Agenda of Waitākere Ranges Local Board

Waitākere Ranges Local Board

14 December 2017

ITEM TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE

1 Welcome 5

2 Apologies 5

3 Declaration of Interest 5

4 Confirmation of Minutes 5

5 Leave of Absence 5

6 Acknowledgements 5

7 Ward Councillor’s Update 5

8 Deputations 5

8.1 Deputation: Te Henga Quarry park and its visitor management 5

8.2 Deputation: Friends of Armour Bay 6

9 Public Forum 6

10 Extraordinary Business 6

11 Notices of Motion 7

12 Notice of Motion: Member Sandra Coney - Reserve revocation 240a Bethells Road, Te Henga 9

13 New community lease to The West Coast Community Arts Trust, 21 Seaview Road, Piha 11

14 Waitakere Ranges Heritage Area Local Parks Design Guidelines Consultation (cover report) 23

15 Waitākere Ranges, Quick Response Grants, Round Two 2017/2018 25

16 Ecological Volunteer and Environmental Programme FY 17-18 61

17 New Road Name Approval for the residential subdivision by Terra Consultants at 15 Burton’s Drive, Swanson. 65

18 Auckland Council’s Quarterly Performance Report: Waitākere Ranges Local Board for quarter one, 1 July - 30 September 2017 71

19 Draft Waitakere Ranges Greenways Plan 111

20 Revising the local board Standing Orders 119

21 LB feedback on Rates remission and postponement policy review 197

22 10-year Budget 2018-2028 consultation 231

23 Decision-making allocation update 239

24 Chairperson's report - December 2017 257

25 Portfolio Update Report: Deputy Chair Saffron Toms (cover report) 267

26 Portfolio Update Report: Member Sandra Coney 269

27 Confirmation of Workshop Records 273

28 Governance Forward Work Calendar - December 2017 281

29 Consideration of Extraordinary Items

PUBLIC EXCLUDED

30 Procedural Motion to Exclude the Public 285

21 LB feedback on Rates remission and postponement policy review

d. All community and sporting remissions by local board area 285

1 Welcome

2 Apologies

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

3 Declaration of Interest

Members were 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 Waitakere Ranges Local Board.

Board Member	Organisation / Position
Sandra Coney	· Waitemata District Health Board – Elected Member · Women’s Health Action Trust – Patron · New Zealand Society of Genealogists – Member · New Zealand Military Defence Society – Member · Cartwright Collective – Member · Titirangi RSA – Member · Portage Trust – Member · West Auckland Trust Services - Director
Neil Henderson	· Portage Trust – Elected Member · West Auckland Trust Services (WATS) Board – Trustee/Director · Whau River Catchment Trust - Employee
Greg Presland	· Lopdell House Development Trust – Trustee · Titirangi Residents & Ratepayers Group – Committee Member · Whau Coastal Walkway Environmental Trust – Trustee · Combined Youth Services Trust – Trustee · Glen Eden Bid - Member
Steve Tollestrup	· Waitakere Licensing Trust – Elected Member · Waitakere Task force on Family Violence – Appointee
Saffron Toms	NIL
Denise Yates	· Friends of Arataki Incorporated – Committee member · EcoMatters Environment Trust – Trustee

Member appointments

Board members are appointed to the following bodies. In these appointments the board members represent Auckland Council.

Board Member	Organisation / Position
Sandra Coney	· Friends of Arataki Incorporated – Trustee
Neil Henderson	· Friends of Arataki Incorporated – Trustee · Rural Advisory Panel - Member
Steve Tollestrup	· Glen Eden Business Improvement District
Greg Presland	· Glen Eden Business Improvement District (alternate)
Saffron Toms	· Ark in the Park

4 Confirmation of Minutes

That the Waitākere Ranges Local Board:

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

5 Leave of Absence

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

6 Acknowledgements

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

7 Update from Ward Councillors

An opportunity is provided for the Waitakere Ward Councillors to update the board on regional issues they have 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 Waitākere Ranges 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: Te Henga Quarry park and its visitor management

Purpose

1. Mark Allen a representative of the Bethells Valley Volunteer Rural Fire would like an opportunity to speak to the board regarding the Te Henga Quarry park and its visitor management.

2. The Bethells Beach Rural Fire Force are concerned at the number of visitors to the Waitakere Quarry Scenic Reserve parking on Te Henga Road a blind corner. We believe it is only a matter of time before someone is severely injured.

3. We also note that the reserve is a "wild" unsupervised area and this needs to be considered by visitors. It has no reliable cell phone coverage or near neighbours.

4. We request that the local board give consideration to opening during day light hours a section of the lower park for people to park their vehicles safely. This can be achieved using existing hard areas and security staff. Appropriate signage also needs to be provided noting this is a wild area with unreliable cell phone coverage.

Recommendation/s

That the Waitākere Ranges Local Board:

a) receive the deputation submission from Mark Allen, Bethells Valley Volunteer Rural Fire representative.

8.2 Deputation: Friends of Armour Bay

Purpose

1. Friends of Armour Bay requested an opportunity to update the Local Board on their progress and formally request that the Local Board support their proposal for the chemical-free management of Armour Bay Reserve.

Recommendation/s

That the Waitākere Ranges Local Board:

a) receive the deputation submission from the Friends of Armour Bay and thank them for attending the Waitakere Ranges 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

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

Waitākere Ranges Local Board

14 December 2017

New community lease to The West Coast Community Arts Trust, 21 Seaview Road, Piha

File No.: CP2017/24028

Purpose

1. To grant a new community lease to The West Coast Community Arts Trust located on Piha Domain, 21 Seaview Road, Piha.

Executive summary

2. The West Coast Community Arts Trust holds a community lease entered into with the legacy Waitakere City Council for a term of five years commencing 1 February 2008. The lease contains one five year right of renewal that reaches final expiry on 31 January 2018.

3. The arts trust has applied to Auckland Council for a new lease of the council owned building known as Old Piha Fire Station, The arts trust will continue to use the building as an art gallery. The building occupies both council reserve land and public road. On 1 May 2014 Auckland Transport granted a licence in road corridor for the portion located on the public road. The licence is terminable on three months written notice if the land is required for public work.

4. In 2012 the section of the Piha Stream behind the gallery suffered erosion and flooded. This has stabilised and is being monitored by Auckland Council. Council may need to undertake future maintenance, repairs and planting of this section of the stream and bank. Additional terms and conditions covering flooding and erosion are contained in the recommendations. The arts trust has agreed to the terms and conditions.

5. If the incumbent group is needed in the area and the group is performing well, the Waitākere Ranges Local Board has the authority to grant a new lease to the group without undergoing an expression of interest process.

6. This report recommends the granting of a new community lease to The West Coast Community Arts Trust for five years commencing 1 February 2018 with one five-year right of renewal. This is the recommended term in the Auckland Council Community Occupancy Guidelines July 2012.

Recommendation/s

That the Waitākere Ranges Local Board:

a) grant a new community lease to The West Coast Community Arts Trust for the Old Piha Fire Station located on Piha Domain, 21 Seaview Road, Piha (Attachment A) on the following terms and conditions:

i) term: five years commencing 1 February 2018 with one five-year right of renewal;

ii) rent: $1.00 plus GST per annum if requested;

iii) maintenance fee: $250.00 plus GST per annum;

iv) The West Coast Community Arts Trust has been made aware that there is a risk of the building being flooded by rising stream levels from time to time during the term. The arts trust accepts that it is taking on the new term of the lease on the basis that the building may be damaged by flooding and become uninhabitable. If it floods to the point where it is no longer possible for occupation of the building by the arts trust to continue, council may terminate the lease immediately without financial compensation to the Trust for early termination the lease;

v) in the event of forced temporary or permanent vacation, as set out in ‘iv)’, the Waitākere Ranges Local Board and/or Auckland Council shall be under no obligation to provide substitute premises to the Trust under a replacement lease;

vi) The West Coast Community Arts Trust indemnifies Auckland Council against any and all claims for damage or loss caused to the arts trust’s fixtures, fittings, chattels and items held in its possession on trust (artworks owned by third parties on temporary loan or display);

vii) Auckland Council to have access through the lease area to the Piha Stream so it can maintain, mitigate or undertake any works including additional planting to prevent further erosion;

viii) The West Coast Community Arts Trust Community Outcomes Plan as approved be attached to the community lease document (Attachment B);

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

Comments

The West Coast Community Arts Trust

7. The arts trust holds a community lease entered into with the legacy Waitakere City Council for a total term of 10-years commencing 1 February 2008 and reaching final expiry on 31 January 2018. Auckland Council owns the building known as Old Piha Fire Station. The arts trust uses the building as an art gallery.

8. The arts trust was registered as a charitable trust on 9 April 2001. The arts trust objectives are to:

· promote the preservation, protection and development of the former fire station at Piha as a centre for the encouragement and promotion of the arts in the interest of the general public of the West Coast of Auckland

· promote the practice and enjoyment of and participation in the arts, including all forms of the visual and applied arts and crafts, performance art, literature, poetry, drama, music, dance, film and the study of the arts

· initiate, conduct, assist, encourage and promote educational programmes concerning the arts for all age groups

9. The arts trust support local community events and festivals and by working with and encouraging local school and pre-school children, unemployed and youth to become involved with the arts trust and community events.

10. Over 200 West Auckland artists display and sell their works through the art gallery that attracts over 16,000 visitors annually.

11. The arts trust has provided financial accounts which indicate that its funds are sufficient to meet its liabilities and are being managed appropriately. The arts trust has all necessary insurance cover, including public liability insurance, in place.

Old Piha Fire Station

12. At the expiry of a lease for a council owned building it is good practice to review alternatives for the use of the premises. An expression of interest process can be undertaken to gauge interest and best use.

13. The Waitākere Ranges Local Board has the authority to grant a new lease without undergoing an expression of interest process if the incumbent group is needed in the area and is performing well.

Piha Domain and building location

14. The eastern portion of the building together with the gravel access way is located on part of Piha Domain described as Section 1 SO 70252 and is held in fee simple by Auckland Council. Section 1 is classified as a local purpose (community buildings) reserve and subject to the Reserves Act 1977. The activities of the arts trust align with the reserve classification.

15. The western portion of the building together with the adjoining trees and grassed area occupies legal road (Attachment C). On 1 May 2014 Auckland Transport granted a licence in road corridor to the arts trust for this area. The licence is terminable on three months written notice if the land is required for public work.

16. In 2012 the section of the Piha Stream behind the gallery suffered erosion and flooded. This has stabilised and is being monitored by Auckland Council. Council may need to undertake stream and bank maintenance, repairs and planting to prevent further flooding and or erosion. In the event of flooding or the need for council to undertake maintenance, additional terms and conditions are contained in the lease recommendations. The arts trust has agreed to all the terms and conditions contained in the recommendations.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

17. Council staff sought the views of the local board at a workshop on 1 June 2017. The board indicated support for a new community lease to the arts trust without the need for an expression of interest process.

18. The Waitākere Ranges Local Board is the allocated authority to approve the granting of a new community lease.

Māori impact statement

19. Auckland Council is committed to meeting its responsibilities under Te Tiriti o Waitangi and its broader legal obligations to Māori. The council recognises these responsibilities are distinct from the Crown’s Treaty obligations and fall within a local government Tāmaki Makaurau context. These commitments are articulated in the council’s key strategic planning documents the Auckland Plan, the Long-term Plan 2015-2025, the Unitary Plan and Local Board Plans.

20. The arts trust promotes and displays works from local Māori artists including weaving, paintings and jewellery.

21. There are no changes in use or operational activities being conducted on the land.

Implementation

22. There is no cost associated with the approval of a new community lease.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Site plan for The West Coast Community Arts Trust, Piha Domain, 21 Seaview Road, Piha	15
b ⇩	The West Coast Community Arts Trust Community Outcomes Plan	17
c ⇩	Site plan for licence in road corridor to The West Coast Community Arts Trust, 21 Seaview Road, Piha	19

Signatories

Authors

Donna Cooper - Lease Advisor

Authorisers

Rod Sheridan - General Manager Community Facilities

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

Waitākere Ranges Local Board

14 December 2017

Waitākere Ranges, Quick Response Grants, Round Two 2017/2018

File No.: CP2017/23811

Purpose

1. The purpose of this report is to present applications received for Waitākere Ranges Local Board Quick Response Grants Round Two 2017/2018. The local board is required to fund, part-fund or decline these applications.

Executive summary

2. The Waitākere Ranges Local Board adopted the Waitākere Ranges Local Grants Programme 2017/2018 on 25 May 2017. The document sets application guidelines for community contestable grants.

3. The local board is required to allocate grants to groups and organisations delivering projects, activities and services that benefit Aucklanders and contribute to the vision of becoming a world class city.

4. The Waitākere Ranges Local Board has set a total community grants budget of $75,000.00 for the 2017/2018 financial year. A total of $43,200.80 has been allocated for one local grant round and one quick response round. This leaves a total of $31,799.20 to be allocated for 2017/2018.

5. Ten applications were received in quick response grant round two requesting a total of $25,880.00.

Recommendation/s

That the Waitākere Ranges Local Board considers the applications listed in Table One and agree to fund, part-fund or decline each application in this round.

Table One: Waitākere Ranges Quick Response Grants: Round Two Applications

Application Number	Applicant	Project/ activity focus	Project	Requested	Eligibility
QR1819-208	Waitakere Japanese Supplementary School (trading as WJSS after-school program)	Arts and culture	Towards venue hire for Waitakere Japanese Supplementary School after-school program for the second term of 2018.	$1,150.00	Eligible
QR1819-202	Glen Eden Community Patrol	Community	Towards Glen Eden Community Patrol first aid training.	$2,850.00	Eligible
QR1819-204	Bishop Stream Neighborhood Garden	Community	Towards replacement of logs and topsoil in Bishop Stream Neighborhood Garden.	$1500.00	Eligible
QR1819-206	Glen Eden Baptist Church	Community	Towards camp site hire, food and transportation for Youth Water Weekend 2018.	$1500.00	Eligible
QR1819-216	The Kindness Institute	Community	Towards wages for a stress management coach to implement the stress management and well-being programme for marginalised youth.	$1332.00	Eligible
QR1819-201	Konini Primary School	Environment	Towards creating new pathways, maintenance of existing pathways and removal of three exotic trees.	$12,000.00	Eligible
QR1819-212	Nandan (Indian Bengali Association) Incorporated.	Events	Towards venue hire for Nandan Arts and Culture Festival.	$1300.00	Eligible
QR1819-214	Waitakere Hindi Language and Cultural School	Events	Towards costs of hall hire, salaries for music and dance teachers, practice hall and musical instruments hire, food and prizes for the “Hindi Music and Dance Night.”	$2451.00	Eligible
QR1819-210	Glenora Netball Club Incorporated	Sport and recreation	Towards a netball training kit, fitness training ladder, team kit bags, first aid kits, uniforms, umpire costs and competition entry fees to establish a youth netball squad.	$1250.00	Eligible
QR1819-218	Helen Fergusson	Sport and recreation	Towards venue hire and Instructor costs to implement a free well-being and movement based mindfulness workshop series for teenagers and adults.	$547.00	Eligible
			Total:	$25,880.00

Comments

6. The implementation of the new Community Grants Policy commenced on 1 July 2015. The policy supports each local board to adopt a grants programme for 2017/2018, see Attachment A.

7. 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.

8. The new community grant programmes have been extensively advertised through the new council grant webpage, local board webpages, local board e-newsletters and Facebook pages, council publications, radio, local newspapers and community networks. Staff have also conducted a series of public workshops in local board areas.

9. The Waitākere Ranges Local Board has set a total community grants budget of $75,000.00 for the 2017/2018 financial year. A total of $43,200.80 has been allocated for one local grant round and one quick response round. This leaves a total of $31,799.20 to be allocated for 2017/2018.

10. Ten applications were received in quick response grant round two requesting a total of $25,880.00.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

11. Local boards are responsible for the decision-making and allocation of local board community grants. The Waitākere Ranges 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.

12. 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.”

Māori impact statement

13. The provision of community grants provides opportunities for all Aucklanders to undertake projects, programmes, and activities that benefit a wider range of individuals and groups, including Maori. 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 Maori.

Implementation

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

15. Following the Waitākere Ranges Local Board allocating funding for quick response grants round one, Commercial and Finance staff will notify the applicants of the local board decision.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Waitakere Ranges Local Board Grants Programme 2017/2018	27
b ⇩	Waitakere Ranges Quick Response Round Two 2017/2018 grant applications	31

Signatories

Authors

Adam Abdeldayem - Environ and Community Grants Advisor

Authorisers

Marion Davies - Community Grants Operations Manager

Shane King - Operations Support Manager

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

Waitākere Ranges Local Board

14 December 2017

Ecological Volunteer and Environmental Programme FY 17-18

File No.: CP2017/24718

Purpose

1. This report seeks approval from the Waitakere Ranges Local Board for the Ecological Volunteer and Environmental Programme 2017-2018, including the allocation of indicative amounts to volunteer projects.

Executive summary

2. The $33,000 Ecological Volunteer and Environmental Programme was approved at a high level by the local board on 22 June 2017, (resolution number WTK/2017/1).

3. The programme was discussed in more detail with the local board at a workshop in September.

4. The board asked for a report back on two proposed projects within the programme: the guided walks and the South Titirangi Neighbourhood Network (STNN) allocation.

5. Staff are recommending that the Waitakere Ranges Local Board endorse the full programme, with indicative amounts as outlined within the body of the report.

Recommendation/s

That the Waitākere Ranges Local Board:

a) approve the following indicative allocations to projects in the Waitakere Ranges Local Parks Ecological Volunteer and Environmental Programme:

Proposed Waitakere Ranges 2017-2018 volunteer work programme
Group	Activity	Park	Budget
Armour Bay Community Group	Planting Plant preparation	Armour Bay	550
South Titirangi Neighbourhood Network	Planting Plant preparation	5 reserves in South Titirangi	3,740
Local residents	Arundo donax Control	Little Muddy Creek	9,046
	Planting	As above	2,254
Local residents	Planting	Milan Reserve	2,000
Local residents	Planting Site prep – plan for prepping difficult bamboo area	Glucina Reserve	8,500
Community events	Guided walk programme	Various parks (TBC)	500
	Community Planting BBQ	As above	2,110
Miscellaneous expenditure	As documented above.	Various parks	4,300
Total:			33,000

b) delegate authority to the Team Leader Volunteering and Programmes to approve variations to the Volunteer Programme up to the value of $5,000, in consultation with the Local Board Chair and Parks Portfolio Holder, so that council can be responsive in its support of community volunteers over the year.

Comments

6. A workshop was held in September to discuss the details of the proposed Ecological Volunteer and Environmental Programme following funding allocation on the 22nd of June 2017 (resolution number WTK/2017/2).

7. At the workshop additional information was requested on the proposed Guided Walk and STNN works.

8. Guided Walks

The allocation of $500 will be for the promotion of the guided walks programme in local community newspapers/newsletters and production of flyers. This is an opportunity to duplicate a programme, which has proven success in the south and north of Auckland with an average 20 people attending each guided walk. The intended outcome is to engage local people in local natural and cultural heritage values, invite new residents and current to enjoy and understand local gems in their areas. Added value will be the opportunity for new volunteers to become aware of and join current programmes.

9. South Titirangi Neighbourhood Network

This project involves the sourcing of native plants for community planting in the Community Parks in Titirangi (as part of the STNN project). The funding allocation, subject to approval, will encourage local residents by supporting a continued motivation for Community Park restoration work, including weeding (completed in council land free of charge). The planting will help reduce volunteer work time by lowering the chance of weed re-infestation, long term. The proposed planting areas in this report will be planted with appropriate native species to prevent rigorous re-growth of weeds.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

10. The local parks Ecological Volunteer and Environmental Programme meets the needs of an active volunteer community and aligns to local board planning.

Māori impact statement

11. The current Waitakere Ranges Local Board Plan recognises and supports local iwi and hapu in their role as kaitiakai. The ecological volunteer and environmental work programme aligns with the values of protecting and enhancing the mauri of reserves in the Waitakere Ranges area. There is a commitment to consult and work with mana whenua on all projects to ensure the protection and restoration of sites of significance to Maori.

Implementation

12. Funding will be administered by the Community Ranger and provision of supplies will be delivered to the groups as they need them over the 2017-2018 financial year.

13. Low maintenance plantings with fast growing appropriate native species will be specified to support the volunteer groups. Community led plantings and associated ecological works will be set up to be maintained by the volunteer groups.

14. The Community Ranger will provide some support to groups (when needed) by engaging contractors for site preparation, supervision, training and to carry out maintenance to make sure the projects succeed. Any contractor support will be funded from the Volunteer budget.

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Signatories

Authors

Sinead Brimacombe - Community Park Ranger

Authorisers

Mace Ward - General Manager Parks, Sports and Recreation

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

Waitākere Ranges Local Board

14 December 2017

New Road Name Approval for the residential subdivision by Terra Consultants at 15 Burton’s Drive, Swanson.

File No.: CP2017/25459

Purpose

1. The purpose of this report is to seek approval from the Waitakere Ranges Local Board, for a new road names for new Jointly Owned Access Lots (JOAL’s) created by way of subdivision at 15 Burton’s Drive, Swanson.

Executive summary

2. Auckland Council has road naming guidelines that set out the requirements and criteria of the Council for proposed road names. These requirements and criteria have been applied in this situation to ensure consistency of road naming.

3. The Applicant Terra Consultants, have submitted the following road names in order of preference:

· JOAL 1 – Mara Waina Rise

· JOAL 2 – Matatika Rise

· JOAL 3 – Ani Lane

With the alternatives being:

· JOAL 1 – Mill Lane & Mira Rakau Lane

· JOAL 2 – William Swanson Lane & Palmate Rise

· JOAL 3 – Hanga Poti Lane & Sawmill Lane

4. Auckland Council’s road naming criteria typically requires that road names reflect:

· a historical or ancestral linkage to an area;

· a particular landscape, environmental or biodiversity feature; or

· an existing (or introduce) thematic identity in the area

The criteria also encourage the use of Maori names. Names also need to be easily identifiable and intuitively clear, thus minimising confusion.

5. All of the proposed road names are deemed to meet the criteria and are acceptable to NZ Post and Land Information New Zealand (LINZ).

6. The road naming criteria suggests that the road types that could be used and the Applicant has chosen Lane and Rise. These road types meet the road naming criteria.

7. Therefore, the following road names are put forward for consideration of the Waitakere Ranges Local Board:

· JOAL 1 – Mara Waina Rise

· JOAL 2 – Matatika Rise

· JOAL 3 – Ani Lane

With the alternatives being:

· JOAL 1 – Mill Lane & Mira Rakau Lane

· JOAL 2 – William Swanson Lane & Palmate Rise

· JOAL 3 – Hanga Poti Lane & Sawmill Lane

Recommendation/s

That the Waitākere Ranges Local Board:

a) pursuant to section 319(1)(j) of the Local Government Act 1974, considers for approval, the proposed road names for the new JOAL’s constructed within the subdivision being undertaken by Terra Consultants at 15 Burton’s Drive, Swanson:

· JOAL 1 – Mara Waina Rise

· JOAL 2 – Matatika Rise

· JOAL 3 – Ani Lane

With the alternatives being :

· JOAL 1 – Mill Lane & Mira Rakau Lane

· JOAL 2 – William Swanson Lane & Palmate Rise

· JOAL 3 – Hanga Poti Lane & Sawmill Lane

Comments

8. This report was previously deferred by the local board, for further communications with the applicant’s agent and the possibility of a list of World War 1 soldier’s names being put forward as an option for this subdivision. Further research for this list is being completed therefore will be considered for future developments within the Swanson area.

9. According to the Auckland Council Road Naming Guidelines, where a new public or private road needs to be named as a result of a subdivision or development, the subdivider/developer shall be given the opportunity of suggesting their preferred new road name for the Local Board’s approval.

10. Local iwi were consulted and a response was received from Te Kawerau a Maki who suggested Matatika and agreed with all proposed names. No other replies were received by the applicant.

11. The Applicant has proposed the road names listed in the table below, in order of preference.

Proposed New Road Name	Meaning	Road Naming Criteria
JOAL 1 Mara Waina Rise (Preferred)	Maori term for vineyard. There are some vineyards located in the Swanson area.	Meets criteria – historical significance
Mill Lane	Swanson was a sawmilling centre that produced timber.	Meets criteria – historical significance
Mira Rakau Lane	Maori term for a saw/timber mill. Swanson was a sawmilling centre that produced timber.	Meets criteria – historical significance
JOAL 2 Matatika Rise (Preferred)	Maori meaning is to be right, ethical, fair, honest which relates to Honest Willie as William Swanson was affectionately known.	Meets criteria – historical significance and suggested by local iwi
William Swanson Lane	The man who gives Swanson its name, who owned most of the land in the area in the 1800s and was a member of parliament.	Meets criteria – historical significance
Palmate Rise	This is a type of leaf and which are the dark green leaves of the Puriri tree which was present on the valley sides in the Waitakere Ranges in the Swanson area.	Meets criteria – local/historical significance
JOAL 3 Ani Lane (Preferred)	This is the first name of William Swanson’s wife who is said to have descended from Ngati Kahungunu descent’s chiefly line.	Meets criteria – historical significance
Hanga Poti Lane	Maori term for boat building. William Swanson was a shipwright who built a lot of ships that he used on his voyages.	Meets criteria – historical significance
Sawmill Lane	Swanson was a sawmilling centre that produced timber.	Meets criteria – historical significance

12. A map showing the location of the roads is shown below.

Assessment

13. Auckland Councils road naming criteria typically requires that road names reflect a historical or ancestral linkage to an area or a particular landscape, environmental or biodiversity feature, or reflect an existing (or introduce) thematic identity in an area. The criteria also encourages the use of Maori names. Names also need to be easily identifiable and intuitively clear, thus minimising confusion.

14. The applicant’s proposed road names have been assessed against the criteria set out in the Auckland Council Road Naming Guidelines.

15. Following assessment against the road naming criteria, the road names are deemed to meet the assessment criteria.

16. All of the proposed names are acceptable to NZ Post and Land Information New Zealand (LINZ).

17. The road naming criteria suggests that the road type could be used and the Applicant has chosen Lane and Rise. These road types meet the road naming criteria.

18. Therefore, the following road names are put forward for consideration of the Waitakere Ranges Local Board:

· JOAL 1 – Mara Waina Rise

· JOAL 2 – Matatika Rise

· JOAL 3 – Ani Lane

With the alternatives being:

· JOAL 1 – Mill Lane & Mira Rakau Lane

· JOAL 2 – William Swanson Lane & Palmate Rise

· JOAL 3 – Hanga Poti Lane & Sawmill Lane

Consideration

Local board views and implications

19. The Auckland Council, by way of the Auckland Council Long-term Plan 2012-2022, allocated the responsibility for the naming of new roads, pursuant to Section 319(1)(j) of the Local Government Act 1974, to boards. A decision is sought from the local board in this report.

20. The decision sought from the Waitakere Ranges Local Board for this report does not trigger any significant policy and is not considered to have any immediate impact on the community.

Māori impact statement

21. The decision sought from the Waitakere Ranges Local Board on this report is linked to the Auckland Plan Outcome, “A Maori identity that is Auckland’s point of difference in the world”. The use of Maori names for roads, buildings and other public places is an opportunity to publicly demonstrate Maori identity.

22. Local iwi were consulted and a response was received from Te Kawerau a Maki who suggested Matatika and agreed with all proposed names. No other replies were received by the applicant.

Implementation

23. The Western Consenting Subdivision Team will ensure that the appropriate road name signage will be installed by the Applicant at their full cost, once an approval is obtained for the new road name and prior to the completion of the subdivision.

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Signatories

Authors

Dale Rewa - Subdivision Advisor

Authorisers

Ian Smallburn - General Manager Resource Consents

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

Waitākere Ranges Local Board

14 December 2017

Auckland Council’s Quarterly Performance Report: Waitākere Ranges Local Board for quarter one, 1 July - 30 September 2017

File No.: CP2017/24502

Purpose

1. To provide the Waitākere Ranges Local Board with an integrated quarterly performance report for quarter one, 1 July to 30 September 2017.

Executive summary

2. This report includes financial performance, progress against local board key performance indicators, progress against work programmes, key challenges the board should be aware of and any risks to delivery against the 2017/2018 work programme for the reporting period.

3. The snapshot (attachment A), indicates performance against the agreed 2017/2018 work programmes is tracking positively.

4. All operating departments with agreed work programmes have provided a quarterly update against their work programme delivery (attachment B). All items are reported as ‘green’ status (87% per cent on track) except for those which have a ‘red’ status (4 per cent behind delivery, incorporated into larger projects) or an ’amber’ status (9 per cent with some risk or issues, which are being managed).

5. Overall, the net financial performance of the Waitākere Ranges local board is under budget to date with operating expenditure below budget by (4%) due to lower parks maintenance than planned and operating revenue under budget due to lower community facility hire:

· Capital expenditure was (67%) under budget. A relative slow start to the year for capital spends in the quarter to September. The main expenditure was on Parrs Park toilet block renewal and Titirangi Library ceiling lighting renewal.

· Operating expenditure is 4% under budget. The majority of the under spend is in Parks activity due to lower than anticipated parks maintenance. The new maintenance contract is still bedding in and fluctuations are expected over the year.

· Operating revenue is below budget in community facility hire due to lower usage of the Titirangi War Memorial Hall than planned.

· Overall capital spend is below budget by $6622k mainly as a result of delays to Huia Domain Seawall, where physical work are now underway and various park asset renewals which are at differing stages of progress.

6. The Waitākere Ranges local board financial performance report is in Appendix C.

7. The key performance indicators show an overall trend of delivery that is not meeting the indicators, with some exceptions (see appendix D). Accuracy of measurement is expected to improve throughout the year and these are explained further in detail in the report.

8. This report does not yet cover the entirety of the Waitākere Ranges Local Board’s projects.

Recommendation/s

That the Waitākere Ranges Local Board:

a) receive the performance report for the financial quarter ending 30 September 2017

Comments

9. The Waitākere Ranges Local Board has an approved 2017/2018 work programme for the following operating departments:

· Arts, Community and Events; approved on 22 June 2017

· Parks, Sport and Recreation; approved on 22 June 2017

· Libraries and Information; approved on 22 June 2017

· Community Facilities: Build Maintain Renew; approved on 22 June 2017

· Community Leases; approved on 22 June 2017

· Infrastructure and Environmental Services; approved on 22 June 2017

· Local Economic Development; approved on 22 June 2017

Key achievements for quarter one

10. Further to delivery of activities that can be defined as ‘business as usual,’ progress during this quarter largely relates to planning and mid-stage delivery of projects.

Key project updates from the 2017/2018 work programme

11. The following are progress updates against key projects identified in the Waitākere Ranges Local Board Plan and/or Local Board Agreement:

· Following a fire in August, Titirangi Hall was closed for refurbishments.

· Titirangi Library was closed for refurbishments on 31st July 2017 (re-opened early December).

· The 2017 'Going West Books and Writers Festival', part funded by the local board, took place in September at a replacement venue in Henderson.

· The local board’s Passchendaele Brass Band concert was held on Saturday 30 July 2017 at the Swanson RSA.

Risks identified in the 2017/2018 work programme

12. Risks that have been identified by operating departments where the progress and performance indicator has been set to ‘red’ (significantly behind budget/time or achievement of outcomes) or ’amber’ (some risk or issues, which are being managed) status, are set out, with explanation and / or mitigation, in Appendix B.

Financial performance

13. Operating expenditure is 4% under budget. The majority of the under spend is in Parks activity due to lower than anticipated parks maintenance. The new maintenance contract is still bedding in and fluctuations are expected over the year.

14. Operating revenue is below budget in community facility hire due to lower usage of the Titirangi War Memorial Hall than planned.

15. Overall capital spend is below budget by $6622k mainly as a result of delays to Huia Domain Seawall, where physical work are now underway and various park asset renewals which are at differing stages of progress.

16. The Waitākere Ranges local board Financial performance report is in Appendix C

Key performance indicators

17. The local board agreements include level of service statements and associated performance measures to guide and monitor the delivery of local services. This report provides information on the performance measure year-end outlook for Waitakere Ranges Board’s measures, showing how we are tracking after the first quarter of FY

18. The year-end outlook is that 53 per cent of measures will not achieve target.

19. Currently all performance measures are being reviewed as part of the development of the 2018-2028 Long Term Plan.

20. For the first and second quarter we will be providing the year-end outlook based on the results of 2016/17 or for any changes to the outlook based on results available. In the third quarter we will be in a better position to accurately project the year-end outlook for all measures. This is because the frequency of most measures is annual as data is collected through surveys.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

21. This report informs the Waitākere Ranges Local Board of the performance for the quarter ending 30 September 2017.

Māori impact statement

22. The Community Capacity Building work programme delivered via the Community Waitakere partnership builds on the capacity building work initiated by Community Waitākere in 2015/16 with Hoani Waititi Marae and surrounding communities. It supports the capacity of Hoani Waititi Marae to implement community-based programmes and activities and connect to the wider community.

23. The local board has this year formally agreed to pursue a relationship agreement with Te Kawerau a Maki in 2018 as a commitment to an open and positive relationship.

Implementation

24. The Local Board will receive the next performance update following the end of quarter 2, December 2017.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Work programme snapshot	71
b ⇩	Work programme update	73
c ⇩	Financial performance	97
d ⇩	Key performance indicators	105

Signatories

Authors	Raewyn Curran - Senior Local Board Advisor
Authorisers	Glenn Boyd - Relationship Manager Henderson-Massey, Waitakere Ranges, Whau

Waitākere Ranges Local Board

14 December 2017

Draft Waitakere Ranges Greenways Plan

File No.: CP2017/24919

Purpose

1. To seek endorsement of the draft Waitakere Ranges Greenways Plan for public consultation.

Executive summary

2. The draft Waitakere Ranges Greenways Plan is intended as a guiding document for developing and improving the walking and cycling network in this area.

3. Its focus is on the urban and urban fringe parts of the Waitakere Ranges, rather than the whole of the local board area. The draft plan brings together and updates the existing walking and cycling plans in the Waitakere Ranges Local Board area into a single document, which will help the local board, and the wider council family, identify opportunities for improving the network in this area. The draft plan identifies nine priority projects, although delivery of all projects is dependent on funding being made available.

4. The draft plan is presented to the local board to seek endorsement before it is released for public consultation.

Recommendations

That the Waitākere Ranges Local Board:

a) endorse the draft Waitakere Ranges Greenways Plan in Attachment B for public consultation.

b) approve the proposed consultation approach outlined in the report.

c) delegate authority to the Local Board Chairperson and Sport and Recreation Portfolio Holder to approve minor editorial changes to the draft plan prior to consultation.

d) approve an allocation of up to $5000 to cover any additional costs associated with developing the Greenways Plan through to completion.

Comments

5. The Waitākere Ranges Greenways Plan seeks to create a network of walking and cycling paths that will provide safe and enjoyable means for people to get around, get active, and get engaged with the community and their environment.

6. The objectives of the Waitākere Ranges Greenways are to:

· extend and link to existing walking and cycling connections such as the Twin Streams shared path

· connect communities/neighbourhoods to key destinations such as local centres, transport nodes, sports parks and reserves

· encourage physical activity and their associated health benefits by planning for a range of routes suited to fitness level and mobility (i.e selecting less vehicle trafficked/greener minor streets)

· provide walking connections to the track and trail network in Waitākere Ranges Regional Park

· progress the planning of walking and cycling connections in areas such as Swanson village and Oratia

· embrace our cultural heritage with signage interpretation to tell local stories along the greenway routes

· investigate and catalyse ecological connections across the diverse range of habitats in our parks, reserves and waterways

· ensure support and stewardship continues by working with community and educating visitors to respect and protect our natural and historical environment

· encourage greater use of under-utilised parks and reserves, eg pocket parks

· connect people to the natural environment and provide the opportunity for ecological restoration such as weed control and native planting.

7. Implementing the greenways plan will better connect Waitākere Ranges to the neighbouring Rodney, Henderson-Massey and Whau Board areas and connect to regional walking/cycling proposals for the greater Auckland region.

Extent of area covered

8. The draft Waitakere Ranges Greenways Plan brings together and updates the existing walking and cycling plans in the Waitakere Ranges Local Board area into a single document. Existing plans include the Glen Eden Town Centre Plan, Western Rail Corridor Cycleway Concept, Waitakere Ranges Foothills Walkway Concept; Oratia Master Plan, and the Little Muddy Creek Walkway Concept.

9. The map in Attachment A shows the extent of the area covered by the plan, which includes North Swanson through to Henderson Valley, Oratia, Waiatarua, Glen Eden, Titirangi, and the Muddy Creeks area of Waima, Woodlands Park and Laingholm.

10. The plan focuses on the urban and urban-fringe parts of the Waitakere Ranges Local Board area, rather than the whole of the local board area. The intent has been to consolidate the existing walking and cycling plans, identify network gaps and opportunities, and, in terms of developing a plan itself, to manage the cost and complexity of mapping walking and cycling routes over a much larger geographical area which includes the Waitakere Ranges Regional Park.

11. It should be noted that residents in many of the outer areas have, in the past, expressed an interest in developing safer walking routes. In most cases this is associated with traffic speeds on rural roads with no footpaths.

Recent walking and cycling developments

12. The local board has continued to develop and improve the walking and cycling network over the past few years. Projects have included a shared path from Oratia village to Parrs Park; a walkway along Mountain Road, Henderson Valley to the Opanuku Pipeline Track; a walking track between Rimutaka Place, Titirangi to Huia Road as part of the Little Muddy Creeks Walkway; and sections of the Swanson Foothills walkway.

Priority projects for future development

13. The draft plan identifies nine priority routes for future development:

i. Parrs Park and Sherrybrook Esplanade to Sunnyvale Station

ii. Western Rail Corridor shared path (between Sunnyvale and Glen Eden)

iii. Titirangi Village to Glen Eden Town Centre

iv. Little Muddy Creek Walkway, Rimataka Place Walkway (Huia Road) to Landings Road Walkway

v. Parker Road Oratia to Arataki Visitor Centre

vi. Swanson Foothills Walkway

vii. Glen Eden Train Station to Upper Waikumete Stream Walk and Cycleway

viii. Singer Park to Harold Moody Reserve alongside Waikumete Stream

ix. Glen Eden Town Centre: Verdale Circle to Glendale Road

14. At present there is no funding available for the delivery of the Greenways Plan. Funding will be sought during future Annual Plan and Long Term Planning processes. It is recommended that the Local Board advocates to the Governing Body to fund the implementation of priority connections through parks.

Ecological restoration (kauri dieback, weeds and pests)

15. Greenways encourage opportunities for ecological restoration as they often align with streams and other natural areas. There are many organisations in the area which are dedicated to improving the natural environment and particularly the streams. In addition to the broader environmental benefits, as the greenways are restored ecologically, their natural beauty will return.

16. A high level description of ecological considerations is provided for each of the identified priority routes. While the plan looks at the opportunity for restoration it has not attempted to provide specific policies or objectives on this.

17. Under the Strategic Alignment section (1.2), it refers the reader to the kauri dieback protocols rather than including specific policies or objectives on kauri dieback. The same approach has been taken with weeds and pests.

Greenways plan development and consultation

18. Over the past two years, council’s landscape architect team has been working with the local board to develop a plan that will best connect Waitākere Ranges communities through their local area and also to the wider active transport network. Five workshops were held with the board over 2016 and 2017 to discuss the plan, and amendments have been made to the plan following feedback from each workshop.

19. The greenways plan was developed through a review of existing walking and cycling plans for the Waitākere Ranges, neighbouring local board areas, and the Auckland Cycle Network. This was followed by a desktop exercise to prepare a draft network for the Waitākere Ranges, and site investigations to ground-truth the network. The methodology is outlined in the draft plan.

20. The maps indicate a network of connections that will enable staff to explore connections in greater detail, progress feasibility studies and embark on more detailed design of the proposed routes. Prioritisation of routes are to be investigated and staging for their development will be dependent on the timing for other projects being delivered along the network, and on the availability of funding.

21. At this stage the plan and map are regarded as a high level network strategy. It is intended that public consultation on more detailed alignment options will be undertaken as opportunities arise to implement the network over a number of years.

Consultation on the draft Greenways Plan

22. The public consultation period is expected to take place over a four week period in early 2018, although, the dates are yet to be confirmed^{^[1]}.

23. We will engage residents and stakeholders through an online presence, communicating directly with identified stakeholders, and a one-off drop in session at the local board office.

24. Online consultation: the draft plan, with a summary, and a feedback form will be put on ShapeAuckland (www.shapeauckland.govt.nz), with the opportunity promoted through links from other sites, along with posters and feedback forms in public places, such as libraries and the local board office.

25. It is proposed to have a one-off drop in session at the Waitākere Ranges Local Board office in Glen Eden, with the date to be confirmed. This will provide an opportunity for residents and stakeholders to discuss the draft plan and have their say without the need to make a formal submission.

Financial

26. The local board allocated $15,000 in May 2016 for the development of the Waitākere Ranges Greenways Plan. The scope of the project extended during the development of the draft and the budget has now been fully expended.

27. An additional budget of $5,000 is sought to cover the cost of developing the plan through to completion.

28. The greenways plan has been developed by council’s landscape architect team using their experience of developing a greenways vision for local boards across Auckland.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

29. The Waitākere Ranges Local Board has funded the draft plan and provided direction at key stages in its development through workshops and meetings with the local board’s greenways lead, Sport and Recreation Portfolio Holder, Neil Henderson.

30. The draft plan will be released for consultation in February 2018, and the community views reported back to the local board so that it may consider what changes are needed prior to the plan being adopted.

Regional context

31. Auckland Council and Auckland Transport are working to achieve a connected active transport (walking and cycling) network across Auckland. Auckland’s greenways plans are a series of linked, aspirational plans being driven from the ground up by local boards with the long term aim of greatly improving walking, cycling and ecological connections across the region.

32. Greenways / local paths network plans are under development or have been adopted by many local boards throughout the Auckland region, including the neighbouring Whau and Rodney Local Boards. The Henderson-Massey Local Board area has an Open Space Network Plan which includes walking and cycling connections.

Re-branding of Greenways Plans

33. Many local boards have adopted walking and cycling plans using the term Greenways Plan. More recently an “identity” for the active transport network (walking and cycling) has been progressed which has recommended that a working concept of Auckland Paths be introduced, to support use and more intuitive understanding of the network (including commuter routes, shared paths, board walks, greenways) spanning control of Auckland Transport, Auckland Council and the NZTA.

34. Under this working concept the term ‘Greenways’ would be replaced with ‘Local Paths’ which will allow more consistent explanation and naming of new routes.

35. It is recommended that the board consider re-naming the Waitākere Ranges Greenways Plan to Waitākere Ranges Local Paths Plan so that it is aligned with the future regional identity of greenways. All references to greenways within this planning document will also be changed to ‘Local Paths’.

Māori impact statement

36. The spread of kauri dieback is a significant cultural issue for Te Kawerau a Maki. The iwi has recently placed a rahui (customary prohibition) over the Waitākere forest, Te Wao Nui a Tiriwa. A statement from the iwi says the area covered by the rahui approximates to the boundary of the Waitākere Ranges Heritage Area (WRHA). It proposes the rolling opening of areas that are risk free once work has been done to assess and mitigate the risk.

37. The draft greenways plan includes parts of the WRHA. It proposes the future upgrade to the path through part of the regional park to connect Parker Road, Oratia, through to Arataki Visitor Centre. This has been assessed as a low or no risk route for kauri dieback disease, although connects to high risk areas. There is not currently information available on proposed routes through local parks.

Implementation

38. Implementation of the plan is dependent on funding being made available through the annual and ten-year budget planning processes. Potential funding is available through the local board, Governing Body, Auckland Transport, NZTA, and external partnerships.

39. An Auckland Council/Auckland Transport draft 10 year programme for investing in greenways/paths has been prepared for 2018-2028. There are no projects from the Waitākere Ranges area included in the draft programme.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Overview map	113
b ⇨	draft Waitakere Ranges Greenways Plan - Part 1 (Under Separate Cover)
c ⇨	draft Waitakere Ranges Greenways Plan - Part 2 (Under Separate Cover)

Signatories

Authors	Brett Lane - Local Board Advisor
Authorisers	Glenn Boyd - Relationship Manager Henderson-Massey, Waitakere Ranges, Whau

Waitākere Ranges Local Board

14 December 2017

Revising the local board Standing Orders

File No.: CP2017/25381

Purpose

1. To consider and adopt revised Standing Orders for local board meetings.

Executive summary

2. Standing Orders are the rules for conduct and procedure at meetings. They are used to help meetings run smoothly and in accordance with relevant legislation, to ensure the integrity of the decision-making process, and to help elected members and members of the public understand how they can participate.

3. The current local board Standing Orders (SOs) were set by the Auckland Transition Agency on 27 October 2010. It is now timely to revise them to ensure they remain a clear, relevant and practical tool for local board meetings.

4. At its meeting on 28 May 2015, the Governing Body resolved to amend its Standing Orders on the basis of work undertaken by a political working party.

5. The revised Standing Orders have a simplified layout, are written in a plain language style, and contain a summary and process diagram at the front for ease of reference during a meeting.

6. A working group of Democracy Advisors has assessed each provision of the current (generic) local board Standing Orders against the corresponding revised governing body Standing Orders. For each local board standing order they considered whether to retain the current wording, use the revised Governing Body wording or to have a combination of the two.

7. A draft set of revised local board Standing Orders is set out in Attachment A for local boards’ consideration. It is based on the recommendations of the Democracy Advisor working group and follows the revised Governing Body Standing Orders in terms of style.

8. The more significant suggested changes include new provisions for electronic attendance at meetings, dealing with conflicts due to the non-financial interests of members, processes for Governing Body and Māori input and enabling use of New Zealand Sign Language at meetings.

9. This report recommends that local boards consider and adopt the revised Standing Orders in Attachment A.

10. Any changes to a boards Standing Orders requires a majority vote of not less than 75% of members present.

Recommendation/s

That the Waitākere Ranges Local Board:

a) adopt the standing orders detailed in Attachment A to the agenda report, entitled “Auckland Council Standing Orders of the Local Board”, in replacement of its current standing orders.

Comments

Background

11. Standing Orders are the rules for conduct and procedure at meetings. They are used to help meetings run smoothly and in accordance with relevant legislation, to ensure the integrity of the decision-making process, and to help elected members and members of the public understand how they can participate.

12. The Governing Body Standing Orders were compiled in 2010 by the Auckland Transition Agency from legacy council standing orders and the NZ Standards Model Standing Orders.

13. Local Board Standing Orders were modelled on the Governing Body Standing Orders.

14. A political working party was set up in November 2013 to review the Governing Body’s Standing Orders. The working party’s findings were reported back to the Governing Body at its 28 May 2015 meeting (Attachment B).

15. Recent amendments to the Local Government Act 2002 (the Act) allowed additional changes to be considered by the working party. These changes included a provision to allow members to attend meetings via audio or audiovisual link.

16. At its 28 May 2015 meeting, the Governing Body adopted an amended set of Standing Orders which have a simplified layout, are written in a plain language style, and contain a summary and process diagram at the front for ease of reference during a meeting.

17. It was resolved at this meeting to forward the report to all local boards, drawing their attention to the suggestion to provide for councillor participation at local board meetings in their Standing Orders.

18. Over the last 18 months, a working group of local board Democracy Advisors has assessed each provision of the current (generic) local board Standing Orders against the corresponding revised Governing Body Standing Orders. For each local board standing order they considered whether to retain the current wording, use the revised Governing Body wording or to have a combination of the two.

19. A revised set of local board Standing Orders has been developed as an outcome of this work (Attachment A) which is in accordance with the recommendations of the Democracy Advisor working group.

20. The revised local board Standing Orders follow a similar format to the Governing Body Standing Orders with a simplified layout, a plain language style, and a summary and process diagram at the front for ease of reference during a meeting.

21. Key substantive changes from the current local board Standing Orders are summarised below. They aim to ensure the local board Standing Orders are up to date, fulfil Auckland Council’s legal obligations and are practical and useful for business meetings.

22. Many standing orders reflect provisions in legislation. In some cases the wording of the standing order may have been changed to a plain language style but the intention of the standing order remains the same. These standing orders are usually indicated by a reference underneath to the relevant clause in legislation. These standing orders may not be suspended.

Key changes

23. Key substantive suggested changes from the current local board Standing Orders are set out below.

Issue	Suggested changes	Purpose of suggested change	Reference in the revised LB Standing Orders
Quorum	Provision for the Chairperson to extend the 30 minute waiting time for a quorum, at the start of a meeting, by another 10 minutes - where members are known to be travelling to the meeting but are delayed due to unusual weather or traffic congestion. Change in the waiting time for a quorum to be reestablished (where, after a meeting starts, member(s) leave and there is no longer a quorum) from 20 minutes to 10 minutes.	Assists smooth running of meeting and ensures consistency with GB Standing Orders	3.1.4 and 3.1.6
Record of a workshop	Deletion of the requirement for the chairperson to sign-off the record of a workshop. Record of workshop proceedings will be circulated.	Assists smooth running of meeting	12.1.4
Public excluded business not to be disclosed	Clarification on situations where the duty of non-disclosure of information, at a meeting where the public were excluded, does not apply - namely where: · a meeting has resolved to make the information publically available · there are no grounds under the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 for withholding the information when requested · the information is no longer confidential.	Clarification and ensures consistency with GB Standing Orders	7.4.3
Languages	Amendments to allow New Zealand Sign Language (as well as English and Māori) to be used by members and in deputations, presentations and public forum. Two clear working days’ notice must be provided when an address is not in English (this is the same as the notice period required under the current local board Standing Orders and the governing body Standing Orders). The Governing Body input and Māori input sections also provide for addressing the meeting in New Zealand Sign Language, English or Māori.	Recognition of NZ Sign Language as an official language	1.1.2, 5.1.5, 6.1.5, 7.6.1, 7.7.5 and 7.8.4.
Minutes	Clarification of what meeting minutes are to record.	Clarification	8.1.2
Agendas	Clarification that agendas can be sent electronically, and that names of local board and committee members are to be on each agenda.	Clarification	2.4.1 7.3.3
Non-financial interests	Suggested new provision regarding procedure for dealing with non-financial interests of members. If a member considers that there is a conflict of interest for an item, they may not take part in the discussions about or vote on the relevant matter.	Helps ensure robust, legally defensible decisions and consistent with GB Standing Orders	1.3.8
Repeat Notices of Motion	Suggested amendment that a Notice of Motion that the local board or a committee has considered twice and rejected within the previous six months may be refused by the Chairperson. (There is no longer the option for a further notice - prior to the expiration of the original period of 6 months - where signed by a majority of all members.)	Assists smooth running of meetings and ensures consistency with GB Standing Orders	2.5.8
Procedural motions	Suggested new provision that the Chairperson has discretion about whether to allow any other procedural motion that is not contained in these Standing Orders.	Assists smooth running of meeting and ensures consistency with GB Standing Orders	1.7.12
Urgent items	Suggested change in title, from ‘Major items of business not on the agenda may be dealt with (extraordinary business)’ to ‘Urgent items of business not on the agenda may be dealt with (extraordinary business)’. This provision sets out when items not on an agenda may be considered. The suggested change in title aims to help clarify the types of issues that fall under this provision and better reflect the purpose of the provision. Text has also been added clarifying that extraordinary business may be brought before a meeting by a report of the Chief Executive or Chairperson. Where the matter is so urgent a written report is not practical, the report may be verbal.	Clarification	2.4.5 and Appendix D
Governing body input	A proposed section on Governing Body input sets out that a Governing Body member may provide input at meetings via speaking rights on items at the discretion of the chair and a report on the agenda for a Governing Body member to provide a general update on matters of interest to the board. This can include reporting on regional matters of interest to the local board or any matter the Governing Body member wishes to raise. This section aims to be more flexible than the current local board SO 3.9.14, by applying to Governing Body members in general rather than ward councillors for the local board area. Whilst the right for Governing Body members to speak as a deputation has also been retained, the Governing Body input section enables a more flexible/permissive option, given it does not require the authorisation of a governing body resolution. Use of the process for Governing Body deputations will be appropriate for more formal circumstances, where the Governing Body member is representing the views of the Governing Body as a whole. The suggested notice period is seven clear working days, to enable sufficient time for it to appear on the agenda. However, this is at the discretion of the Chairperson and can be shortened if necessary. The suggested speaking time is five minutes, in accordance with provisions in the Governing Body Standing Orders.	More permissive input provisions	Part 5
Order of business	Clarification that the order of business for an extraordinary meeting should be limited to items relevant to the purpose of the meeting. The Chairperson may allow governing body, Māori and public input that is relevant to the purpose of the meeting. The items listed in this section have been amended to fit with the order of business generated by Infocouncil.	Clarification and ensures consistency with GB Standing Orders	2.4.2
References to working parties and briefings	These have been taken out, as these forums tend to be less formal and not covered by Standing Orders.	Relevance
Public forum	Suggested changes clarifying that: · public forum may not be required at the inaugural meeting, extraordinary meetings or a special consultative procedure · members may not debate any matter raised during the public forum session that is not on the agenda for the meeting, or take any action in relation to it, other than through the usual procedures for extraordinary business if the matter is urgent. The meeting may refer the matter to a future meeting, or to another committee, or to the Chief Executive for investigation · Māori or New Zealand Sign Language can be used at public forum, as long as two clear working days’ notice is provided. Where practical, council will arrange for a translator to be present · the Chairperson may direct a speaker to a different committee and prohibit a speaker from speaking if he or she is offensive, repetitious or vexatious, or otherwise breaches these standing orders.	Clarification	7.8
Suspension of standing orders	A provision has been included for a member to move a motion to suspend standing orders as a procedural motion. The member must name the standing orders to be suspended and provide a reason for suspension. If seconded, the chairperson must put it without debate. At least 75 per cent of the members present and voting must vote in favour of the suspension, and the resolution must state the reason why the SO was suspended. It should be noted that some SOs reflect provisions in legislation so cannot be suspended. These are usually indicated by a reference underneath the SO to the relevant clause in legislation.	To assist the smooth running of meetings and ensure consistency with GB Standing Orders	1.7.11
Notice to be seconded	A notice of motion delivered to the Chief Executive must be signed by another member of the meeting as a seconder – unless member is giving notice of motion to revoke or alter a previous resolution.	Consistency with GB Standing Orders	2.5.2
Chairperson discretion	The discretion of the Chairperson has been clarified and made as consistent as possible in Standing Orders relating to Governing Body input, Māori input, public forum and deputations.	Clarification and consistency	Parts 5 and 6, 7.7 and 7.8
Māori responsiveness	Suggested provisions for representatives of Māori organisations to provide input at local board or committee meetings via speaking rights during relevant items. The main purpose of the provisions is to recognise the special status of Māori and increase the council’s responsiveness to Māori.. The provisions also provide more flexibility than the deputations process, which restricts the number of deputation members that may address the meeting. The suggested notice period is seven clear working days, to enable sufficient time for such an item to appear on the agenda. However, this is at the discretion of the chair and can be shortened if need be.	Recognition of the special status of Māori and IMSB’s role under section 85 of the Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009	Part 6 and 4.2.2
Working days / clear working days	The term “clear working days” has been used throughout the document, to refer to the number of working days prescribed for giving notice. It excludes the date of service of that notice and the date of the meeting itself. This is in accordance with legislation (Local Government Act 2002, Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 and the Interpretation Act).	Clarification and consistency
Governing body input, Māori input, public forum, deputations	The provisions in these sections have been made as consistent as possible and, where appropriate, in accordance with the Governing Body Standing Orders. Legal advice has been followed regarding the subjects a speaker may not speak about and the questions which can be put to speakers.	Clarification
New appendices	New appendices have been added, setting out who must leave the meeting when the public is excluded and how business is brought before a meeting. Provisions in the current local board Standing Orders relating to workshops have been placed in an appendix, given their exemption from Part seven of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1978.	Clarification	Appendices B-D
Electronic attendance at business meetings	Recent changes to the Local Government Act 2002 now allow members to attend meetings by audio or audio-visual means in certain situations. There are a number of restrictions for this provision in the legislation including that relevant technology is available and of suitable quality, all those participating can hear each other and there is no reduction in accountability or accessibility of the member in relation to the meeting. Members attending meetings by electronic link may vote but are not counted as part of the quorum. The revised Standing Orders contain provisions to enable members to attend meetings by electronic link, where the member is representing the council at a place that makes their physical presence at the meeting impossible or impracticable, to accommodate the member’s illness or infirmity or in emergencies. This provision will only apply where the technology is available.	Allows members to attend meetings whilst away on council business, or during illness or other emergency.	3.3
Membership of committees	In accordance with section 85 of the Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009, a clause has been included acknowledging that the Independent Māori Statutory Board must appoint a maximum of two people to sit as members of committees that deal with the management and stewardship of natural and physical resources.	Clarification	4.2.2
Powers of delegation	Clause 36D of schedule 7 of the Local Government Act 2002 identifies who a local board may delegate decision-making to, and the powers a local board cannot delegate. This clause does not include the power to delegate to other subordinate decision-making bodies or more than one member of a local board. Therefore references to subordinate decision-making bodies have been removed.	Clarification	Part 4

Key differences from the governing body standing orders

24. The revised local board Standing Orders contain some points of difference with the governing body Standing Orders. Key points of difference are in the areas of refreshment breaks, petitions, notices of motion, and public input.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

25. This report provides information and a revised set of Standing Orders for local board consideration and adoption.

Māori impact statement

26. The local board Standing Orders deal with meeting procedure. They provide for Māori to be spoken at business meetings and for deputations, presentations and petitions to be in Māori. They also enable:

· Māori to participate on local board committees, even if they are not members of the relevant local board. See current local board SO 2.9.2 which states: “members of a committee or subcommittee may, but need not be, elected members of the Local Board”. As such, non-members may be appointed to committees or subcommittees if they have relevant skills, attributes or knowledge.

· the suspension of Standing Orders, which can be useful to flexibly incorporate tikanga at meetings.

27. New suggested provisions relating to Māori in the revised Standing Orders include:

· a section on Māori input, to recognise the special status of Māori and encourage their input at local board meetings. This is in accordance with advice from Te Waka Angamua and work being undertaken by some local boards on a co-design process with mana whenua to improve Māori input into local board decision-making

· clarifying that the Independent Maori Statutory Board (IMSB) must appoint a maximum of two people to sit as members of committees that deal with the management and stewardship of natural and physical resources (in accordance with the Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009, section 85)

· providing for Māori to be spoken at public forum, and by the governing body or Māori organisations providing input, as long as two clear working days’ notice is given of the intention to do so.

28. Including these provisions recognises the special status of Māori under Te Tiriti o Waitangi and Local Government Act 2002 requirements to provide opportunities and processes for Māori to contribute to decision-making processes.^{^[2]} It is also in accordance with the goals of council’s Māori Responsiveness Framework, Whiria Te Muka Tangata. In particular, to foster more positive and productive relationships between council and Māori, and contribute to Māori well-being by developing strong Māori communities.

Implementation

29. Changes to Standing Orders requires a majority vote of not less than 75% of members present (s27(3) Schedule 7, Local Government Act 2002).

30. If approved, the revised Standing Orders will come in to effect immediately.

31. Copies of the revised Standing Orders will be provided to all local board members, where local boards choose to adopt changes.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Revised Local Board Standing Orders	123
b ⇩	Governing Body Political working party’s finding	183

Signatories

Authors

Blair Doherty - Kaipatiki Local Board Democracy Advisor

Authorisers

Carol McKenzie-Rex – Manager, Local Board Services

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

Waitākere Ranges Local Board

14 December 2017

LB feedback on Rates remission and postponement policy review

File No.: CP2017/25895

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 Waitākere Ranges 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^{^[3]} (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	201
b ⇩	Rates remission and postponement policy	207
c ⇩	Value of legacy schemes by local board area	225
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

Waitākere Ranges Local Board

14 December 2017

10-year Budget 2018-2028 consultation

File No.: CP2017/25907

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 Waitākere Ranges Local Board:

a) agree, subject to approval by the governing body, to hold at least one spoken interaction events during the consultation period (event type date, and venue to be resolved).

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 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 Waitakere Ranges Local Board area are to be confirmed at the meeting.

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 - TO BE TABLED AT THE MEETING	231
b ⇩	Local supporting information for consultation - TO BE TABLED AT THE MEETING	233

Signatories

Authors

Christie McFayden - Graduate Advisor

Authorisers

Carol McKenzie-Rex - Relationship Manager

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

Waitākere Ranges Local Board

14 December 2017

Decision-making allocation update

File No.: CP2017/26224

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 Waitākere Ranges 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.^{^[4]} 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	239

Signatories

Authors

James Liddell - Portfolio Manager

Authorisers

Carol McKenzie-Rex – Manager, Local Board Services

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

Waitākere Ranges Local Board

14 December 2017

Chairperson's report - December 2017

File No.: CP2017/26321

Kauri Dieback

Tiakina te wao nui a Tiriwa hei oranga mou

(Treasure the great forest of Tiriwa and you in turn shall prosper)

1. Te Kawerau A Maki’s declaration of a rāhui over the Waitakere Ranges has attracted a great deal of attention. I am glad to say that the overall response to the rāhui that I have experienced is one of respect.

2. Many people have committed to observe the rāhui, myself included. I agree with the sentiment that until the forest is healed we should not walk anywhere that may risk the spread of kauri dieback. The problem is of course that we are amongst the ones most likely to clean our shoes and observe hygiene protocols. But the reduction in pressure on the tracks will be helpful.

3. I attended the ceremony placing the rāhui recently held at the Cascades. Aunt Agatha, the towering Kauri near the start of the track was the centre of attention. Sadly she is infected with kauri dieback and is dying.

4. I understand completely Te Kawerau A Maki’s motivation in laying the rāhui. To be frank Council has reacted too slowly to the crisis, and it is a crisis. No individual should be blamed, it is a system problem, but it is still a problem. An example is that the data and draft report concerning the latest round of testing for Kauri dieback was available in November last year. I was part of urgent meetings held last December. Yet publication of the final report took until August of this year and we are only seeing now the roll out of major changes to how the park is managed.

5. The Environment and Community committee of Council considered the issue recently. It wanted to formulate a response to correspondence received from Te Kawerau A Maki and to work out what changes should be made to current management of the park.

6. The local board took the opportunity to attend the meeting en masse and to present what we thought was the optimal approach to take.

7. Despite time pressures on the Committee I was generously allowed twice the normal speaking time. Following is a synopsis of what I said to the committee.

8. The disease is a scourge. It is a kauri killer and they are facing extinction because of it. Kauri are a keystone species. If they go the health of the forest will be adversely affected.

9. Regrettably the Waitakere Ranges is the most heavily affected area in the country.

10. Peter De Lange, who is a scientist at AUT and a former principal science adviser at the Department of Conservation has said this about the disease.

"I can tell you now, because of the rate of decline that’s been mapped and because we have good data, that kauri is now being listed as a threatened species.

And I think that’s just terrible. This is an iconic tree; a sacred tree protected under the … Treaty of Waitangi. Various iwi regard it as their totem tree, and we are potentially going to lose it.”

11. The recent Kauri Dieback report prepared by Council shows a clear correlation between tracks, watercourses and baitlines and the spread of the disease. The correlation is startling and unmistakeable.

12. Five different options were presented to the committee. They included doing nothing, status quo, slight improvement, close high and medium risk tracks, and close the ranges.

13. As far as the Board was concerned:

· Doing nothing is not an option

· Status quo is not an option. Both of these options clearly will fail.

· The recommended option (slight improvement) was deficient because there is a need to quarantine areas where dieback is prevalent and close tracks where there are healthy Kauri.

· Option 4 was closest to what is needed to protect Kauri but still allow some use.

· We did not think that full immediate closure of the Ranges was workable.

14. Our submission noted that under the Waitakere Ranges Heritage Area Act there is an obligation to “protect, restore, and enhance the area” and when making decisions that threaten serious or irreversible harm Council must endeavour to protect the forest.

15. I included two maps in the submission. The first shows the presence of Kauri disease which has been spreading like a cancer along the tracks. Red dots are infections in 2011. Black dots are infections in 2016. It is clear that most of the infection is spreading along the tracks.

16.
The next map shows tracks of no, low, medium and high risk. Option four requires the medium (yellow) and high risk (red) tracks to be closed.

17. The board spent a great deal of time considering Te Kawerau A Maki’s placing of a rāhui over the Ranges. We understood completely their motivation for imposing the rāhui. There have been too many delays, including delays in releasing the Kauri dieback report.

18. I believe that the rāhui presents an opportunity to urgently address the crisis affecting Kauri and is a perfect tool to educate Auckland of the severity of the situation. The board’s view is that option 4 properly implemented is not inconsistent with the principles of the rāhui in that Te Kawerau A Maki is prepared to allow “rolling openings” of low risk areas. Option 4 speeds this process up. BUT, and I should emphasis this, I would prefer that Te Kawerau a Maki agreed with the categorisation of the tracks. It would help if there was a meeting of Council and Te Kawerau A Maki to look at the track categorisation and see if consensus can be reached.

19. The local board had a number of other suggestions for the Council including the following:

· Urgent work on tracks to improve drainage and increase number of boardwalks as well as rerouting away from Kauri.

· Install more hygiene stations along tracks, not just at track entrances.

· Install DOC designed high quality stations at key sites.

· Check station coverage. For example there are no cleaning stations at Beveridge Track even though it is considered to be a high risk track.

· Provide maps and brochures (including online)with up-to-date information about kauri PTA and closed tracks.

· Promote non-kauri tracks on and off regional parks.

· Stop all sporting events through the Waitakeres.

· Work with concessionaires to re-site tourism activities.

· Work with ATEED to halt all promotion of the Waitakeres.

· At a minimum double kauri ambassadors in the Waitakeres from 6 to 12 and extend their period of employment.

· Work with local communities to identify low risk areas for exercise and recreation.

· Filming only to occur in non-kauri locations.

· Develop a “good visitor” code of conduct for Waitakere.

· Prohibit dogs anywhere in Waitakere Ranges off-leash.

20. Our presentation ended with the photo below of Aunt Agatha which is the most prominent Kauri in the Ranges but has succumbed to Kauri Dieback. I said that we do not want to be at another meeting in another 5 years discussing another report that shows a further spread of this disease through the Waitakere Ranges. We need urgent effective action now.

21. Since the meeting I have written to Councillor Hulse reemphasising our proposals and also suggesting there should be added resources for pig hunting in line with a suggestion Jack Craw has made. I also suggested that ongoing engagement with Te Kawerau A Maki about the rāhui should occur and there should be a high level governance group to oversee action and maintain momentum. Councillor Hulse has responded positively to these suggestions.

22. The announcement has not gone completely smoothly. An initial 13 tracks were identified in the report for closure and since then a further 17 tracks have been identified for closure before Christmas. But there is some local concern that not all medium and high risk tracks will be closed. Can I just say that my clear understanding of the resolutions is they will and will remain closed until they can be made safe.

Mayor’s Ten year budget proposal

23. The Mayor has released his proposal for Auckland Council’s ten year long term plan. He is endeavouring to keep the “core” rate rise next year to 2.5% in line with his promise made during the election campaign last year but has acknowledged that if we are going to do something significant about environmental damage that is happening then more resources will be required.

24. He has proposed that there be a “targeted protection” rate. There are two options presented. The first will raise an additional $123 million and require an environmental levy of around $21 a year, or 40 cents per week, for the average residential ratepayer. Staff analysis is that this will result in a “slowed decline” of Auckland’s natural environment and a 30-50% risk of kauri dieback spreading. Council staff believe that currently planned levels of spend on environmental matters will result in ongoing decline in environmental quality and extinction of some species, with the risk of Kauri dieback spreading being assessed at over 80%.

25. The other option, titled “enhanced protection and restoration” would raise an additional $356 million of rates funded budget and require an environmental levy of around $60 a year, or $1.15 per week, for the average residential ratepayer. This will allow “protected and enhanced priority areas and species” and the risk of kauri dieback spreading is estimated to be 10-20%. Approximately $84 million over ten years will be spent on the disease including track upgrades.

26. A second targeted rate is for water quality purposes. The Mayor is proposing a regional Water Quality targeted rate to fund Healthy Waters’ part of the Water Quality Improvement Programme. The intent is to achieve an 80% reduction in waste water overflows within ten years. Under current plans this is well over 20 years away and the Mayor wants to spend the money now to accelerated this. The proposed rate is less than $1.30 per week or $66 per year for the average residential ratepayer.

27. A quote from the Mayor’s report deserves repeating:

"I believe Aucklanders want their city to be world class. In the twenty first century, world class cities don’t allow waste water to flow into their streams and beaches. This problem is not new. It goes back more than a century. It is time to take the problem out of the too-hard-basket, and to stop passing it unresolved to future generations. I am asking Aucklanders whether they are ready to make the commitment of a small weekly sum to tackle, and resolve this problem, so we can live up to our reputation as a clean and green city.”

28. The Waitakere Ranges Local Board area has the dubious characteristic of having more polluted areas than any other board. Five of our Manukau Harbour beaches and three of our west coast lagoons regularly have long term water quality alerts. This is half of the total problem areas in the region. There are various reasons for this but for most of the Manukau Beaches infrastructure is implicated. The Mayor’s suggestion work be performed on contaminant reduction is helpful. It is clear that the primary cause of pollution in the Manukau Harbour is failing sewerage infrastructure and the sooner this is fixed the better.

29. The draft ten year budget is being prepared for consultation. The local board will have a role in the consultation process. These particular proposals are very important to the west and I will be urging everyone to support them.

Titirangi library opening

30. The local board were present when the Titirangi Library reading deck was recently opened. We had the pleasure of a performance from the Titirangi Primary Kapa Haka group. As kaumatua Fred Holloway noted they may have been the most blue eyed and blonde kapa haka group he has seen but they performed extremely well and their haka was extraordinary.

31. It made me reflect on the quality of our local libraries which also includes the Glen Eden library. Both institutions perform outstandingly well and are a tribute to our staff. We tend to get the praise for this and I thought we should thank them for the outstanding work they do.

32. And libraries are a cornerstone of our civilisation. The accumulation and dissemination of knowledge only took off when Libraries first appeared.

West Auckland Maori engagement

33. The Henderson Massey and Waitakere Ranges local boards had a very helpful session at Hoani Waititi marae concerning Maori engagement. The sessions were run by Joe Waru and Kim Penetito.

34. They were well designed and provided very helpful insights into how to properly engage with tangata whenua. The first thing is to front up and to talk. And listen. The second thing is to be respectful. These two basic ideas will ensue that any discussions with Iwi will be fruitful.

Glen Eden Santa parade

35. This has become a firm fixture of Glen Eden’s social calendar. A number of groups are involved, including the Glen Eden Protection Society, the Glen Eden Business Improvement District, and Glen Eden Community Patrol helped out.

36. Gayle Marshall, who has been involved ever since the parade started, once again starred as Mrs Claus or whatever the current version of that description is! Congratulations to all involved.

Titirangi Glow Festival

37. And immediately following the Glen Eden Christmas Parade was the Titirangi Glow festival. This is a more recent event but it also has a dedicated group of people who want to make Titirangi an enjoyable place at Christmas time. The aim is to light up Titirangi and to have an evening event of celebration. They rely on the Titirangi Fire Brigade a great deal and they also receive significant support from the local business community.

38. The Local Board has helped with funding in the past couple of years. I am suggesting that we meet in the new year with the group who organise the event to make sure that the event can continue in the future.

Combined ratepayers meeting

39. We had our last meeting of this group for year recently. The combined ratepayers meeting involves representatives from throughout the Waitakere Ranges and it is probably the most important chance that we have to discuss matters with local communities. It is ably chaired by former Waitakere Community Board chair Kubi Witten-Hannah and assisted by the legendary secretary Mels Barton.

40. We were pleased to have Deborah Russell, MP for New Lynn and Chris Penk, MP for Helensville present at the meeting. A number of issues of interest were discussed including fireworks in the ranges, kauri dieback and a number of Council associated matters. Hopefully this can continue so that the lines of communication between local communities, the local board and central Government can continue to be strong.

Citizenship ceremonies

41. And finally I attended the last citizenship ceremony of the year this week. They are always very similar although often subtly different. Every ceremony I have been involved in has included Papa Fred Holloway. He is a kaumatua who gives the ceremony a very gentle but inclusive feel. His presence highlights the importance of Maori culture.

42. During the ceremonies I am given the opportunity to welcome everyone and to urge that although they are now citizens of a new land their culture is important and should be retained. Then there is the formality of everyone pledging oaths of allegiance, the handing out of citizenship certificates and high fives with the young new citizens. Then after that is the boisterous singing of the national anthem in te reo and english and then an acknowledgment and celebration of all the different nationalities present.

43. The ceremonies are always touching. It is clear that new citizens publicly pledging allegiance to New Zealand is an emotional matter for them and a very important ceremony. Seeing all these new New Zealanders with smiles on their faces is one of the best parts of my job.

Meri Kirihimete me ngā mihi o te tau hou ki a koutou katoa!

(Merry Christmas and a happy New Year!)

Greg Presland, Waitakere Ranges Local Board Chairperson.

Recommendation/s

That the Waitākere Ranges Local Board:

a) receive the Chairperson’s report.

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Signatories

Authors	Tua Viliamu - Democracy Advisor
Authorisers	Glenn Boyd - Relationship Manager Henderson-Massey, Waitakere Ranges, Whau

Waitākere Ranges Local Board

14 December 2017

Portfolio Update Report: Member Sandra Coney

File No.: CP2017/26571

Purpose

1. This report provides an opportunity for Member Sandra Coney to give an update with regards to activity within her portfolio areas.

2. Portfolio holders are responsible for leading policy development in their portfolio area, proposing and developing project concepts, overseeing agreed projects within budgets, being active advocates, accessing and providing information and advice.

3. Member Coney has lead for the portfolios of Historic Heritage/Character and Parks area.

Parks

4. Overall, it has been frustrating to have no funds to develop existing parks and to have a potential park (Glengarry Road) sold by Auckland Council. Waitakere Ranges Local Board has a huge responsibility in that our area contains 40% of the native vegetation in the Auckland region, and is over 80% covered in native vegetation, but we get no loading to look after this area, and in fact, draw the short straw because of our low population.

5. In other parts of Auckland, higher population leads to more funding and in areas where there is development, so-called “growth funding” to develop new parks.

6. This board has quite a few undeveloped parks in established areas of Glen Eden, for instance, where all that happens is that the grass gets mowed. Sometimes there isn’t even a sign to say that it is a park. There is not a lot of new development on our area, because most of it is covered by the Waitakere Ranges Heritage Area Act 2008. We’re not complaining about that, as we collectively agreed to protect the Ranges, but it does mean the criteria Council uses to distribute funding does not work for us. There are some promising areas for parks and recreational facilities within our boundaries but we lack the wherewithal to do the work. Two examples are the Kaye Road balefill site, which would be ideal for mountain-biking, and the former Luckens land in Swanson which could provide some very nice walking tracks. Where we have areas with development, we still struggle to get funding to provide basic facilities such as seats, paths and play equipment. Penihana in Swanson is one such example, where there is a designated park, but no money to develop it, even though many families are already moving in around it.

Kauri in Waitakere Ranges parkland

7. The big issue facing parks out our way, is kauri phytophthora agathidicida. A recent report showed an alarming spread of the disease within a five-year period between surveys and reports. It also showed that the most certain vector for spread was people, spreading the organism along the track networks, and also along bait lines. I recall this latter was suggested by the earlier report, and that five years’ ago I said this was possible. I was roundly criticised for saying this, however, it has now proved to be correct.

8. On 2 December the iwi, Te Kawerau a Maki called a rahui on the Ranges, basically saying people should keep out, although they also said people could be “warranted” to enter the Ranges for pest control and the like.

9. The Board had many discussions about this and arrived at a position which I imagine Chair Greg Presland will outline in his chair’s report. We presented this at the Environment and Community Committee on 5 December and I think this was one of the factors that encouraged the councillors to reject the officers’ recommendations (which was a modified status quo) and adopt a much more rigorous approach. It is still unclear exactly what this will look like – officers are asked to report back in February – and the Local Board will need to keep closely involved in the process.

10. One proposal if for a Controlled Area Notice under the Biosecurity Act which would give the Council a lot of teeth to prohibit access where it deems it necessary and act if that is flouted There is a CAN for the Hauraki Gulf which enables Council to inspect boats arriving at Great Barrier, for instance, to ensure no possums arrive, GB being possum-free.

11. On 5 December the Environment and Community Committee of Auckland Council passed resolutions to significantly increase actions to control the spread of Kauri Phytophthora agathidicida. The focus of that reporting was the Waitakere Ranges Regional Park. The Waitakere Ranges Local Board governs and manages a number of local parks within the Waitakere Ranges and adjoining areas. These resolutions are aimed at ensuring that these parks are managed to prevent the spread of the disease.

Other parks news

Waitakere Ranges Heritage Area Design Guidelines

12. These are about to be approved by the Board to go out for consultation over the summer. These aim to ensure that infrastructure and development in parks, are consistent with the natural and landscape values of the heritage area.

Crossing to Parrs Park

13. The safe pedestrian and cycle crossing from the Oratia shared pathway to Parrs Park is nearly completed. This joins up with the pathway around Parrs Park. In time – and when the board has the funds – this will take people all the way to Sunnyvale Railway Station.

Piha Ministry of Education land

14. On the recommendation of the Local Board this was purchased by Auckland Council. The intention is for local grounds to run the old schoolhouse and work with the Board on restoration of the wetland.

Erosion at the Piha Stream

15. The Board has had (yet another) report as to what to do about the stream erosion of Piha Stream in the reach above the West Coast Gallery, which is a local park. Morphum Engineers and Consultants have moved away from hard engineering solutions and are proposing bank flattening and riparian planting at three locations on the north edge of the meanders upstream. The bank flattening would be between 25 and 46 metres in length and be setback from the bank 5 metres. There is also a proposal to install rock vanes in the reach by the schoolhouse and gallery to slow down the velocity of the stream.

16. Total projected cost of bank flattening at the three locations is $190,000. The rock vanes would double the cost. There is currently no budget for this work.

17. The board is yet to make a decision on whether it accepts this approach. The implications of the bank flattening for access to regional parkland at Nigel Hanlon Hut needs to be looked at, and the implication for the ex-Ministry of Education land.

Facilities for children and young people in our parks

18. We have regular requests for new facilities in our parks. As noted above, we lack the resources to build these, but even where others suggest it, we have to consider the loss of public open space for other activities, including informal recreation, and the compatibility of activities within the park itself. To enable the sensible use of scarce resources we have asked parks to provide us with mapping of playgrounds, half-courts, skate parks, mountain biking etc in our area and adjoining LB areas.

Parks Management Plans

19. We were also recently pleased to hear that the Council is at last getting going on park management planning, which have virtually been at a standstill for the last 6 years. What is suggested is an omnibus approach, modelled on the Auckland Regional Parks Management Plan, which I chaired in 2009. This means the board would have over-arching policies and objectives for different types of parks, following by more detailed policies about individual parks. This is an efficient way of covering a lot of ground and we look forward to it. Some parks and areas already do have management plans for their parks and we won’t be throwing those out in a hurry, and they were usually well consulted on and carefully drafted.

Summer Rangers

20. Our summer rangers are back to help visitors in our busiest parks. Phoebe Munro is welcomed back to Piha for the third year and Nick King to Te Henga. They started on 4 December. Student rangers in regional parks we are sad to see have gone down from 7 to 3.

Recommendation/s

That the Waitākere Ranges Local Board:

a) receive the Portfolio Update from Member Sandra Coney.

· b) request that officers report back to the local board with urgency on:

i) which local parks contain kauri

ii) what signage and hygiene measures are in place at those parks

iii) whether any surveys or tests have been carried out in those parks to ascertain whether any trees are infected

iv) recommendations as to whether any tracks/parks should be closed.

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Signatories

Authors	Tua Viliamu - Democracy Advisor
Authorisers	Glenn Boyd - Relationship Manager Henderson-Massey, Waitakere Ranges, Whau

Waitākere Ranges Local Board

14 December 2017

Governance Forward Work Calendar - December 2017

File No.: CP2017/26324

Purpose

1. To present to the board with a governance forward work calendar.

Executive Summary

2. This report introduces the governance forward work calendar: a schedule of items that will come before the board at business meetings over the upcoming months. The governance forward work calendar for the board is included in Attachment A.

3. The calendar aims to support local boards’ governance role by:

· ensuring advice on agendas and workshop material is driven by local board priorities

· clarifying what advice is required and when

· clarifying the rationale for reports.

4. The calendar will be updated every month. Each update will be reported back to business meetings and distributed to relevant Council staff. It is recognised that at times items will arise that are not programmed. Board members are welcome to discuss changes to the calendar.

Recommendation/s

That the Waitākere Ranges Local Board:

a) note the updated Governance Forward Work Calendar for December 2017 (attachment A).

Comments

5. Council’s Quality Advice Programme aims to improve the focus, analysis, presentation and timeliness of staff advice to elected representatives. An initiative under this is to develop forward work calendars for governing body committees and local boards. These provide elected members with better visibility of the types of governance tasks they are being asked to undertake and when they are scheduled.

6. Although the document is new, there are no new projects in the governance forward work calendar. The calendar brings together in one schedule reporting on all of the board’s projects and activities previously approved in the local board plan, long-term plan, departmental work programmes and through other board decisions. It includes governing body policies and initiatives that call for a local board response.

7. This initiative is intended to support the boards’ governance role. It will also help staff to support local boards, as an additional tool to manage workloads and track activities across council departments, and it will allow greater transparency for the public.

8. The calendar is arranged in three columns, “Topic”, “Purpose” and “Governance Role”:

· Topic describes the items and may indicate how they fit in with broader processes such as the annual plan

· Purpose indicates the aim of the item, such as formally approving plans or projects, hearing submissions or receiving progress updates

· Governance role is a higher-level categorisation of the work local boards do. Examples of the seven governance categories are tabled on the following page.

Governance role	Examples
Setting direction/priorities/budget	Capex projects, work programmes, annual plan
Local initiatives/specific decisions	Grants, road names, alcohol bans
Input into regional decision-making	Comments on regional bylaws, policies, plans
Oversight and monitoring	Local board agreement, quarterly performance reports, review projects
Accountability to the public	Annual report
Engagement	Community hui, submissions processes
Keeping informed	Briefings, cluster workshops

9. Board members are welcome to discuss changes to the calendar. The calendar will be updated and reported back every month to business meetings. Updates will also be distributed to relevant Council staff.

Consideration

Local Board views and implications

10. All local boards are being presented with governance forward work calendars for their consideration.

Māori impact statement

11. The projects and processes referred to in the governance forward work calendar will have a range of implications for Māori which will be considered when the work is reported.

Implementation

12. Staff will review the calendar each month in consultation with board members and will report an updated calendar to the board.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Governance Forward Work Calendar - December 2017	283

Signatories

Authors	Tua Viliamu - Democracy Advisor
Authorisers	Glenn Boyd - Relationship Manager Henderson-Massey, Waitakere Ranges, Whau

[1] The region wide consultations on the Auckland Plan and Long Term Plan from 28 February - 28 March 2018 may impact the timing.

[3] The headline rates increase in an annual plan, or long-term plan, is a comparison of the annual rates requirement to the previous years budgeted rates requirement. Moving a charge against revenue to an expenditure item like grants will increase the council’s costs and inflate the apparent rates increase. However, remissions and postponements are a cost already borne by those ratepayers not receiving them. Therefore an adjustment will be made to the 2014/2015 budgeted rates requirement for the purpose of calculating the rates increase proposed for 2015/2016.

[4] The Governing Body resolved to delegate this power to local boards. However, this was in error, as it was always intended that the power should be allocated to local boards by Governing Body and it was discussed by the Political Working Party in this context.

Chairperson	Greg Presland
Deputy Chairperson	Saffron Toms
Members	Sandra Coney, QSO
	Neil Henderson
	Steve Tollestrup
	Denise Yates, JP