Agenda of Waiheke Local Board

1 Welcome

Kua uru mai a hau kaha, a hau maia, a hau ora, a hau nui,

Ki runga, ki raro, ki roto, ki waho

Rire, rire hau…pai marire

Translation (non-literal) - Rama Ormsby

Let the winds bring us inspiration from beyond,

Invigorate us with determination and courage to achieve our aspirations for abundance and sustainability

Bring the calm, bring all things good, bring peace….good peace.

2 Apologies

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

3 Declaration of Interest

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

4 Confirmation of Minutes

That the Waiheke Local Board:

a) confirm the ordinary minutes of its meeting, held on Thursday, 22 March 2018, as a true and correct record.

5 Leave of Absence

That an apology from Member B Upchurch for leave of absence, be received.

6 Acknowledgements

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

7 Petitions

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

8 Deputations

Standing Order 3.20 provides for deputations. Those applying for deputations are required to give seven working days notice of subject matter and applications are approved by the Chairperson of the Waiheke 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.

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

9 Public Forum

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

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

10 Extraordinary Business

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

11 Notices of Motion

There were no notices of motion.

Waiheke Local Board

26 April 2018

Waiheke Quick Response Round Three 2017/2018 grant allocations

File No.: CP2018/05379

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1. To fund, part-fund or decline applications received for Waiheke Quick Response, Round Three 2017/2018

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2. This report presents applications received in Waiheke Quick Response, Round Three 2017/2018 (see Attachment B).

3. The Waiheke Local Board adopted the Waiheke Local Grants Programme 2017/2018 on 27 April 2017 (see Attachment A). The document sets application guidelines for contestable community grants submitted to the local board.

4. The Waiheke Local Board has set a total community grants budget of $60,000 for the 2017/2018 financial year. A total of $40,219 has been allocated in one local grant and two quick response rounds, leaving a total of $19,781 to be allocated to one quick response round and one local grant round.

5. Seventeen applications were received for Waiheke Quick Response, Round Three 2017/2018, requesting a total of $37,252.

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendations

That the Waiheke Local Board:

a) agree to fund, part-fund or decline each application in Waiheke Quick Response, Round Three, listed in Table One.

Application ID	Focus area	Organisation	Requesting funding for	Amount requested	Eligibility
QR1818-302	Community	Waiheke Spiritual Cinema Circle	Towards cinema hire for a monthly evening film session for a year, plus two special screenings	$1,050.00	Eligible
QR1818-303	Arts and culture	Joe McCracken under the umbrella of Waiheke Island Council of Social Services	Towards workshop presenters fee, venue hire, organisational costs and food for participants.	$4,000.00	Eligible
QR1818-305	Arts and culture	Waiheke Community Art Gallery	Towards exhibition, promotion and costs for “Matariki Open Studio” weekend.	$4,000.00	Eligible
QR1818-306	Environment	John MacKenzie under the umbrella of Rakino Ratepayers Association	Towards the purchase of monitoring tunnels for pest eradication	$3,015.00	Eligible
QR1818-308	Arts and culture	Auckland Choral Society Incorporated	Towards venue hire, fees for the music director and deputy, piano accompanist and a professional vocal coach.	$1,710.00	Eligible
QR1818-309	Arts and culture	Waiheke Comedy	Towards one Waiheke comedy member to attend the annual New Zealand Improvisation Festival taking place in Wellington.	$1,000.00	Eligible
QR1818-311	Community	Waiheke Adult Literacy Incorporated	Towards teaching resource upgrades, including a data projector, sound system, mounts, cabling and a whiteboard including installation and computer storage and charging,	$4,000.00	Eligible
QR1818-312	Community	Youthline Auckland Charitable Trust	Towards a portion of the overall annual cost for the helpline, relative to the approximate number of contacts received from the Waiheke area	$202.00	Eligible
QR1818-313	Arts and culture	Colin Beardon	Towards subsidised tickets for the community and for advertising in local newspapers for the “Open Home” production.	$870.00	Eligible
QR1818-314	Sport and recreation	Waiheke Gymnastics Club	Towards hireage costs of the Waiheke Recreation centre for the play gym classes	$2,520.00	Ineligible
QR1818-315	Arts and culture	Waiheke Teen Photography Club	Towards the studio lighting, sand bags and koha,	$2,096.00	Ineligible for a grant as the group is run through the library, however the group can be supported through a transfer of funding to the Waiheke Library
QR1818-316	Community	Waiheke Community Childcare Centre Incorporated	To purchase a heat pump for the childcare centre at Surfdale.	$4,000.00	Eligible
QR1818-317	Sport and recreation	Waiheke Island Rugby Club Incorporated	Towards purchase of a drinks fridge for the rugby club	$1,579.00	Eligible
QR1818-318	Environment	Environmental Education for Resource Sustainability Trust	Towards the purchase of 56 native trees and eight classroom recycling bins.	$710.00	Eligible
QR1818-319	Arts and culture	Waiheke Musical Museum Charitable Trust	Towards a microphone and sound system to facilitate the show presentations and concert performances for the musical museum.	$1,500.00	Eligible
QR1818-323	Environment	Carbon Neutral Waiheke under the umbrella of Hauraki Gulf Conservation Trust	Towards the cost of building a low carbon interactive website for Waiheke households and businesses to measure, reduce and offset their carbon emissions.	$4,000.00	Eligible
QR1818-325	Environment	Palm Beach Coast Care Group	Towards a contribution for the purchase of plants for dune restoration on Palm Beach	$1,000.00
			Total	$37,252.00

Horopaki / Context

6. The local board allocates grants to groups and organisations delivering projects, activities and services that benefit Aucklanders and contribute to the vision of being a world class city.

7. The Auckland Council Community Grants Policy supports each local board to adopt a grants programme.

8. 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.

9. The Waiheke Local Board adopted their grants programme for 2017/2018 on 27 April 2017 and will operate three quick response and two local grants rounds for this financial year.

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

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu / Analysis and advice

11. The aim of the local board grant programme is to deliver projects and activities which align with the outcomes identified in the local board plan. All applications have been assessed utilising the Community Grants Policy and the local board grant programme criteria. The eligibility of each application is identified in the report recommendations.

Ngā whakaaweawe ā-rohe me ngā tirohanga a te poari ā-rohe /
Local impacts and local board views

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

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

14. A summary of each application received through Waiheke Quick Response, Round Three is provided (see Attachment B).

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori / Māori impact statement

15. The local board grants programme aims to respond to Auckland Council’s commitment to improving Maori wellbeing by providing grants to individuals and groups who deliver positive outcomes for Maori. Auckland Council’s Maori Responsiveness Unit has provided input and support towards the development of the community grant processes.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea / Financial implications

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

17. The Waiheke Local Board has set a total community grants budget of $60,000. A total of $40,219 was allocated in one local grant round and two quick response rounds.

18. This leaves a total of $19,781 to be allocated to two quick response rounds.

19. In Waiheke Quick Response Round Three 2017/2018, seventeen applications were received, requesting a total of $37,252.

Ngā raru tūpono / Risks

20. The allocation of grants occurs within the guidelines and criteria of the Community Grants Policy and the local board grants programme. The assessment process has identified a low risk associated with funding the applications in this round.

Ngā koringa ā-muri / Next steps

22. Following the Waiheke Local Board allocating funding for round three quick response, Commercial and Finance staff will notify the applicants of the local board’s decision.

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Waiheke Grant Programme 2017/2018	15
b ⇩	Waiheke Quick Response Round Three 2017/2018 grant applications	19

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Author

Agus Castro Pons - Community grants coordinator

Authorisers

Marion Davies - Community Grants Operations Manager

Shane King - Operations Support Manager

Helgard Wagener - Relationship Manager Great Barrier and Waiheke Local Boards

Waiheke Local Board

26 April 2018

Waiheke Local Board Community Grants Programme 2018/2019

File No.: CP2018/03686

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1. To adopt the Waiheke Local Board Community Grants Programme for 2018/2019.

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2. The Auckland Council Community Grants Policy was implemented on 1 July 2015. The policy guides the allocation of local, multi-board and regional grant programmes to groups and organisations delivering projects, activities and services that benefit Aucklanders.

3. The Community Grants Policy supports each local board to review and adopt their own local grants programme for the next financial year.

4. This report presents the Waiheke Local Board Community Grants Programme 2018/2019 for adoption (see attachment A).

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation

That the Waiheke Local Board:

a) adopt the Waiheke Local Board Community Grants Programme 2018/2019.

Horopaki / Context

5. The Auckland Council Community Grants Policy was implemented on 1 July 2015. The policy guides the allocation of local, multi-board and regional grant programmes to groups and organisations delivering projects, activities and services that benefit Aucklanders.

6. The Community Grants Policy supports each local board to review and adopt their own local grants programme for the next financial year. The local board grants programme guides community groups and individuals when making applications to the local board.

7. The local board community grants programme includes:

· outcomes as identified in the local board plan

· specific local board grant priorities

· which grant types will operate, the number of grant rounds and opening and closing dates

· any additional criteria or exclusions that will apply

· other factors the local board consider to be significant to their decision-making.

8. Once the local board community grants programme for the 2018/2019 financial year has been adopted, the types of grants, grant rounds, criteria and eligibility with be advertised through an integrated communication and marketing approach which includes utilising the local board channels.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu / Analysis and advice

9. The new Waiheke Community Grants Programme has been workshopped with the local board and feedback incorporated into the grants programme for 2018/2019.

10. The new grant programme includes:

· new outcomes and priorities from the Waiheke Local Board Plan 2017

· the same number of grant rounds for 2018/2019, as are available in 2017/2018.

Ngā whakaaweawe ā-rohe me ngā tirohanga a te poari ā-rohe /
Local impacts and local board views

11. The Community Grants Programme has been developed by the local board to set the direction of their grants programme. This programme is reviewed on an annual basis.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori / Māori impact statement

12. All grant programmes respond to Auckland Council’s commitment to improving Māori wellbeing by providing grants to organisations delivering positive outcomes for Māori. Applicants are asked how their project aims to increase Māori outcomes in the application process.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea / Financial implications

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

Ngā raru tūpono / Risks

14. The allocation of grants occurs within the guidelines and criteria of the Community Grants Policy and the local board grants programme. Therefore, there is minimal risk associated with the adoption of the grants programme.

Ngā koringa ā-muri / Next steps

15. An implementation plan is underway and the local board grants programme will be locally advertised through the local board and council channels. Targeted advertising and promotion will be developed for target populations, including migrant and refugee groups, disability groups, Māori and iwi organisations

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Waiheke Community Grants Programme 2018/2019	73

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Author

Marion Davies - Community Grants Operations Manager

Authorisers

Shane King - Operations Support Manager

Helgard Wagener - Relationship Manager Great Barrier and Waiheke Local Boards

Waiheke Local Board

26 April 2018

Local Transport Capital Fund: options for distribution and size of the fund

File No.: CP2018/04645

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1. This report seeks formal feedback from the local board on options for the future size and underlying distribution methodology of the local transport capital fund (LTCF) and on the proposal to increase advisory support for the fund from Auckland Transport staff.

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2. In September 2017, the Governing Body agreed in principle to an increase to the local transport capital fund as an outcome of the governance framework review. Staff were directed to undertake further work with Auckland Transport and local boards on the size of the increase, and the distribution methodology.

3. The LTCF was established in 2012 and currently sits at $10.8 million. It is allocated on a pure population basis. Two options for the size of funding increase have been modelled, an increase of $6 million and an increase of $10 million.

4. Staff have also modelled three different distribution options: the current population model, a model applying the Local Boards Funding Policy, and a model that includes a mix of a fixed level of funding per board, along with a variable rate determined by the Local Boards Funding Policy.

5. Each of the options has been assessed against a set of criteria. The pure population model is not supported by staff, while each of the other two models has merits. On balance, staff recommend that the Local Boards Funding Policy be applied to the distribution of the LTCF, with an additional amount of $10 million being added to the fund. Feedback is sought from local boards on their preferences.

6. It is also recommended that Auckland Transport have funding allocated to provide an increased level of support to local boards in developing and assessing local transport projects.

7. Final decisions will be made by the Governing Body as part of the 10-year budget process in May.

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendations

That the Waiheke Local Board endorses:

a) an increase to the local transport capital fund of $10 million per annum (inflation adjusted) from 1 July 2018.

b) the distribution of the entire local transport capital fund to be made according to Auckland Council’s Local Boards Funding Policy from 1 July 2018.

c) Auckland Transport receiving additional funding to provide an increased level of support to local boards in developing and assessing projects for the local transport capital fund.

Horopaki / Context

8. The local transport capital fund (LTCF) was established by resolution of the Strategy and Finance Committee [SF/2012/40] in April 2012, in order to provide local boards with access to funding for local transport projects that had strong local significance, but which were unlikely to be prioritised through the regional transport planning process.

9. The establishment of the fund is consistent with the government’s original policy intent that local boards would have a role in funding local transport projects out of a dedicated local budget [CAB Minute(09) 30/10] and that “local boards will have an advisory role with respect to transport services and a budget for the transport elements of ‘place shaping’^{^[1]}”.

10. The objectives of the fund are to:

· ensure locally important transport projects are given appropriate priority

· provide local boards with more direct ability to influence local transport projects.

11. Projects must be deliverable, meet transport safety criteria and not compromise the network. Auckland Transport retains the responsibility for delivering projects delivered through this funding and the budget remains with Auckland Transport. Depreciation and consequential operating expenditure are also the responsibility of Auckland Transport, as is the core administration of the fund.

12. The fund was initially set at $10 million per annum (since adjusted for inflation, and now sitting at $10.8 million) and is currently split between the local boards on the basis of population, excepting Waiheke and Great Barrier Island local boards, which receive two per cent and one per cent of the fund respectively. The population figures that the distribution is based on have remained at 2012^{^[2]} levels.

13. At the Governing Body meeting of 28 September 2017, at which the recommendations of the Governance Framework Review Political Working Party were considered, it was agreed [GB/2017/117] that officers would report back to the governing body through the 10-year budget process on options for significantly increasing the LTCF, as well as providing an assessment of options for allocating the additional funding.

14. This report provides options for the quantum of the proposed increase, the method of allocating the proposed increase among the twenty one local boards and issues relating to the administration of the fund. Workshops have been held with each local board to discuss these proposals and now formal feedback is sought through business meetings. Final recommendations will be made to the Governing Body in May.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu / Analysis and advice

15. Issues with the local transport capital fund identified through the governance framework review were grouped under three key themes:

· the overall size, or quantum, of the local transport capital fund

· the methodology underpinning its distribution among local boards

· the administration and support provided by Auckland Transport to local boards in relation to developing options and projects for consideration.

Quantum of funding

16. When the LTCF was initially established at $10 million, the figure was not based on any specific assessment of need, but more on the recognition that smaller, local projects that had a strong place shaping component were unlikely to be funded according to Auckland Transport and NZTA’s prioritisation formulas.

17. While the fund took some time to get established, it is now delivering valuable transport related outcomes for communities across Auckland. The LTCF spend forecast in 2016-17 financial year was $17 million, as boards have been able to accumulate funding across years to put towards more significant projects. It has delivered 286 projects over the five year period.

18. The LTCF contribution to these many local projects has also been complemented through the input of additional funds from Auckland Transport (as well as NZTA subsidy) with the value of the work they have delivered to their communities being substantially leveraged through this additional funding.

19. Staff have modelled the impact of the proposed increase on individual local boards according to a range of distribution models. In doing so, two different levels of increase have been used – the $10 million figure, initially proposed by Auckland Transport, and a lower figure of $6 million.

20. Neither figure is based on specific needs assessment, but Auckland Transport is of the view that a baseline of approximately six hundred and fifty thousand dollars a year is desirable to give individual boards the resources to support significant local projects. This would require an increase of at least $6 million per annum.

21. Boards that have had access to higher levels of funding have generally found it easier to leverage that to attract NZTA subsidies and additional Auckland Transport funding, for example for projects that are being brought forward as a result of LTCF investment. Successful examples include the Half Moon Bay ferry terminal, the Mt Albert Station Bridge and the Māngere Future Streets project.

Distribution methodology

22. This section provides modelling of three distribution options applied to two levels of overall increase (sub-option A being an increase of $6 million, and sub-option B being an increase of $10 million). The options are:

· Option 1: status quo – simple population based distribution of both the existing fund and any additional funding

· Option 2: applying the current Local Boards Funding Policy to the distribution of the fund

· Option 3: a model that provides for a fixed level of baseline funding for all boards, as well as a variable component based on the Local Boards Funding Policy.

Population based distribution

23. In 2012, the governing body elected to distribute the first iteration of the LTCF purely on a population basis, following consultation with local boards^{^[3]}^. The distribution has not been adjusted to account for population distribution changes since the fund was established.

24. We have modelled (Appendix A) the option of applying the population based distribution methodology, based on Statistics NZ 2017 population estimates. As you will see from the modelling, the impact on boards with higher populations is the most significant, in terms of an increase in funding, especially if the additional amount is $10 million.

25. Under this model, however, if the additional amount is $6 million, six boards would still fall short of the $650,000 baseline figure identified by Auckland Transport as being desirable to enable the delivery of viable local transport proposals.

Applying the Local Boards Funding Policy to the LTCF

26. Following the establishment of the LTCF, work was undertaken to develop the current Local Boards Funding Policy, as required under the Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009. This policy was adopted in 2014, and uses an allocation methodology incorporating three factors: population (90 per cent), deprivation (five per cent) and land area (five per cent). This funding policy is currently applied to locally driven initiatives funding, including the local capital fund, but was not retrospectively applied to the LTCF.

27. The development of the funding policy involved significant consultation and engagement with local boards prior to final adoption. There are no current plans to review the policy.

28. We have modelled (Appendix B) the option of applying the Local Boards Funding Policy to the distribution of the LTCF. The modelling has been applied to the existing fund and the additional amounts of $6 million and $10 million. The modelling is also based on 2017 population estimates.

Fixed and variable costs distribution

29. As previously noted, Auckland Transport has the view that in order to deliver transport infrastructure of any significance, a certain level of baseline funding is desirable – around $650,000 per annum, based on practical experience.

30. Many local boards have achieved significant results with their local transport projects, but transport infrastructure is inherently costly and costs tend not to vary according to location. For example, a footbridge and walking path in Pukekohe will tend to cost the same as a comparable one in Glenfield.

31. In considering the distribution methodology for the extended fund, Auckland Transport has put forward the following factors as being relevant:

· the cost of building transport infrastructure is not directly related to the size of the population it serves

· mature areas with high populations tend to already have higher quality and better developed transport infrastructure

· the existing Auckland Transport/NZTA criteria for regional transport spending tend to favour, as would be expected, areas of high density and growth

· the physical size of an area tends to have a correlation with the need for transport infrastructure e.g. the number of settlements, town centres.

32. A distribution model based on a split of fixed and variable costs has also been modelled as an option. The methodology involves fifty per cent of the entire quantum of funding being distributed by an even split (with the exception of Great Barrier and Waiheke Island Boards which receive 1/3 and 2/3 of a single share respectively), thus giving all other local boards the same level of core funding. The other fifty per cent of the funding would be distributed according to the Local Boards Funding Policy.

33. We have modelled (Appendix C) the option of applying this fixed/variable costs model to the distribution of the LTCF.

Assessing the options

34. Each of the three distribution models has elements to recommend it and others that detract from it. In assessing the models, staff applied the following assessment criteria:

· transparency and ease of understanding for communities and stakeholders

· equity and fairness of outcomes across the region

· ensuring delivery of good local transport outcomes

· recognising the role of local boards as leaders of place shaping with their communities.

35. Staff assessment of the options against these criteria is set out below.

Options 1a and 1b – population based distribution

36. These options have been modelled on 2017 Statistics New Zealand population estimates.

37. A pure population based approach has the benefits of being objective, transparent and straightforward and means that funding received is proportionate to the number of ratepayers. It was, however, recognised at the time that this approach applied to areas of extremely low population (Waiheke and Great Barrier Islands) would result in those boards receiving insufficient funding to achieve anything practical, hence the application of the one and two per cent formula for the island boards. A similar approach is also used in the Local Boards Funding Policy.

38. The limitations of this approach are that it does not address either the level of need in a given local board area, or the underlying cost drivers of transport infrastructure. Hence, large areas of low population density with significant roading networks and multiple population centres are funded at the same, or lower, level as smaller urban communities of interest with already well-developed transport infrastructure, but higher population density.

39. The distribution methodology is simple and transparent and easy for communities and stakeholders to understand. In terms of delivering equity and fairness, this model delivers the widest differential of funding levels across boards, with the highest funded board receiving 2.78 times the amount of the lowest funded board (excluding the island boards).

40. Option 1a also results in six boards receiving less than Auckland Transport’s benchmark identified as desirable for supporting good local transport outcomes in communities. The model limits the potential for those boards to actively implement their role as local place shapers and to leverage additional investment into their projects. This model, and therefore Options 1a and 1b, is not supported by either Auckland Council or Auckland Transport staff.

Options 2a and 2b – Local Boards Funding Policy based distribution

41. This distribution method involves application of the current Local Boards Funding Policy. The policy is currently applied to distribution of funding for local activities (including local capex) to local boards and is based on the following factors: ninety per cent population^{^[4]}, five percent deprivation^{^[5]}and five per cent land area^{^[6]}^.

42. Applying the Local Boards Funding Policy is a simple methodology that has a clear rationale, is easily described to the community and is consistent with council’s wider approach to funding local boards. It takes account of multiple factors, delivering a more equitable distribution of funding, especially to boards with lower populations but very large land areas and roading networks.

43. Reviewing the projects that have been funded from the LTCF to date, it is clear that much of the local boards’ focus has been on “people centred” transport projects, for example pedestrian safety improvements, walkways and cycleways, footpaths and streetscape improvements. This is consistent with the principles underpinning the Local Boards Funding Policy i.e. that population is the key driver of need for the funding, but that geography and deprivation also need to be taken into account.

44. This distribution methodology evens out the increase in funding across the twenty one boards. The boards with a larger land area receive more funding than under the pure population model, and all boards receive the proposed level of baseline funding, but only under the $10 million quantum increase.

45. Under this model, however, the level of funding that accrues to the more populous boards becomes very substantial in relationship to that for the smaller boards, due to the compounding impact of the distribution model. For example, the Howick Local Board would receive over $1.7 million and Henderson-Massey over $1.4 million. Despite these extremes, this option provides an arguably more equitable and nuanced distribution of funding, as well as being consistent with current funding policy.

46. Its variation between the lowest and highest level of funding is still high with the highest funded board receiving 2.57 times the amount of the lowest funded board. Under Option 2a, five boards still receive less than Auckland Transport’s desirable benchmark for delivering good local transport outcomes in communities and it limits the potential for those boards to actively implement their role as local place shapers.

47. This is the preferred option on the basis of consistency with the existing funding policy, assessment against the criteria and recognition of the population focus of projects delivered using this fund. The preferred option is for the $10 million quantum as better providing for good local transport outcomes and delivering local place shaping.

Options 3a and 3b – fixed and variable cost distribution

48. This model is more complex and less transparent to communities and stakeholders than the other models. The identification of the benchmark figure is based on Auckland Transport’s experience of administering the fund over the past five years and the learning that has been gained from this, rather than in-depth financial analysis of infrastructure costs.

49. The results of this distribution are similar to those of applying the Local Boards Funding Policy, in that a similar number of local boards benefit under each model. However, it is different local boards that benefit from each model. In terms of equity and fairness, this model reduces the difference between the highest funded and lowest funded boards and also brings all boards above the $650,000 benchmark, even under Option 3a ($6m increase).

50. The model reduces the impact of population on the distribution of funding, however, which is a core component of current funding policy and the focus of the projects delivered using the LTCF. The model performs well against the criteria of enabling the delivery of good local transport outcomes and supporting the role of local boards as place shapers.

Summary of assessment of options

51. Of the three distribution models assessed, the current model of pure population distribution performed the poorest and is not recommended by either Auckland Council or Auckland Transport staff.

52. The other two models deliver mixed results against the criteria. On balance, staff recommend that the Local Boards Funding Policy distribution best meets the criteria and is consistent with current funding policy. The final recommendation to the governing body will also be informed by feedback from local boards through this process.

Administration of the LTCF

53. When the LTCF was established in 2012, it was recognised that there would be an impact on Auckland Transport as the fund administrator. While design costs are capitalised within the cost of a specific project, there are also additional costs in developing options, undertaking feasibility studies, assessing proposals and general administration.

54. It was noted at the time that if each local board proposed 3-4 projects a year that this could place a considerable burden on Auckland Transport and it was recommended that this be reviewed at the time the fund was reviewed. Given the proposed increase to the size of the fund, this issue needs to be revisited.

55. Auckland Transport’s advice on LTCF investment focusses on whether a project put forward by a local board is technically feasible, and whether it is realistic in light of the available funding from the LTCF. During the governance framework review some local board members raised concerns about the nature and quality of advice received from Auckland Transport in relation to LTCF proposals. Boards felt that advice was limited to assessing their proposal against criteria, rather than helping them identify and develop high quality proposals.

56. It is recommended that Auckland Transport be allocated additional opex funding in support of the LTCF to be used to develop a more systematic and responsive work programme with local boards around the application of the LTCF. This will include supporting boards to investigate and develop options for projects for consideration. A sum of $500,000 per annum is recommended to support this deliverable.

Ngā whakaaweawe ā-rohe me ngā tirohanga a te poari ā-rohe /
Local impacts and local board views

57. Workshops have been held with every local board and a range of initial feedback has been received. Discussion on collective views has also taken place at the Local Board Chairs’ Forum. While some local boards have given early indication of their preferred options, others have reserved the right to engage in further consideration ahead of providing formal feedback.

58. There was general support for an increase to the fund and for additional funding to be provided to Auckland Transport to provide advice on projects and mixed views on options for allocating the fund. As noted in the assessment of options, each of the options for the amount of increase and the distribution methodology affects individual boards differently.

59. Growth was raised by some boards as a factor that should be considered. Staff’s view is that the population element of each of the models addresses this as current population is the only reliable indicator of growth. Population estimates are updated and will be applied to the fund annually.

60. As noted in the assessment of options, each of the options for the amount of increase and the distribution methodology affects individual boards differently. A recent presentation to the Local Board Chairs’ Forum noted that it would be helpful for the Governing Body to have a clear preference signalled by the majority of local boards, in order to facilitate its decision making.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori / Māori impact statement

61. A move away from a pure population based distribution model would take into account other factors, being deprivation and land area. Both options 2 and 3 include a deprivation component, although this is greater in option 2. This would have some positive impact on local board areas where there is a higher Māori population.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea / Financial implications

62. The source of the additional funding is not addressed in this report, as it is being considered through the overall budget setting process in the 10-year budget. Essentially, however, there are two options that the governing body will need to consider – that additional funding comes from rates and/or borrowing, or Auckland Transport reprioritises within its existing funding envelope.

63. The proposed size of the increase to the fund (both options) is not significant enough within the overall transport budget to be able to enable transparent trade-offs at a detailed level e.g. which specific transport projects might not be funded in the Regional Land Transport Plan in a given year if the LTCF is increased.

Ngā raru tūpono / Risks

64. No significant risks have been identified.

Ngā koringa ā-muri / Next steps

65. Final decisions will be made by the Governing Body as part of the 10-year budget process in May. Any new funding and change to the distribution methodology will be applied from 1 July 2018.

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Population based distribution modelling	85
b ⇩	Local boards funding policy distribution modelling	87
c ⇩	Fixed and variable costs distribution modelling	89

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Author

Linda Taylor - Programme Manager Governance Framework Review

Authorisers

Louise Mason - GM Local Board Services

Phil Wilson - Governance Director

Waiheke Local Board

26 April 2018

Options for preparing a reserve management plan for Rangihoua/Onetangi Sports Park

File No.: CP2018/04745

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1. To present options for preparing a reserve management plan for Rangihoua Reserve and Onetangi Sports Park.

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2. In December 2017, the Minister of Conservation requested that a management plan be prepared for Rangihoua Reserve.

3. Of the four options presented for preparing a reserve management plan for Rangihoua Reserve and Onetangi Sports Park, it is recommended that the Waiheke Local Board prepare a standalone reserve management plan at the same time that an omnibus reserve management plan is prepared for all local parks on Waiheke Island.

4. This option fulfils the Minister’s request and would allow the local board to strategically plan for park visitor, community, play, activation, sport and recreation opportunities across the island. The approach also provides the opportunity to decouple the two plans if more time is required to test scenarios for Rangihoua Reserve and Onetangi Sports Park or if more consultation is required on a specific issue.

5. It is anticipated that work would begin on the development of the plans in mid-May. The first round of public engagement is currently programmed for August/September 2018.

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendations

That the Waiheke Local Board:

a) agree to the preparation of an individual reserve management plan for Rangihoua Reserve and Onetangi Sports Park at the same time that an omnibus open space management plan is developed for all local parks on Waiheke.

b) allocate $80,000 in 2018/19 to prepare an individual reserve management plan for Rangihoua Reserve and Onetangi Sports Park and an open space management plan covering all other local parks in the Waiheke Local Board area from the Locally Driven Initiatives operational expenditure budget.

Horopaki / Context

6. Rangihoua Reserve and adjoining Onetangi Sports Park are a 110 hectare local park in two 55 hectare blocks. Rangihoua Reserve is held under the Reserves Act 1977 and classified as a recreation reserve. Onetangi Sports Park is held in fee simple by Auckland Council and not subject to the Reserves Act.

7. The two blocks are managed as a single local park for which the Waiheke Local Board has allocated management responsibility, with the exception of the Rangihoua Maunga which is to be managed by the proposed Rangihoua and Tāwaipareira Kaitiaki Management Committee.

8. Under s 41 of the Reserves Act, a reserve management plan for Rangihoua Reserve is required. Auckland City Council prepared a draft management plan for Onetangi Sports Park and Rangihoua Reserve in 1995. However, the plan was never adopted.

9. Following the discontinuation of the judicial review proceedings brought by the Hauraki Gulf Enhancement Society against Auckland Council and others, in relation to a lease to the Waiheke Golf Club over part of Rangihoua Reserve, the Minister of Conservation has set out her expectation that Auckland Council will comply with the requirement to prepare a reserve management plan for Rangihoua Reserve.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu / Analysis and advice

10. Auckland Council supports the Minister’s request to prepare a reserve management plan for Rangihoua Recreation Reserve.

11. Staff have identified four approaches to prepare a management plan for Rangihoua Reserve and Onetangi Sports Park, recognising that the two blocks of land are managed as a single park. A reserve management plan is not required for Onetangi Sports Park. However, including the two blocks in the same plan would provide management direction for both parks and would become the local board’s policy for management of Onetangi Sports Park.

12. A separate decision would have to be made by the Rangihoua and Tāwaipareira Kaitiaki Management Committee as to whether Rangihoua Maunga is included in any of the options (further discussed in paragraph 24).

Management planning options

13. The four options identified are described as:

· Option 1 - Standalone management plan for Rangihoua Reserve and Onetangi Sports Park

· Option 2 – Incorporate Rangihoua Reserve and Onetangi Sports Park in an open space management plan covering all local parks in the Waiheke Local Board area (omnibus plan)

· Option 3 – Concurrent development of a management plan for Rangihoua Reserve and Onetangi Sports Park, and Waiheke omnibus plan

· Option 4 - Incorporate Rangihoua Reserve and Onetangi Sports Park into Whakanewha Regional Park thereby transferring management to the Governing Body who would develop a variation to the Regional Parks Management Plan

14. An assessment of the options is outlined in attachment 1. All options would need to be supported by baseline environmental assessment and cultural values assessment. The costs of these reports are included in the indicative costs.

15. Due to the complex history, range of uses, sensitivities and specific future aspirations for the land and the need for a largely bespoke management framework, it is recommended that the local board proceeds with Option 3. This option includes preparation of an individual management plan for Rangihoua Reserve and Onetangi Sports Park at the same time as an omnibus open space management plan is developed for all other local parks on Waiheke Island.

16. Developing the two plans concurrently will allow the community to take a holistic look at the open space issues on the island and it will provide the flexibility to decouple the two projects if extra time is required to look at specific issues in depth.

17. Additionally, there are cost savings which can be realised by running the two reserve management plan projects at the same time. These include community engagement, public notices and hearings.

Decision-making on the management plan

18. The Reserves Act 1977 provides for a hearing process as part of the decision-making for the management plan. The hearing is a formal forum for the consideration of public input into the management plan.

19. The hearing is convened by commissioners who consider all submissions and make a recommendation to the local board to help them with their decision-making on the management plan. The commissioners can be either local board members or independent commissioners from Auckland Council’s pool of commissioners or a combination of both.

20. For complex plans with a high level of public interest like Rangihoua Reserve and Onetangi Sports Park, the appointment of a panel of independent planning commissioners is recommended as the most appropriate approach to decision making. This would allow the local board to receive independent advice which would reduce the potential for perceived bias or pre-determination of the outcome of the management planning process.

Rangihoua and Tāwaipareira management committee

21. At its November 2017 meeting the Waiheke Local Board resolved to establish a Rangihoua and Tāwaipareira management committee (Resolution Number WHK/201/195).

22. The committee consists of three representatives of Ngāti Paoa and three Waiheke Local Board representatives.

23. The purpose of the Rangihoua and Tāwaipareira management committee is to ensure that management and activities that may affect the Rangihoua Maunga are managed in accordance with Ngāti Paoa tikanga.

24. The committee has not yet met. When the committee meets, staff will seek their views on how they want to develop a management plan for Rangihoua Maunga and Tāwaipareira Reserve and whether they wish to include Rangihoua Maunga in the management plan for Rangihoua Reserve and Onetangi Sports Park (the park management plan).

25. Options for management planning for Rangihoua Maunga would be to:

· Include specific policies for the management of Rangihoua Maunga in the park management plan

· Prepare a separate chapter for Rangihoua Maunga in the park management plan

· Prepare a separate reserve management plan for Rangihoua Maunga and Tāwaipareira Reserve.

26. All these options allow the Maunga to be clearly addressed and for the committee to ensure management and activities are in accordance with Ngāti Paoa tikanga.

27. If Rangihoua Maunga was included in the Rangihoua Reserve and Onetangi Sports Park management plan there would be no additional costs. The costs to prepare a standalone management plan for Rangihoua Maunga would be around $70,000.

28. Once the Rangihoua and Tāwaipareira management committee have met and confirmed an approach it will be reported to the local board. Any decisions that impact on this report’s recommendations will be incorporated into the programme.

29. If the local board recommended that Rangihoua Reserve and Onetangi Sports Park be incorporated into Whakanewha Regional Park, the management committee will have to be re-established by the Environment and Community Committee.

Ngā whakaaweawe ā-rohe me ngā tirohanga a te poari ā-rohe /
Local impacts and local board views

30. At a workshop in February 2018, the local board identified the following:

· Rangihoua/Onetangi Sports Park should be addressed clearly in any management plan process

· The local board are keen to resolve the management plan this electoral term

· The local board want to provide the community with certainty about the future uses of the park

· The local board want to provide certainty for the existing groups and clubs using the park.

31. The Waiheke Local Board Plan 2017 identifies the following in relation to Rangihoua/ Onetangi Sports Park:

· continue to improve facilities at Rangihoua/ Onetangi Sports Park. The reserve caters for outdoor recreational uses, including team sports, tennis, mountain biking and golf. It also has culturally significant areas, wetlands and regeneration areas, and public access ways.

· a key initiative is to reconvene the Rangihoua Tāwaipareira management subcommittee.

32. In 2013, a regional review of the decision making allocation for parks was undertaken. At the time it was proposed to include the bush part of Rangihoua/Onetangi Sports Park as part of Whakanewha Regional Park for administration and management by Regional Parks. At that time the Waiheke Local Board strongly opposed the proposal for the following reasons:

· retention of local decision making

· the two parks are separated by a road, not contiguous with a regional park as per the criteria

· Rangihoua/Onetangi has a role as a sports park which is inconsistent with the role of Whakanewha, which is a natural park

· pest and weed control regimes are different for the parks.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori / Māori impact statement

33. Mana whenua and mātāwaka will be consulted as part of the development of the management plan and reserve management plan.

34. The Waiheke Local Board Plan 2017 acknowledges the importance of our natural environment to Māori and will work with mana whenua and mātāwaka to achieve our combined environmental aspirations.

35. The plan also acknowledges Waiheke’s rich Māori and European history and significant archaeological and heritage features, including pā and wāhi tapu sites. The board has indicated that they will work with mana whenua and mātāwaka and government agencies to ensure these sites are protected.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea / Financial implications

36. The costs for each of the approaches to preparing a management plan is outlined below:

Management Tool	Indicative cost	Funding source
37.		2017/18	2018/19	2019/20
38. OPTION 1 39. Management plan for Rangihoua/ Onetangi Sports Park	$90,000		Locally driven initiatives funding $80,000	Locally driven initiatives funding $10,000
40. OPTION 2 41. Waiheke Local Board open space management plan (omnibus) 42.	$120,000	Service and Strategy Integration operational expenditure $20,000	Locally driven initiatives funding $80,000	Locally driven initiatives funding $20,000
43. OPTION 3 44. Concurrent development of a management plan for Rangihoua/ Onetangi Sports Park and Waiheke Island	$150,000	Service and Strategy Integration operational expenditure $20,000	Locally driven initiatives funding $80,000	Locally driven initiatives funding $50,000
45. OPTION 4 46. Incorporate Rangihoua/ Onetangi Sports Park into Whakanewha Regional Park		The Governing Body would be responsible for funding and preparing a variation to the Regional Parks Management Plan.

Ngā raru tūpono / Risks

47. In the past there has been significant interest in the appropriate use of Rangihoua Reserve. This has included a discontinued judicial review of a decision to grant a lease to the Waiheke Golf Club Inc.

48. In the course of preparing the reserve management plan, there may be further significant interest or dispute over these issues which may require an extension to the programme timeframe to complete the work. This could be mitigated by undertaking community engagement beyond what is required in the Reserves Act 1977.

49. The management plan process may generate some uncertainty for existing leaseholders, particularly if there are alternative uses suggested for their sites. The Reserves Act 1977 does not provide certainty that existing leases will continue beyond their current rights.

50. Rangihoua and Tāwaipareira management committee has yet to meet. If they have not met and had the opportunity to advise their preferred approach to the development of a management plan by July 2018, the programme timeframes may need to be adjusted to enable that process to be completed.

Ngā koringa ā-muri / Next steps

51. If the local board approve the recommended approach and the required investment, staff will start designing a public engagement process to develop an open space management plan for Waiheke and Rangihoua/Onetangi Sports Park. An indicative timeline is outlined below, this timeline assumes that the Rangihoua and Tāwaipareira management committee have met and identified their preferred approach for Rangihoua Maunga before July 2018.

Phase	Approximate time
Discovery and project initiation	May to July 2018
Public engagement	August to September 2018
Analyse feedback and develop draft plans	October 2018 to January 2019
Draft plan consultation	February to April 2019
Hearings and deliberations	May to July 2019
Adopt open space management plans	August 2019

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Reserve management plan options analysis	97

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Author

Shyrel Burt - Service and Asset Planning Specialist

Authorisers

Mace Ward - General Manager Parks, Sports and Recreation

Helgard Wagener - Relationship Manager Great Barrier and Waiheke Local Boards

Waiheke Local Board

26 April 2018

Waiheke Arts and Culture Needs Assessment

File No.: CP2018/00323

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1. To present the findings of the Waiheke arts and culture needs assessment.

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2. On 25 May 2017 the Waiheke Local Board approved the Arts, Community and Events 2017/2018 work programme (WHK/2017/67) which included $15,000 for an arts and culture needs assessment to be conducted on Waiheke Island. The needs assessment is attached to this report (Attachment A).

3. The findings of the needs assessment were presented at a local board workshop on 1 March 2018 and are reported under four key themes:

· Physical infrastructure to support arts and culture on the island: Facilities at the Artworks Precinct are not fit-for-purpose and the courtyard is underutilised, alternative community facilities on the island are at capacity and/or unsuitable for arts activity.

· The role and purpose of the Artworks Precinct: The Precinct has the potential to become the arts and cultural hub for the island but requires an integrated approach, improved signage and greater links to arts activity taking place elsewhere.

· Constraints and resourcing of arts and culture on the island: Waiheke’s island location presents challenges for resourcing and accessing arts and cultural activity.

· Vision for arts and culture on the island: Stronger leadership is required to support and develop the island’s creative sector, there are opportunities for increased collaboration within the arts community and to leverage off existing events and tourism.

4. Potential responses to the findings are provided in section four of the needs assessment and a summary is provided in section 1.4.

Te tūtohunga / Recommendation

That the Waiheke Local Board:

a) receive the report and findings of the Waiheke arts and culture needs assessment dated 26 March 2018.

Horopaki / Context

5. On 25 May 2017 the Waiheke Local Board approved the Arts, Community and Events 2017/2018 work programme (WHK/2017/67) which included $15,000 for an arts and culture needs assessment to be conducted on Waiheke Island.

6. The purpose of the needs assessment was to identify the arts needs of communities on Waiheke for the short, medium and long-term and to provide the local board with potential responses to address them. The needs assessment is intended to be used as a strategic planning tool for the local board to guide prioritisation and support the provision of arts and culture in the area.

7. The primary driver for the needs assessment was to identify the degree to which existing arts infrastructure, particularly at the Artworks Precinct, are able to support the delivery of arts programming and services on the island. Investigating the capability of the Precinct to meet current and future needs would provide the local board with direction on how best to support the site going forward.

8. Other drivers include:

· Waiheke’s island location and related barriers and opportunities

· the growth in visitor numbers to the island

· arts related outcomes and initiatives identified in the Waiheke Local Board Plan 2017.

9. The project brief and scope for the arts and culture needs assessment was presented for feedback at a workshop with staff and the local board on 13 July 2017 (provided as Appendix 1 in Attachment A).

10. An expression of interest (EOI) process was conducted and Janis McArdle was selected as the preferred contractor to conduct the assessment. The contractor commenced the research and development of the arts and culture needs assessment in October 2017.

11. The contractor presented the initial findings of the arts and culture needs assessment at a local board workshop on 8 February 2018. The draft report was also presented for feedback at a workshop with staff and the local board on 1 March 2018.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu / Analysis and advice

12. The research methodology for the Waiheke arts and culture needs assessment included:

· desktop research, to develop a profile of Waiheke and its community, and analyse the strategic context for the report

· community engagement, to understand barriers and enablers to arts delivery and participation on the island, and perceived needs

· key informant interviews, to identify specific issues and opportunities associated with the Artworks Precinct

· workshops with the Waiheke Local Board and Auckland Council staff to discuss the research findings and recommended responses.

13. The full research methodology including research limitations are detailed in section 3 of the needs assessment (Attachment A).

14. Themes identified in the needs assessment, along with opportunities, issues and recommendations relating to them are summarised in the table below.

Theme

Opportunities and issues

High-level recommendations

Physical infrastructure to support arts and culture

- Infrastructure at the Artworks Precinct is not fit-for-purpose and is unable to meet the needs of current and future users.

- The size of the current buildings are causing storage issues and limiting levels of provision.

- Other community facilities on the island are at capacity and/or unsuitable for delivering the arts programmes required by the community.

- Any redevelopment of the Precinct needs to be achieved in a way that is consistent with the character of the island.

- The Artworks Precinct courtyard is underutilised due to issues with the physical space, and its potential as a site for community events and activity is not being maximised.

- Support a community-led redevelopment project for the Artworks Precinct site.

- Invest in enhancing the physical space of the courtyard.

- Support a coordinated programme of activities and an improved booking system to activate the courtyard space.

- Investigate alternative storage solutions.

Role and purpose of the Artworks Precinct

- The Artworks Precinct is perceived to provide positive community outcomes.

- The identity of the Precinct site could be strengthened to better reflect the character of Waiheke.

- There’s an opportunity for the Precinct to become an arts and cultural hub for the island and link more strongly to arts activity happening elsewhere.

- The Precinct is well located but the potential of the site as a primary visitor destination is not being realised.

- There is a perceived gap in the provision of arts education and training, particularly for youth.

- Develop the identity of the Artworks Precinct as the island’s arts and cultural hub, and take an integrated approach to promoting the precinct and wider island’s arts and culture activity.

- Support connections between facilities to develop a creative hub.

- Improve signage at the Precinct to better communicate what’s on offer at each facility and more widely across the island, with both the local and visitor experience in mind.

Resources and constraints

- Auckland Council was seen as having the potential to enable positive change by increasing levels of funding and streamlining processes.

- Costs associated with bringing productions and exhibitions to the island, and the quality of existing facilities, limits the amount of work being presented on the island from elsewhere and opportunities for collaboration within the wider sector.

- Arts services and programmes that are not provided at a local level are difficult for Waiheke residents to access due to distance and transportation issues.

- The combined potential of the Waiheke arts community is not being fully realised.

- Local board advocacy for mechanisms to deliver increased public funding for arts and culture on the island.

- Support community-wide initiatives that engage arts practitioners in collaborative activities and events.

- Assist the network of privately owned art studios and performance venues to promote their locations.

Vision for arts and culture

- There is a consistent vision and shared language for arts and culture on the island.

- Formal leadership is needed within the arts community to drive new initiatives and help develop a stronger and more sustainable sector.

- There is strong potential for coordinated programming and integrated arts and culture experiences on the island.

- There are opportunities for the arts to better leverage off the existing tourism market of Waiheke, and link with other local organisations, businesses and networks.

- Invest in an integrated response plan to prioritise the implementation of the findings and recommendations of the arts and culture needs assessment.

- Implement initiatives to support the development of the arts sector, and increase collaboration between the island’s arts practitioners and groups.

- Leverage off existing regional events, tourism and business opportunities to promote arts and artists on Waiheke.

Ngā whakaaweawe ā-rohe me ngā tirohanga a te poari ā-rohe /
Local impacts and local board views

15. The needs assessment aligns with the following local board plan outcomes:

· thriving, strong and engaged communities: stating that the board will carry out a needs assessment to inform any future developments of the Artworks complex

· vibrant places for people: where the board commits to supporting the development and upgrading of the Artworks site as an arts and cultural precinct with guidance from a needs assessment.

16. Implementation of the recommendations identified in the needs assessment will also assist the local board to achieve initiatives identified in their local board plan.

17. On 1 March 2018 staff discussed the findings of the needs assessment and the potential response options with the Waiheke Local Board. During this workshop high-level funding implications and potential next steps were discussed.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori / Māori impact statement

18. Residents identifying as Māori participated in the survey component of the needs assessment and their feedback has been considered in the development of the needs assessment report.

19. As part of the community engagement phase of the assessment, a hui was held on the Piritahi Marae to facilitate Māori engagement. A Māori representative of the marae was also consulted during the assessment.

20. The 2013 census showed that 11.4 per cent of the Waiheke population identified as Māori. The potential responses identified in the needs assessment may have a positive impact on Māori, as part of the wider Waiheke community.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea / Financial implications

21. There are no financial implications associated with receiving the Waiheke arts and culture needs assessment.

22. If the potential responses identified in the assessment are implemented some actions would require opex or capex funding which the local board could decide to allocate from existing or future budgets.

Ngā raru tūpono / Risks

23. There is a risk that consultation and the needs assessment report may raise public expectation which may not be able to be met due to resources.

24. To mitigate this risk future public communication will outline prioritisation and constraints.

Ngā koringa ā-muri / Next steps

25. Section four of the needs assessment provides potential responses to address the findings of the research. The next suggested step in the report is for an integrated response programme to be developed to prioritise and implement the findings and recommendations of the assessment based on costs, feasibility and available resources.

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Waiheke Arts & Culture Needs Assessment	105

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Author

Philippa Wilkinson - Arts & Culture Advisor

Authorisers

Graham Bodman - General Manager Arts, Community and Events

Helgard Wagener - Relationship Manager Great Barrier and Waiheke Local Boards

Waiheke Local Board

26 April 2018

Local Māori Responsiveness Projects – Waiheke Island 2018

File No.: CP2018/03489

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1. To approve grants from the 2017/2018 Local Māori Responsiveness budget for community-led projects.

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2. The Waiheke Local Board have $12,000 remaining in the Local Māori Responsiveness budget within their 2017/2018 work programme to respond to aspirations and priorities for Māori in the area.

3. Staff have liaised with mana whenua and mataawaka to scope Waiheke community-led projects that align with the 2017/2018 work programme for Local Māori Responsiveness.

4. There are two options for the local board to consider:

· E Tipu e Rea, a kaupapa Māori mentoring project that pairs 20 rangatahi with 20 established Māori artists, to develop rangatahi skills and identity, and enable rangatahi participation in the 2018 Matariki exhibition at Waiheke Community Art Gallery - Te Whare Taonga.

· Maumaraha Flames, a free community event at Matiatia to mark the close of Matariki 2018 in a celebration of remembrance.

5. It is recommended the board approve a grant of $5000 for E Tipu e Rea to Waiheke Art Gallery, which will act as umbrella for the project.

6. It is recommended the board approve a grant of $2000 for Maumahara Flames to Tamaki Makaurau Matariki Festival Trust.

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendations

That the Waiheke Local Board:

a) approve a grant of $5000 from the 2017/2018 Local Māori Responsiveness budget to support E Tipu e Rea, a mentoring project that pairs rangatahi from Waiheke High School with Māori artists to develop skills and identity.

b) approve a grant of $2500 from the 2017/2018 Local Māori Responsiveness budget to support Maumahara Flames, a community project to mark the closing of Matariki 2018 by igniting flames of remembrance at the Matiatia headlands.

Horopaki / Context

7. The local board budgeted a total of $15,000 within their 2017/2018 work programme for Local Māori Responsiveness, to engage with mana whenua and mataawaka, to support Māori aspirations and priorities, and build strong relationships with Māori in the local area.

8. To date, the local board has granted $3000 to Piritahi Marae for Waitangi Day celebrations, leaving $12,000 available.

9. Following staff engagement with mana whenua and local Māori organisations, two upcoming local projects have been identified that align with Local Māori Responsiveness: E Tipu E Rea and Maumahara Flames.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu / Analysis and advice

E Tipu e Rea

10. E Tipu e Rea aims to provide mentoring to rangatahi to develop their skills and identity, leading to improved educational and career opportunities. E Tipu e Rea is a three-year project occurring in the led up to the annual Matariki celebrations in June and July.

11. The project’s name ‘E Tipu e Rea’ is part of a widely used pepeha (proverb) written by Āpirana Ngata in 1949 to inspire Māori youth - ‘grow up, tender plant, to fulfill the needs of your world.’

12. The project’s kaupapa or philosophy is: Mā te tuakana te teina e tōtika, Mā te teina te tuakana e tōtika – which translates as ‘the older will lead the younger and the younger will lead the older’.

13. E Tipu e Rea pairs 20 rangatahi from Waiheke High School (or recent graduates) with 20 established Māori artists in a mentoring relationship. Participants may be non- Māori but their work must align with the project’s kaupapa.

14. The project is a collaboration between local Māori artists, Waiheke High School and Waiheke Community Art Gallery - Te Whare Taonga. It is led by Māori artists, Jeanine Clarkin and Anton Forde, who have worked with the Waiheke Community Art Gallery over the last nine years to develop and curate the Matariki exhibition.

15. Rangatahi participants will be selected by Waiheke High School. There will be an application process, however teachers will use discretion to ensure inclusivity. Mentors will be approached and selected by the project lead team.

16. E Tipu e Rea will run parallel with the annual Matariki exhibition at Waiheke Community Art Gallery - Te Whare Taonga. The theme of the Matariki exhibition 2018 is ‘looking to the future’. The costs of curating and staging the Matariki exhibition are separate to this project.

17. Mentors will provide advice and guidance to rangatahi as they develop an artwork for the Matariki exhibition. Mentor meetings include an initial group hui to whakawhanāunga, build relationships, by introducing the project and participants, followed by individual face-to-face or Skype mentoring sessions.

18. Rangatahi will have the opportunity to visit the Auckland Art Gallery -Toi o Tāmaki, to learn about the works of contemporary Māori artists.

19. Rangatahi are also expected to provide some support to tamariki at Waiheke’s primary schools and early childhood centres with their Matariki pieces for the exhibition.

20. The project will benefit rangatahi by enabling them to develop their artistic skills, leadership and cultural identity in a kaupapa Māori context, with support and guidance from established Māori artists.

21. The arts are recognised for their important role in Waiheke’s culture and economy. The project will enhance Māori participation in the arts and is intended to provide pathways for Māori youth to access tertiary study and employment in the arts and related fields.

Maumahara Flames

22. Maumahara Flames is a community project to commemorate the closing of Matariki on Sunday 22 July 2018 at 6.45pm.

23. The Maumahara Flames project is led by George Kahi and the Tamaki Makaurau Matariki Festival Trust, in conjunction with Waiheke choirs and the Waiheke Dirt Track.

24. For Māori, maumahara or remembrance is an essential aspect of Matariki, which was traditionally a time for remembrance, reflection and celebrating new life.

25. The Waiheke community will be invited to Matiatia to participate in the free event on Sunday 22 July 2018 to commemorate tupuna (ancestors) and whānau who have passed away during the year

26. During the event, two flames symbolising remembrance will be ignited on the historic pā sites at the two headlands of Matiatia Bay (see Attachment A).

27. Two gas-burner flames, like those used at Super-Rugby games, will be supplied by LIVEFX. A crowd-funded fireworks display is also planned with the assistance of Waiheke Dirt Track. Both the flames and fireworks will be overseen by pyrotechnics experts and Waiheke Fire Service.

28. At the conclusion to the event, Waiheke choirs and the wider community will be invited to sing ‘E pari Ra’, a waiata composed in 1918 by Paraire Tomoana to commemorate soldiers lost during the First World War. Waiheke choirs are currently practicing the waiata in preparation for the event.

Ngā whakaaweawe ā-rohe me ngā tirohanga a te poari ā-rohe /
Local impacts and local board views

29. The Waiheke Local Board Plan 2017 Outcome 4 is thriving, strong and engaged communities. The plan states:

We are aware of the important role arts and culture plays in creating a sense of identity and cohesion. We will use our community grants and partnerships to encourage community-led activities. Events also play an important part in promoting our identity and growing community spirit.

30. Both E Tipu E Rea and Maumahara Flames help to meet this outcome by taking an empowered communities approach to supporting Māori-led initiatives and events.

31. Both projects were introduced by community members at the local board public forum on 22 February 2018.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori / Māori impact statement

32. The projects outlined in this report are led by local Māori with the goal of enhancing Māori identity and cultural values. The projects align with the board’s commitment to supporting Māori aspirations and initiatives.

33. E Tipu E Rea aims to achieve positive outcomes for rangatahi Māori by supporting their development through a kaupapa Māori mentoring programme and through participation in the Matariki Exhibition at Waiheke Art Gallery.

34. Maumahara Flames aims to involve the wider Waiheke community in the commemorative kaupapa of Matariki, where the community remembers tupuna and whānau who have passed in the previous year.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea / Financial implications

35. E Tipu e Rea budget:

Item	Cost
Coordinator costs 24 hours at $25 per hour	$600
Mentors – koha for participating artists 20 mentors at $100 each	$2000
Return ferry fares for 10 off-island artists to travel to two mentoring meetings	$800
Return ferry fares for 20 rangatahi and 4 adult helpers to travel to Auckland Art Gallery (value $800 sponsored by Fullers)	$0
Art materials contribution for 20 rangatahi at $50 each	$1000
Art materials contribution for 9 schools and early childhood centres at $50 per school	$450
Catering for mentor hui	$150
TOTAL	$5000

36. Maumahara Flames budget:

Item	Cost
Gas burner hire and associated pyrotechnic support (LIVEFX)	$2500
Fireworks and associated pyrotechnic support (value $9,500 to be community crowd-funded)	$0
Marketing and co-ordination (value $1,200 to be sought from Creative Communities grant)	$0
Travel (value $152 sponsored by Fullers)	$0
TOTAL	$2500

Ngā raru tūpono / Risks

37. E Tipu E Rea could be at risk from insufficient engagement from mentor and/or rangatahi participants. This risk is mitigated by appointing a project coordinator to oversee the mentor relationship, identifying mentors in advance of the project start date, and identifying rangatahi participants through existing networks at Waiheke High School.

38. Maumahara Flames involves consideration of the health and safety risk of igniting gas flames and fireworks during the event. This risk is mitigated by the community group contracting pyrotechnic support and obtaining support from Waiheke Fire Service for the event. If the cost of the fireworks display is unable to be met through crowd funding, a fireworks display will not be included in the event.

Ngā koringa ā-muri / Next steps

39. Staff will liaise with Waiheke Community Art Gallery - Te Whare Taonga and Tamaki Makaurau Matariki Festival Trust following consideration of this report.

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Maumahara Matariki Matiatia Map	159

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Author

Fiona Gregory – Strategic Broker

Authorisers

Graham Bodman - General Manager Arts, Community and Events

Helgard Wagener - Relationship Manager Great Barrier and Waiheke Local Boards

Waiheke Local Board

26 April 2018

Waiheke Youth Space Business Case Development 2018

File No.: CP2018/05615

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1. To approve a grant for the development of a business case and co-design process for a youth space on Waiheke Island.

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2. The board have $6,200 remaining in the Community and Social Economic Development budget available within their 2017/2018 work programme.

3. Staff have engaged with Waiheke community groups to scope projects that align with the outcomes of the 2017/2018 work programme for Community and Social Economic Development.

4. It is recommended that the board grant $6,200 to the Waiheke Youth Centre Trust for the development of a business case for a youth space on Waiheke Island.

5. The project will enable Waiheke’s youth network to explore best practice models for youth facilities, engage local youth stakeholders in a co-design approach, and develop an implementation plan for a youth space to support the needs of Waiheke youth.

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation

That the Waiheke Local Board:

a) approve a grant of $6,200 from the 2017/2018 Community and Social Economic Development budget to the Waiheke Youth Centre Trust for the development of a business case and facilitated co-design process for a Waiheke youth space.

Horopaki / Context

6. The local board allocated a total of $10,000 within their 2017/2018 work programme for Community and Social Economic Development. This budget is to support the facilitation of local community economic development through social enterprise and entrepreneurship, including creating opportunities to upskill local youth and residents, and creating sustainable social enterprises.

7. To date, the local board has granted $3,800 for training to upskill Waiheke-based contractors to meet the council’s health and safety requirements, leaving $6,200 remaining budget.

8. Staff have engaged with Waiheke community groups to scope projects that align with the outcomes of community and social economic development.

9. A Waiheke-based network of youth-focussed community groups propose to develop a youth space to support the needs of youth on Waiheke Island.

10. This report recommends that the remaining 2017/2018 Community and Social Economic Development budget go to the Waiheke Youth Centre Trust for the development of a business case and facilitated co-design process, in collaboration with Waiheke’s youth network, to support the successful design and implementation of a Waiheke youth space.

11. The community-led youth space would be utilised for youth-focussed workshops and training, creative programmes, youth enterprise development, meetings, study, rehearsal and recreation. Youth will be supported to actively contribute to programmes and activities, with the aim of increasing youth skills, community engagement, and sense of belonging.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu / Analysis and advice

12. Waiheke’s youth network will work collaboratively to develop a business plan and co-design process for the youth space.

13. The project will begin with a mini-conference of workshops at Surfdale Hall for stakeholders in the Waiheke youth space. Facilitators with experience in the design and management of youth facilities will be invited to present.

14. The programme will include best practice models and case studies of successful youth facilities in Auckland and will involve Waiheke youth stakeholders in a co-design approach to the youth space.

15. Following the conference, a business plan will be developed, outlining the process and resources required by the youth network to collaboratively implement and achieve the goals of the youth space.

16. The business case and co-design project will assist the youth network to develop their capacity and collaborative relationships to enable successful and sustainable implementation of the youth space.

17. The Waiheke Youth Centre Trust will lead the project in collaboration with the other youth-focussed community groups. The trust has a well-established track record of youth programming and collaboration in community projects. It is well-positioned to contract facilitators to support the youth network in developing and implementing a business case.

18. The trust currently manages ‘The Rock’, a youth centre adjacent to Surfdale Hall, providing social worker support for vulnerable youth, a free after-school programme and drop-in centre for 10 to 14-year olds, and a free multi-sports programme at Waiheke Recreation Centre that is open for all Waiheke youth to attend.

19. Waiheke’s youth network also includes the Waiheke Youth Music Trust, Waiheke High School, Piritahi Hau Ora, Friends of the Street and Waiheke Youth Voice.

Community Facility Network Plan

20. The Community Facility Network Plan (CFNP), a plan that details how the council aims to provide community facilities over the next 20 years, does not identify the creation of a youth space on Waiheke as a network priority.

21. If the council is to be a stakeholder in the creation of a youth space, the local board will have to fund associated work including pre-development, capital development, commissioning and ongoing operational costs. This is because priorities are already confirmed within the CFNP programme of work.

Proposed youth space location

22. A proposed option for the location of the youth space is the under-utilised Surfdale Hall. Repurposing of the hall would lead to an increase in the level of service currently provided by this facility and a change in the operating model. It is expected that repurposing the space will increase operating costs to the local board. This is due to more active relationship and performance management required by these changes.

Ngā whakaaweawe ā-rohe me ngā tirohanga a te poari ā-rohe /
Local impacts and local board views

23. A youth space aligns with the local board plan outcome: thriving, strong and engaged communities which strives to support youth-centred initiatives that build engagement, resiliency and transitions to adulthood, including a dedicated youth centre and recreation facilities.

24. The project was explored at a workshop with the local board on 5 April 2018.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori / Māori impact statement

25. Rangatahi Māori are key stakeholders in the proposed youth space, therefore local Māori participation in the co-design and business case development process will be sought.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea / Financial implications

26. Project Budget:

Item	Cost
Mini-conference facilitator fees, ferry travel, resources and catering	$5000
Business plan contractor fees	$1200
Total	$6200

27. The youth network will contribute coordination of the mini-conference and accommodation for presenters and facilitators.

Ngā raru tūpono / Risks

28. The development of a business case is low risk for the local board.

Ngā koringa ā-muri / Next steps

29. Staff will liaise with Waiheke Youth Centre Trust and Waiheke’s youth network following consideration of this report.

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Author

Fiona Gregory – Strategic Broker

Authorisers

Helgard Wagener - Relationship Manager Great Barrier and Waiheke Local Boards

Graham Bodman - General Manager Arts, Community and Events

Waiheke Local Board

26 April 2018

Waiheke Volunteers Day 2018

File No.: CP2018/05508

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1. To approve a grant of $1500 to Community Networks Waiheke to support delivery of the annual Volunteers Day celebration and to allocate $500 towards a memorial to acknowledge the outstanding community service of the late Ron Leonard.

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2. The Waiheke Local Board has $2000 within their 2017/2018 work programme to recognise and celebrate the contributions of residents to the local community.

3. In 2016/2017, the local board allocated $800 to a volunteer dinner provided by Community Networks Waiheke (previously known as WICOSS) and $1200 to an event celebrating Community Service Awards.

4. Community Networks Waiheke’s Volunteers Day dinner is an annual acknowledgement of volunteers for their service to the Waiheke community. Feedback from the 2017 event held at the Sustainability Centre suggested it would be more inclusive of a greater number and range of community volunteers if held at Piritahi Marae, as it has been previously, which requires an increased budget.

5. The Waiheke Local Board wishes to recognise the significant community service of Ron Leonard, who passed away on 6 March 2018. Ron Leonard provided an outstanding contribution to the Waiheke community as Chief Fire Officer of the Waiheke Volunteer Fire Brigade and in his professional roles with the Waiheke County Council, Auckland City Council and Auckland Council.

6. It is therefore recommended that $1500 be granted to Community Networks Waiheke to support the Waiheke Volunteer Dinner in July 2018 and $500 be allocated towards a memorial acknowledging Ron Leonard’s significant contribution to the Waiheke community.

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendations

That the Waiheke Local Board:

a) approve a grant of $1500 to Community Networks Waiheke to support delivery of the annual Volunteers Day celebration, from the 2017/2018 Volunteer Day/Community Service Award budget.

b) allocate $500 towards the cost of a memorial seat to publicly acknowledge the outstanding community service of the late Ron Leonard, from the 2017/2018 Volunteer Day /Community Service Award budget.

Horopaki / Context

7. The Waiheke Local Board has $2000 within their 2017/2018 work programme to recognise and celebrate the contributions of residents to the local community.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu / Analysis and advice

Volunteers Day Dinner

8. Community Networks Waiheke organises an annual Volunteers Day dinner in recognition of the contribution volunteers make to the island. The local board has historically provided funding to Community Networks Waiheke in support of this event.

9. Last year the board granted funding of $800 to Community Networks Waiheke (then known as WICOSS) to organise the volunteer dinner. The event was provided at the Waiheke Sustainability Centre and was very successful, however feedback suggested the event would be inclusive of a greater number and range of community volunteers if held at Piritahi Marae, as it has been previously.

10. Community Networks Waiheke proposes to hold the 2018 Volunteer dinner in the wharekai at Piritahi Marae during National Volunteers Week, 17 – 23 June 2018. The event will celebrate the contribution of Waiheke’s volunteers with a catered dinner for 95 volunteers, a guest speaker and live music.

11. Community Networks Waiheke will extend invitations to Waiheke’s community groups and will publicise the event in local media.

Ron Leonard Memorial

12. The local board wishes to recognise the significant community service of Ron Leonard, who passed away on 6 March 2018.

13. Ron Leonard served the Waiheke community for 49 years as Chief Fire Officer of the Waiheke Volunteer Fire Brigade and in professional roles with the Waiheke County Council, Auckland City Council and Auckland Council.

14. Following consultation with Ron’s wife Laurie Leonard, it is proposed that a wooden bench seat, with a memorial plaque to Ron Leonard, be located beside in the Oneroa Beach Accessway Reserve opposite Tui Street. Laurie will determine the most appropriate location for the seat, in conjunction with the council’s Parks and Community Services teams.

15. The commemoration of Ron Leonard will replace the Community Service Awards in 2018. The future of the awards will be revisited by the local board in 2019.

Ngā whakaaweawe ā-rohe me ngā tirohanga a te poari ā-rohe /
Local impacts and local board views

16. The Waiheke Local Board Plan 2017 recognises that ‘our volunteers play an important role in fostering community identity and looking after our environment’.

17. The 2017/2018 Local Board work programme allocates $2,000 to recognition of volunteers and community services on the island.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori / Māori impact statement

18. This report does not involve any significant decisions and does not have any particular benefits to or adverse effects on Māori.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea / Financial implications

19. Budget – Volunteer dinner

Catering for 95 volunteers	$950
Piritahi Marae – koha	$200
Musicians - koha	$150
Guest speaker – return ferry travel and gift	$100
Marketing	$100
Total cost	$1500

20. Colonial Carpentry has quoted $836.00 + GST to build and install a 2.1m wooden seat.

21. This report recommends an allocation of $500 from the board’s ‘Volunteer Day / Community Service Award’ work programme budget for Ron Leonard’s memorial. The remaining cost was approved by the local board in resolution number WHK/2018/74, that the Waiheke Local Board ‘approve allocation of up to $600 from the 2017/2018 Civic Events Locally Driven Initiatives budget to cover the wreath and purchase a plaque for Ron Leonard’.

Ngā raru tūpono / Risks

22. The project is low risk for the Waiheke Local Board.

Ngā koringa ā-muri / Next steps

23. Staff will liaise with Community Networks Waiheke and appropriate council departments following consideration of this report.

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Author	Janine Geddes - Senior Local Board Advisor Waiheke
Authorisers	Helgard Wagener - Relationship Manager Great Barrier and Waiheke Local Boards

Waiheke Local Board

26 April 2018

Delegation for formal local board views on notified resource consents, plan changes and notices of requirement

File No.: CP2018/04408

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1. To seek that the Waiheke Local Board delegates the responsibility of providing formal views on resource consents, notified plan changes and notices of requirement to a local board member.

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2. Local board feedback can be provided on notified resource consents, plan changes and designations. Written feedback needs to be provided prior to the submission closing date (usually 20 working days after public notification). This feedback is included in the planner’s report verbatim and local boards are also able to speak to their written feedback at the public hearing. Views should be received by the processing planner or reporting consultant by submission closing date to ensure the content can be considered in planning reports.

3. This report explores options to enable local boards to provide their views in a timely way. Local boards normally provide their formal views at business meetings. Because local board reporting timeframes don’t usually align with statutory timeframes, in most instances formal reporting at a business meeting will not allow local feedback to be provided by submission closing date.

4. Providing formal local board views by way of a delegation to a local board member is considered the most efficient way of providing formal local board views. This is because the delegate can provide views within the regulatory timeframes and because no additional reporting is required when new applications of interest are notified.

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation

That the Waiheke Local Board:

a) delegate the authority to Member XX, to prepare and submit local board views and speak those local board views at any hearings on:

· Notified resource consents

· Notified plan changes

· Notices of requirement.

Horopaki / Context

Notified Resource Consents

5. Local boards are able to provide input into the determination of applications that may be notified. Local boards, via their appointed Resource Consents Leads, input into a wide range of resource consents that are received by the council and that trigger the matters of particular interest to local boards.

6. Local views and preferences are also able to be provided, once a decision of notification is made, and local boards can then submit further feedback to any notified resource consent application within their local board area. This feedback is then included in the planner’s report verbatim for the hearing and for the consideration of the commissioners who determine the outcome of the resource consent application.

7. Local boards are also able to speak to their written feedback at any notified resource consent hearing. Local boards are taking this opportunity up more often and it is considered important to ensure any feedback is authorised by the local board and a delegation is in place for the Resource Consent Lead to authorise them to speak on behalf of the local board at hearings.

Notified Plan Changes and Notices of Requirement

8. The Auckland Unitary Plan was made “Operative in Part” in November 2016. As plan changes and notices of requirement can now be received and processed by council, there are opportunities for local boards to provide their views and give feedback on notified applications.

9. For council-initiated plan changes and notices of requirement, staff will seek local board views prior to notification for proposals where there are issues of local significance. For private plan changes and notices of requirement submitted by non-council requiring authorities, local boards may not have any prior knowledge of the application until notification.

10. Local boards can provide written feedback on notified applications. Written feedback needs to be provided prior to the submission closing date (usually 20 working days after public notification). Local boards can subsequently present their feedback to support their views at any hearing.

11. It is important that options are explored to enable local boards to provide their views in a timely way and a delegation to ensure timely feedback is desirable. At present the local board views must be confirmed formally and statutory timeframes are short and do not always align with local board reporting timeframes.

12. Local boards may want to add the responsibility for plan changes and notices of requirement feedback to the resource consent lead role. This will broaden the responsibilities of the role to enable feedback on notified plan changes and notices of requirement to be provided. Alternatively, local boards may want to develop a separate planning lead role and each local board has the flexibility to make appointments that best suit their needs.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu / Analysis and advice

Options considered

13. Options available for local boards to provide their views into the hearings process have been summarised in Table 1.

14. Local boards normally provide their formal views at business meetings (option 2). Because local board reporting timeframes do not usually align with statutory timeframes, in most instances formal reporting at a business meeting will not allow local feedback to be provided by submission closing date. Views must be received by the processing planner or reporting consultant by the submission closing date to ensure the content can be considered in planning reports.

15. Providing formal local board views by way of a delegation to one local board member (option 5) is considered the most efficient way of providing formal views. This is because no additional reporting is required when new applications of interest are notified.

Table 1: Options for local boards to provide their formal views on notified applications (resource consents, plan changes, notices of requirement)

Options	Pros	Cons
1. No formal local board views are provided		· Local board views will not be considered by the hearings commissioners
2. Formal local board views are provided at a business meeting	· All local board members contribute to the local board view · Provides transparent decision making	· Local board meeting schedules and agenda deadlines are unlikely to align with statutory deadlines imposed by the planning process
3. Formal local board views are provided as urgent decisions	· Local boards can provide their views in a timely way that meets statutory deadlines	· Decisions are not made by the full local board · Urgent decisions may not be accompanied by full information and the discussion may be rushed · Not transparent decision-making because the decisions do not become public until after they have been made
4. Formal local board views are provided by separate and specific delegation for each application which the local board wishes to provide their views	· Delegations can be chosen to align with area of interest and/or local board member capacity	· Local board meeting schedules and agenda deadlines required to make each separate delegation are unlikely to align with statutory deadlines imposed by the planning process · Decisions are not made by the full local board
5. Formal local board views are provided by way of delegation to one local board member (preferred option) for all applications	· Delegate will become subject matter expert for local board on topic they are delegated to · Local boards can provide their views in a timely way that meets statutory deadlines · Any feedback can be regularly reported back to the local board	· Decisions are not made by the full local board

Ngā whakaaweawe ā-rohe me ngā tirohanga a te poari ā-rohe /
Local impacts and local board views

16. This report seeks a delegation to a local board member for resource consents, plan changes and notices of requirement, to allow local boards to provide feedback in accordance with agreed timeframes on notified resource consents, plan changes and notices of requirement.

17. Any local board members who is delegated responsibilities should ensure that they represent the wider local board views and preferences on each matter before them.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori / Māori impact statement

18. A decision of this procedural nature is not considered to have a positive or negative impact for Māori.

19. The Resource Management Act 1991 requires that council consult with Mana Whenua of the area who may be affected, through iwi authorities, on draft plan changes prior to their notification. Council must also consider iwi authority advice in evaluations of plan changes.

20. For private plan changes, council seeks that the applicant undertakes suitable engagement with relevant iwi authorities, and where necessary will undertake consultation before deciding whether to accept, reject or adopt a private plan change.

21. For notices of requirement, council serves notice on Mana Whenua of the area who may be affected, through iwi authorities. Requiring authorities must also consult with the relevant iwi as part of the designating process.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea / Financial implications

22. A decision of this procedural nature is not considered to have financial implications on Auckland Council.

Ngā raru tūpono / Risks

23. If local boards choose not to delegate to provide views on notified applications, there is a risk that they will not be able to provide formal views prior to the submission closing date and may miss the opportunity to have their feedback presented and heard at a hearing.

Ngā koringa ā-muri / Next steps

24. The appointed member of the Waiheke Local Board will operate under the delegations of the Waiheke Local Board once they have been adopted.

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Author

Carol Stewart - Principal Policy Analyst

Authorisers

Anna Bray - Policy and Planning Manager - Local Boards

Louise Mason - GM Local Board Services

[1] Cabinet paper: Auckland Governance: Regional Transport Authority Steven Joyce, Minister of Transport 2009

[2] Based on Statistics NZ 2011 population estimates

[3] There was no formal local board funding policy in place at this time

[4] Based on annually revised estimates from Statistics NZ

[5] Based on Index of Deprivation provided by the Ministry of Health

Chairperson	Cath Handley
Deputy Chairperson	Paul Walden
Members	Shirin Brown
	John Meeuwsen
	Bob Upchurch

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Resource consent applications received from 3 to 9 March 2018	179
b ⇩	Resource consent applications received from 10 to 16 March 2018	181
c ⇩	Resource consent applications received from 17 to 23 March 2018	183
d ⇩	Resource consent applications received from 24 to 30 March 2018	185
e ⇩	Resource consent applications received from 31 March to 6 April 2018	187

Author	Mark Inglis - Local Board Advisor
Authoriser	Helgard Wagener - Relationship Manager Great Barrier and Waiheke Local Boards