000. This increase is offset by the increase in rates revenue of $900,000
resulting from remissions no longer being applied. There is no net cost to
ratepayers of converting rates remissions to grants.
Allocating grants
19. Integration of remissions into wider
regional, or local, grants schemes is preferable because:
· allocation
of rates expenditure will be transparent
· spending via
grants is public and assessed against other comparable demands on public money
in terms of efficacy. Value for money is regularly assessed.
· administrative
systems for grants are already in place although there will be a change in
volume
· proposed
transition will result in no change for recipients over the three years
· regional
equity will be achieved over time as the legacy grants are integrated into the
wider grants programme
· enables
equity between community organisations that own land and those that do not.
20. Legacy
schemes have been assessed against local and regional responsibilities. From
this it is proposed that grants budgets be allocated as follows:
|
Remission/Postponement For
|
Aligns with
|
Grant allocates to
|
|
Natural
heritage
|
Regional
|
Regional Environment and
Natural Heritage Grants Programme
|
|
Historic
Heritage
|
Regional
|
Regional
Historic Heritage Grants Programme
|
|
Regional
or sub-regional sports facilities
|
Regional
|
Regional
Sports and Recreation Grants Programme
|
|
Local
sports clubs and facilities
|
Local
|
Local Board
where property receiving remission is located
|
|
Regional
or sub-regional community facilities
|
Regional
|
Regional
Community Development Grants programmes
|
|
Local
community organisations and facilities
|
Local
|
Local Board
where property receiving remission is located
|
|
Great
Barrier businesses
|
Local
|
Great
Barrier Local Board
|
21. Remissions
for community and sporting organisations have been split between Regional and
Local based on the area served by the property receiving the remission. For
example, Eden Park, St John’s ambulance stations, IHC care homes and the
SPCA have been classed as regional. Remissions for the Scouts Association and
Plunket NZ have been classed as local because they relate to local scout halls
and Plunket centres.
22. The
value of remissions by local board area can be found in Attachment C. A list of
all community and sporting remissions by local board showing the ratepayer and
amount of remission, can be found in Attachment D.
Three Year Transition
23. The
relevant decision maker, e.g. the Governing Body Committee for regional grants,
and local boards for local grants, would be required to provide a grant to the
level of the existing remission for a period of three years. The present
recipient would therefore be protected from any change to their current funding
for that period. At the end of the three years the decision maker can then
decide whether to continue the grants on the existing basis or release the
funds to the wider grants pool.
Option 2: Retain the status quo
24. This
option would retain the remissions and postponement schemes in their current
form in the former council areas. Properties in other parts of the region would
not be able to apply for them
25. This
option is administratively simple for the council and recipients. It minimises
change. Costs will depend on applications but have been relatively stable over
time. The options is not equitable because the schemes are only available to
ratepayers in some areas.
26. Rates
remissions and postponements are not a transparent mechanism for supporting
wider council goals because they:
· are
recorded as a charge against revenue
· do
not appear as a cost in the councils accounts
· do
not increase the rates requirement and hence do not impact the headline rates
increase[2]
(They still increase the rates burden on other ratepayers)
· are
not prioritised against other expenditure proposals or subject to the same
value for money scrutiny.
Option 3:
Extend to entire region
27. This option would extend the current
policies to apply to the entire Auckland Council area. Extending the policies
in their current form is equitable, and simplifies administration. However this
option:
· increases
costs to ratepayers without being compared to other council proposals that may
offer greater benefits
· lacks
evidence as to how much benefit will be returned by this investment
· is
not transparent as described in Option 2 above.
28. The
cost of extending existing legacy remission schemes regionally
will depend on the criteria for eligibility. Costs for extending the current
remission schemes have been estimated at $4.5 - $6 million as follows:
· Extending
remission for natural heritage to properties with a covenant managed by the
Queen Elizabeth the Second Trust: $40,000. There are just over 100
properties in Auckland with a QEII covenant. If the criteria is extended to
include other types of covenant, such as a covenant with a council, then the
number of eligible properties will increase significantly. For example there
are 4,500 properties with a bush-lot covenant from Rodney Council.
· Extending
remissions for historic heritage: $3 million. This is derived from the
rates for properties that are scheduled Category A in the Auckland Unitary
Plan, where the status is associated with a building. This ignores
archaeological sites such as middens and pa, but will capture the whole value
of properties where the heritage status only applies to part of the property.
· Extending
remissions for community and sporting organisations: $1.5 million for 50
per cent remission to $3 million for 100 per cent remission. This is
estimated by applying a full remission to properties currently receiving a five
per cent remission for the Auckland Regional Council scheme for community and
sporting organisations. This is likely to under estimate the value of
remissions, as offering a more generous remission is likely to significantly
increase the number of applicants.
Option 4: Remove the schemes
29. Removing
the schemes would lead to immediate financial impacts for a number of
organisations presently receiving support from council. While the sums
remitted are in many cases small, it is not clear that all the current
recipients would be able to adequately accommodate change in a short time
period.
Postponement for
sports clubs in the district of the previous Manukau City Council
30. It
is not recommended that the rates postponements for Manukau Sports clubs be
converted to remission. This is because the postponement is currently set to be
cost neutral. This is achieved by interest being charged, and by the
postponement being secured against the title of the property. The council can
require the full amount of postponed rates and interest be paid before any sale
of the property can proceed. It would not be effective or efficient to try and
replicate the postponement through a grants process.
31. The
clubs are accruing a major liability against their land under this scheme. The
total current liability including interest is $880,000. If the policy is not
changed then rates will continue to accrue as the rates are never remitted.
While the postponements are cost-neutral when they end, in the meantime they
represent a significant debt liability at a time when the council is debt
constrained. For this reason officers prefer that the schemes be removed after
a suitable transition period. (The outstanding liability at the time the scheme
is removed would remain a liability on the land until its sale or transfer of
ownership.)
32. The
two clubs receiving the postponement are zoned for residential development.
Both clubs have significant (around 240%) increases in capital valuation following
changes in zoning under the unitary plan. One club has repaid a portion of its
liability following the sale of part of the property, and has chosen to pay
rather than postpone the current year’s rates.
33. Officers
propose to do further work to understand the individual circumstances of these
two golf courses before developing formal recommendation and options for
addressing this postponement scheme. Next steps and a timeline for actions will
be included in the report to the February Finance and Performance Committee.
Next
Steps
34. Preliminary
feedback from local boards will be attached to the report to the February
Finance and Performance Committee. The committee will agree a Rates remission
and postponement policy, and any options, for consultation.
35. Public
consultation will occur in April. All current recipients of the legacy rates
remission and postponement schemes will be notified of any proposed changes to
enable them to submit feedback.
36. Local
boards will be able to consider the results of the public consultation, and
provide formal feedback on the proposed policy, at their May meetings.
37. The
Finance and Performance Committee will consider feedback from the public and
local boards and adopt a final Rates remission and postponement policy by 31
May 2018. This enables the council’s budgets to be updated for the
adoption of the Long-term Plan 2018-2028.
Table 1: Review of the rates
remission and postponement policy: Options for legacy remission and
postponement schemes
|
Option
|
Description
|
Pros
|
Cons
|
Implementation
|
|
Option 1: Integrate with grants schemes
|
· Legacy
remission and postponements schemes (excluding MCC postponement for sports
clubs) transfer to regional or local grants schemes.
· Three
year transition – same level of support given as provided in remission
or postponement
|
· Increased
transparency and accountability – grants assessed for value for money
· Can
cap costs
· No
change for three years for current recipients – time to adjust
· Greater
flexibility in application – not restricted to organisations that own
land, level of support can reflect outcomes not property rates
· Reduced
rates administration
|
· Increased
grants administration
|
· Administrative
systems already in place for grants
· Increase
in grants volume
|
|
Option 2: Retain the status quo
|
· Legacy remission and postponements schemes continue
unchanged
|
· Minimises
change
|
· Inequitable
– only available in some areas, and only available to groups that own
land
· Lacks
transparency – spending not reviewed against other council priorities
· No
cap on costs
|
· No
change to current processes
|
|
Option 3: Extend to entire region
|
· Schemes
expanded to regional schemes. Costs will depend on the criteria applied
|
· Increases
equity across the region
|
· Cost
– estimated at $4.5m to $6m
· No
cap on costs
· Lacks
transparency – spending not reviewed against other council priorities
· Lack
of evidence this would improve outcomes
· Only
available to groups that own property
|
· Increases
volume of remissions to process
|
|
Option 4: Remove the schemes
|
· Legacy
schemes removed without transition
|
· $700,000
reduction in cost of rates for 2018/2019
|
· No
time for recipients to adjust
|
· Reduces
rates administration
|
Consideration
Local
board views and implications
38. Implications
for local boards are set out in the report. Under the proposal boards will be
provided with additional funding to maintain the existing level of support for
local community and sports groups in their board area that currently receive
remissions. However, local boards will have more grant applications to
appraise in the future and potentially more decisions to make at the end of the
three year transition.
39. This
report seeks feedback from Local Boards to inform the consideration of this
issue by the Finance and Performance Committee in February 2018.
Māori impact statement
40. None
of the properties presently receiving remissions or postponements under the
legacy schemes are known to be Māori owned or operated.
41. The
only reference to Māori in the legacy remission and postponement schemes
is the provision for remissions for Māori reservations in the Rodney
District. No properties applied under this criterion. Such properties would be
eligible for remission under the Council’s Māori freehold land rates
remission and postponement policy. The Council is not required to review its
MFL rates remission and postponement policy until 2019. No changes are proposed
for this policy.
42. Under
the principles for the Community Grants Policy, all grants programmes should
respond to Auckland Council’s commitment to improving Māori
outcomes.
Implementation
43. Differences
in implementation for each of the options are set out in Table 1 above.
Attachments
|
No.
|
Title
|
Page
|
|
a⇩
|
Summary of Auckland Council Rates remission and
postponement policy schemes
|
61
|
|
b⇩
|
Rates remission and postponement policy
|
67
|
|
c⇩
|
Value of legacy schemes by local board area
|
85
|
|
d⇩
|
All community and sporting remissions by local board
area (Under Separate Cover) - Confidential
|
|
Signatories
|
Authors
|
Beth Sullivan - Principal Advisor Policy
Andrew Duncan - Manager Financial Policy
|
|
Authorisers
|
Matthew Walker - Acting Group Chief Financial Officer
Glenn Boyd - Relationship Manager Henderson-Massey,
Waitakere Ranges, Whau
|
|
Whau Local
Board
13 December
2017
|
|
|
Whau Local Board
13 December
2017
|
|
|
Whau Local Board
13 December
2017
|
|
|
Whau Local Board
13 December
2017
|
|
Governance Forward Work Calendar
File No.: CP2017/25937
Purpose
1. To
present the Whau Local Board with its updated governance forward work calendar.
Executive Summary
2. The
governance forward work calendar for the Whau Local Board is in Attachment A.
The calendar is updated monthly, reported to business meetings and distributed
to council staff.
3. The
governance forward work calendars were introduced in 2016 as part of Auckland
Council’s quality advice programme and aim to support local boards’
governance role by:
· ensuring advice on
meeting agendas is driven by local board priorities
· clarifying what
advice is expected and when
· clarifying the
rationale for reports.
4. The
calendar also aims to provide guidance for staff supporting local boards and
greater transparency for the public.
|
Recommendation
That the Whau Local Board:
a) note
the Whau Local Board Governance Forward Work Calendar – December
2017.
|
Attachments
|
No.
|
Title
|
Page
|
|
a⇩
|
Governance Forward Work Calendar - December 2017
|
89
|
Signatories
|
Authors
|
Tua Viliamu - Democracy Advisor
|
|
Authorisers
|
Glenn Boyd - Relationship Manager Henderson-Massey,
Waitakere Ranges, Whau
|
|
Whau Local
Board
13 December
2017
|
|
|
Whau Local Board
13 December
2017
|
|
Confirmation of Workshop Records: 15 & 29 November
2017
File No.:
CP2017/25939
Purpose
1. This
report presents records of workshops held by the Whau Local Board on:
o 15 November 2017
o 29 November 2017
Executive Summary
2. At
the workshop held on Wednesday, 15 November 2017, the Whau Local Board had
briefings on:
· Update
– McWhirter Bridge
· Quick
Response Grants
· Local
Board Agreement Planning process – Workshop 3 - advice from departments
and feedback from local boards
· Greenways
deferral funding
3. At
the workshop held on Wednesday, 29 November 2017, the Whau Local Board had a
briefing on:
· Elected
Member – Health and Safety training
· Farewell
Finn McCahon Jones
· Home
Energy Advice
4. The
workshop records are attached to this report.
|
Recommendation
That the Whau Local Board:
a) confirm
the records of the workshops in Attachments A and B held on the following
dates:
o 15 November 2017
o 29 November 2017
|
Attachments
|
No.
|
Title
|
Page
|
|
a⇩
|
Workshop Record - 15 November 2017
|
93
|
|
b⇩
|
Workshop Record - 29 November 2017
|
95
|
Signatories
|
Authors
|
Tua Viliamu - Democracy Advisor
Mark Allen - Senior Local Board
Advisor
|
|
Authorisers
|
Glenn Boyd - Relationship Manager
Henderson-Massey, Waitakere Ranges, Whau
|
|
Whau Local
Board
13 December
2017
|
|
Whau
Local Board Workshop Record
Record of the
Whau Local Board workshop held 15 November 2017 at Whau Local Board boardroom,
31 Totara Avenue, New Lynn, Auckland 0600
PRESENT
Members: Catherine
Farmer (Chaired meeting); Derek Battersby, QSM, JP; Duncan Macdonald JP;
Te’eva Matafai; David Whitley (from 10.28am, item 1)
Apology: Chair
Tracy Mulholland (for absence - attending regional LTP Meeting) and Deputy
Chair Susan Zhu (for absence)
Also
Present: AC Officers: Mark
Allen, Antonina Georgetti, Riya Seth, Pepe Sapolu-Reweti, David Rose
Notes: Meeting opened by
Chair at 10.15am.
|
Workshop Item
|
Summary
of discussion
|
|
Administration
|
· Board administration and upcoming events/meetings
· Context setting of today’s items
· Last workshop’s draft record accepted
|
|
1. Update - McWhirter Bridge
Governance
role: Keeping Informed
Presenters:
Felicity Merrington, Davey Chang,
Andrew Mackenzie, Chris Conner
|
Members discussed the Scope
Definition Report that closes the Concept Design.
The following points were discussed:
· Noted that estimated cost of the bridge has increased
significantly.
· Members supported further investigations by staff to
get clearer estimates
o Investigate variations or amendments to existing option
o Geography of land base is estimated - investigations
may reveal need for substantive columns in stream bed.
· Extra cost for Geotech report
|
|
2. Quick Response Grants
Governance
role: Local initiative / preparing for specific
Presenter:
Caroline Teh
|
Members
discussed applications received for quick response grants round two.
Members
Te’eva Matafai noted her conflict of interest with regards to the
application from Pacific Events and Entertainment Trust.
Approved
funds passed via Resolution 22 November Board meeting.
|
|
3. Local Board Agreement Planning process - Workshop 3 -
advice from departments and feedback from local boards
Governance
role: Local initiative / preparing for specific decisions
|
Presenters: Mark Allen, David
Burt, John Cranfield, Chantelle Subritzky, Mara Bebich, David Hookway, Pippa
Sommerville, Felicity Merrington (AT), Pepe Sapolu-Reweti, Kat Teirney,
David Rose, Antonina Georgetti
· Members discussed key projects/area of focus
for 2018/19 consultation.
· Members supported direction presented by staff.
· Report to December board meeting will seek
board’s formal approval on consultation material.
|
|
4. Greenways
deferral funding
Governance
role: Engagement
Time: 1.10pm – 1.20pm
Presenter:
Pippa Sommerville
|
· The Whau Local Board allocated LDI OPEX to
‘Greenways Promotion’ in FY16/17. The budget was unspent and was
deferred.
· Paths programme still being worked on to deliver online
guide throughout Whau pathways
· PS tabled proposal to develop paper pathway guides for
public to explore in the Whau – perhaps start with three identified
circular routes – potential to expand at later date – pop-up
panels to highlight nearby noteworthy sites.
· Board supportive of
direction outlined by Pippa. Wish to see the drafted material prior to
going to print.
|
|
Whau Local Board
13 December 2017
|
|
Whau
Local Board Workshop Record
Record of the
Whau Local Board workshop held 29 November 2017 at Whau Local Board boardroom,
31 Totara Avenue, New Lynn, Auckland 0600
PRESENT
Members: Duncan Macdonald; David Whitley;
Catherine Farmer; Deputy Chair Susan Zhu (Chaired meeting)
Apology: Tracy Mulholland, Derek Battersby,
Te’eva Matafai
Also
Present: AC Officers: Mark
Allen, Antonina Georgetti, Riya Seth, Pepe Sapolu-Reweti
Meeting opened by Chair at 10.45 am.
|
Workshop Item
|
Summary
of discussion
|
|
1. Administration
|
· Service Pro Network Upgrade –
Members asked to bring laptops to next week’s workshop on 6 Dec, drop
off with Kate prior to workshop for update and testing (approx. 2 hrs)
returned to members after meeting.
· Reminder to members not to print party
political material on council printer
· Next week’s workshop: draft
agenda shared – no conflict of interest identified for coming items.
Will be final workshop of the year.
· Previous workshop notes shared.
· Final board meeting on 13 December
– board to adopt LBP
· Meeting informed that planning started
at direction of Chair to deliver a Whau Seniors’ Event March 2018.
|
|
2. Elected
Member - Health & Safety training
Governance Role: Keeping Informed
Presenters:
Oliver Sanandres, Head of Health, Safety and Wellbeing
Alice McCarthy, Solicitor
Inger – Oli’s PA
|
Develops knowledge and understanding of an elected member’s
duties and obligations under the Health and Safety at Work Act 2015.
Law:
· Act in place to ensure workers get home
to their families at end of day
· Members should take responsibility for
health and safety of all staff under their direction – ask robust
questions when work being undertaken on behalf of board
Business:
· Set a vision that everyone can buy into
· Qtr Reports coming to Gov Body/local boards
in future
· Run a EM site visit programme to see
safety mechanisms in practice
· Training sessions for all EMs –
will include training to utilise Risk Manager - an inhouse programme that
records relative info
· Address Risk vs Hazard
· If a budget is being cut on any project
– ask what the H&S implications are from that decision
· Volunteers working on community projects
– council responsible for their safety – board needs to be
mindful
· Members invited to email any questions.
|
|
3. Farewell
Finn McCahon Jones
Recognition
certificate presentation
Presenters:
Philippa
Wilkinson
Finn McCahon Jones
|
· Board invited Finn who has
resigned as Director of Te Toi Uku to further Arts History degree.
· Members presented gift &
certificate - farewell and thanks for energy in the role and successfully
involving surrounding community in museum presence plus increased number of
visitors. Also acknowledged enhanced delivery and recognised support
for Local Board Plans outcome: “ensure that the Whau’s heritage
is known, protected and our stories are shared”.
|
|
4. Home
Energy Advice
Governance
Role: Engagement
Presenters:
Jaimee Maha
Robbie Sutherland
Bill Smit
|
To discuss the report on the Home Energy
Advice project, delivered as part of the 2016/2017 local environment work
programme.
· 2016 Home energy advice. 2017
Home energy + transport advice (AT funded)
· Part of Low Carbon Initiative –
to change homeowner behaviours - evidence of real life effect on homes and
families in the test area (Fruitvale)
· Study results will be share with other
boards
· Solar Energy – difficult to
address solar energy instalment with rental homes & if in lower
demographic area. Potential for future
· 2018: extend the project scale and
area –into Avondale; investigate AT involvement; expand to include
food/waste; consider CO2 data collection.
· If more boards participate, possibly
move into a regional programme –Other related programmes exist in Whau
· Working with the DHBs on the healthy
home initiative and leveraging external funding; also working closely with
EcoMatters.
· Dissemination of information –
last year’s information was used to inform council’s submission
to Residential Tenancy Act.
Board feedback:
· Board consider work with comms team to
do media release about project.
· Board support extending any future
project into Avondale
Meeting closed 12:30 pm
|
|
Whau Local
Board
13 December
2017
|
|
Exclusion of the Public: Local Government Official
Information and Meetings Act 1987
That the Whau Local Board:
a) exclude
the public from the following part(s) of the proceedings of this meeting.
The general
subject of each matter to be considered while the public is excluded, the
reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter, and the specific
grounds under section 48(1) of the Local Government Official Information and
Meetings Act 1987 for the passing of this resolution follows.
18 LB
feedback on Rates remission and postponement policy review - Attachment d - All community and sporting
remissions by local board area
|
Reason for
passing this resolution in relation to each matter
|
Particular
interest(s) protected (where applicable)
|
Ground(s)
under section 48(1) for the passing of this resolution
|
|
In
particular, the report contains information about arrears, remissions, or
postponed rates that are not available for public inspection in accordance
with the Local Government Rating Act 2002 Section 38(1)(e)
Please note the confidentiality reason is LGOIMA 48 (1) (b) (i) in reference
to Local Government Rating Act 2002 Section 38 (1) (e):
38 Inspection of rates records
(1) The following persons may inspect the rates record for a rating unit:
(a) the ratepayer:
(b) a person who is authorised by the ratepayer to do so:
(c) a person who has become liable to pay the rates in respect of the unit
under section 61 or section 62:
(d) a solicitor, a person (not being a lawyer) who provides conveyancing
services, a real estate agent, or any other person, who—
(i) is a
party to (or acting as an agent for a party to) a transaction relating to the
rating unit; and
(ii)
reasonably requires the information in the rates record for the purposes of
the transaction:
(e) any member of the public with respect to rates assessed, but not
including arrears, remissions, or postponed rates.
.
|
n/a
|
s48(1)(b)
The public
conduct of the part of the meeting would be likely to result in the
disclosure of information which would be contrary to a specified enactment or
constitute contempt of court or contempt of the House of Representatives.
|
