Minutes of Hibiscus and Bays Local Board

12	Local board decisions and input into the 10-year Budget 2018-2028, draft Auckland Plan 2050 and draft Waste Management and Minimisation Plan 2018
	Members wanted more clarification of how option B was to be funded, at what cost of other projects and what reprioritisation will occur . A revised Attachment C was tabled at the meeting a copy of which has been placed on the file copy of the minutes and can be viewed on the Auckland Council website.
	Resolution number HB/2018/60 MOVED by Chairperson J Parfitt, seconded by Member V Watson: That the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board: a) Receives the consultation feedback summary on the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board priorities for 2018/2019 (Attachment A). b) Approves its advocacy initiatives, including its key advocacy project, for inclusion (as an appendix) to its 2018/2019 Local Board Agreement (Attachment B) as follows: i) seeking $18 million capital funding for implementation of the Orewa Beach Esplanade Enhancement Project (OBEEP) using a phased approach. ii) to deliver Penlink earlier, i.e. in the first five years in the ten year plan. iii) to realign East Coast Road at the intersections with Lonely Track Road and Glenvar Road immediately following the completion of Glenvar Ridge Road and the upgrade of Glenvar Road. iv) to prioritise the investigation of equitable regional operational funding for community houses, youth and arts centres. c) Recommends to the Governing Body that $218,000 of 2017/2018 Locally Driven Initiative operating expenditure to be deferred to 2018/2019 (Attachment C). d) Receives the consultation feedback summary on regional proposals in the 10-year Budget 2018-2028 and draft Auckland Plan 2050 from people or organisations that submitted on the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board area (Attachment A). e) Receives the consultation feedback on the draft Waste Management and Minimisation Plan 2018 (Attachment D). f) Provides feedback and local board views on the 10-year Budget 2018-2028 (Attachment E) as follows: 1. Transport – Regional Fuel Tax: i) Supports a regional fuel tax because it is more efficient and cheaper to implement than any other proposals. The local board believe that the proceeds of the fuel tax must be equitable and fund projects across the Auckland region so that our residents can see improvements at the local level. ii) Supports a further source of funding for transport and other infrastructure requirements as an investment or private partnership model, including Crown Infrastructure Partners. The local board supports Penlink as one of the projects identified in the Auckland Transport Alignment Project report that recognises the accelerated infrastructure to support and address growth within the Hibiscus Coast, Silverdale and Wainui areas. iii) Supports a regional fuel tax in that it will provide more funding to ensure local projects can be achieved and ensure the Auckland Transport Alignment Project proposal projects are delivered. iv) Supports the development of criteria to ensure projects will be delivered locally across the Auckland region to ensure that it does not all go to ‘approved priority’ areas. v) Expresses concern that there was no list of priorities/projects that were consulted on as part of the 10-year Budget consultation material for the community to review and comment on. vi) Notes that written submissions received from the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board area on regional proposals as part of the 10-year Budget indicated that 44% support, 49% do not support the regional fuel tax proposal and 8% indicated ‘other’. vii) Expresses concerns that consultation on the regional fuel tax was done prior to the government’s announcement on their fuel tax proposals and this may have changed the views of the community on the council’s regional fuel tax proposals. 2. Natural Environment – Water Quality Targeted Rate: i) The Hibiscus and Bays Local Board support the proposal to accelerate the water quality work programme over 10 years, using a targeted rate based on capital value. ii) Expresses concern as both Hibiscus Coast and East Coast Bays currently have stormwater outfall pipes discharging directly to beaches which is not acceptable and needs to be rectified. (The local board values our beaches and streams and our natural environment and believe that programmes are required to maintain these assets to ensure they are enjoyed now and by future generations). iii) Acknowledges that feedback on the 10-year Budget clearly showed that our people value the water quality and receiving environment and that they support a targeted rate. iv) Supports improved regulation and investment for stormwater intervention projects that are enforced by sedimentation rules to ensure our environment is protected. v) Supports the safe swim real time data for monitoring but want to see more testing sites across the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board area. vi) Acknowledges that a targeted rate needs to be targeted to the areas that will benefit the most but requests that a portion of funding is made available for local projects so that our residents can see improvements. vii) Written submissions received from the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board area on the 10-year Budget on regional proposals showed that 65% support, 26% do not support the water quality programme targeted rate proposal and 8% indicated ‘other’. 3. Natural Environment Targeted rate: i) The Hibiscus and Bays Local Board supports Option B – a targeted rate of an average $47 per residential ratepayer proposal to invest more in environmental initiatives. ii) Supports the pest free projects in our local board area being financially supported including areas where Kauri dieback is happening like the Okura Reserve, which is one of the last known Kauri coastal areas in the region. i) The local board would like to see extensive boardwalks along access ways in the Okura Reserve. ii) Supports keeping our estuaries as pristine as possible and providing funding for the approved Orewa and Okura Estuary Restoration plans. iii) Supports stronger monitoring and enforcement through improved regulation to protect our estuaries and to ensure that they are well maintained and not choked with sedimentation. iv) Supports and encourages volunteer groups to help improve our natural environment and water quality in a timely and cost effective way, as volunteers are effective in these roles. v) Expresses concern that the highest funding option does not clearly state how it will fund volunteer programmes that are achieving the same objectives as the council programme in a more cost effective manner. vi) Written submissions from the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board area on the 10-year Budget on regional proposals showed that 25% support Option A, 30% support Option B, 30% indicated they do not support investing more in environmental initiatives thorough a targeted rate and 15% indicated ‘other’. vii) Seeks more information about how and where the reprioritisation of funding will occur. 4. Rates and Charges – proposed rates increase: i) The Hibiscus and Bays Local Board supports a general rate increase of 2.5% for the first two years and then 3.5% for years three to ten. ii) Notes that the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board area has a high percentage of people on low incomes within the local board area that would be more impacted by increasing rates. iii) Reiterates feedback from Hibiscus and Bays Local Board residents that they would like to see more of their rates being spent locally and wish to have a greater say on how their money is spent locally. iv) Written submissions received from the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board area on the 10-year Budget on regional proposals showed that 44% support a 2.5% rate increase for the first two years and then 3.5% for years three to ten, 45% do not support and 11% indicated ’other’. 5. Rates and Charges – Accommodation Provider Targeted Rate for online accommodation providers: i) The Hibiscus and Bays Local Board supports council introducing a new targeted rate on property used for commercial accommodation providers. ii) Written submissions received from the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board area on the 10-year Budget on regional proposals showed that 66% support a new targeted rate on property used for commercial accommodation, 27% do not support and 7% indicated ‘other’. 6. Other budget information: i) The Hibiscus and Bays Local Board expresses concern that Auckland Council are selling strategic assets and would like a clear definition of ‘strategic assets’ and request council ensure that local boards are part of the decision-making process for proposed disposals that affect the local board area. ii) The local board do not support Land Advisory Services introducing a new charging regime for council-owned land owner approval applications unless it excludes community groups and community organisations. iii) The local board is concerned that Regional Facilities Auckland is charging groups e.g. Harbour Sport, at commercial rental when previously they only charged $1 peppercorn rental. The local board has a concern that this extra charge will then come at the cost of the programme and that council will have to pick up the charges/shortfall. 7. Council Controlled Organisation (CCO) Accountability Policy review: The local board supports the overall intent and scope of the Council Controlled Organisations Accountability Policy subject to the following amendments and considerations: i) Endorses the requirement that all parts of council act in the interest of Auckland and supports the expectation that the Council Controlled Organisations and council, including local boards, should have trust and confidence in each other and avoid actions that are perceived to undermine either party in public. ii) Supports inclusion of a clear statement of the obligation on Council Controlled Organisations to consult with local boards in the Accountability Policy and ensure that in any decision-making or inputs by local boards is clearly defined and sufficient time is given for genuine engagement with local boards. iii) Supports Council Controlled Organisations developing examples and clear methodologies that exhibit and deliver “best practice” in working with local boards and provides clear accountability in practice. iv) Seeks clear statements in the Accountability Policy in section 1.1.3 to require that Council Controlled Organisations must give effect and be cognisant of Local Board Plans and where relevant Area Plans to ensure that key local board priorities and projects are supported and integrated. v) Acknowledge and support the expectation in section 1.1.4 to Improve Outcomes for Māori ensuring that both Mana Whenua and Mataawaka are part of the overall approach and essential to our relationship with Māori across the whole council. vi) Endorses section 1.1.7 Understanding and Giving Effect to Auckland’s Shared Governance and the recognition and acknowledgement of local boards as an integral part of the shared governance of Auckland Council. CARRIED Pursuant to Standing Order 1.9.3 Member Caitlin Watson abstained from voting on clause 3 Natural Environment Targeted rate.
	Resolution number HB/2018/61 MOVED by Chairperson J Parfitt, seconded by Member G Holmes: That the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board: g) provides feedback on the draft Auckland Plan 2050 (Attachment F) as follows: 1. Outcome area 1: Belonging and participation: i) Written submissions received from the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board area on the Draft Auckland Plan 2050 showed that 45% support, 34% partially support and 21% do not support an inclusive Auckland. ii) Expresses concern that although belonging is linked with well-being, wellness seems to have been overlooked. iii) Expresses concern that to improve living standards for all Aucklanders by reducing disparities in opportunities will require intervention from central government to make this a reality. It would be difficult if not impossible for council to deliver this on its own. There are issues within affluent areas as well. iv) Expresses concern that immigration is not dealt with and new migrants need to be able to integrate into their chosen areas. Council needs to provide programmes that celebrate diversity and inclusion. v) Expresses concern that the ‘Focus investment to address disparities and serve communities of greatest need’ does not seem to acknowledge growth and that investment needs to accommodate growth requirements in poorer areas as well as those areas experiencing substantial growth. vi) Performance measures are too reliant on perception measures and require some data-based measures as well which can be from sources outside council, e.g. Ministry of Health/regional health boards, regional sporting bodies. 2. Outcome area 2: Māori identity and wellbeing: i) Written submissions received from the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board area on the Draft Auckland Plan 2050 showed that 37% support, 28% partially support and 35% do not support advancing Maori well-being. 3. Outcome area 3: Homes and places: i) Written submissions received from the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board area on the Draft Auckland Plan 2050 showed that 34% support, 40% partially support and 26% partially support affordable homes. ii) The local board acknowledges that ‘affordable homes’ must be included and also demonstrated to our community as being achievable. Safe and healthy homes are important as many existing homes are not built for the environment, e.g. leaky homes and insufficient insulation. iii) Supports increasing security of tenure and broaden the range of tenure models, particularly for those most in need. The Hibiscus and Bays Local Board would like to see central government take more of a proactive role in the focus area. v) Supports including access to schools and jobs within this focus. 4. Outcome area 4: Transport and access: i) Written submissions received from the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board area on the Draft Auckland Plan 2050 showed that 45% support, 36% partially support and 19% do not support moving easily around Auckland. ii) Supports the transport and access outcome but would like to see more recognition of current growth that has exceeded council’s expectations and how this will be managed. iii) Supports a second harbour crossing sooner rather than later to enable rail for North Shore given that we are already exceeding bus patronage numbers now that were anticipated to be met a decade later. iv) Supports better use of transport networks and providing opportunities for travel including providing more ferry services from Gulf Harbour including a weekend ferry service trial. 5. Outcome area 5: Environment and Heritage: i) Written submissions received from the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board area on the Draft Auckland Plan 2050 showed that 54% support, 33% partially support and 13% do not support protecting and enhancing our environment. ii) Suggests the outcome needs to provide more information about protection of coastal environments. iii) Suggests that cultural values should not just embrace to ao Māori values, they should also recognise that people come from different cultures and we must respect those cultures and learn about them too. 6. Outcome area 6: Opportunity and prosperity: i) Written submissions received from the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board area on the Draft Auckland Plan 2050 showed that 45% support, 36% partially support and 19% do not support equipping people for future jobs. ii) Suggests that living and working locally is an important factor to include. Aucklanders need the security of finding full-time quality employment. iii) Suggests the need to protect industrial areas to allow for growth and employment opportunities, e.g. Silverdale area. iv) Suggests the need to include developing young people who can adapt to change and be resilient. v) Suggests that as more technology will eventually reduce jobs for many, people need alternatives and manual trade skills will still be required. 7. Development Strategy: i) Written submissions received from the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board area on the Draft Auckland Plan 2050 showed that 39% support, 38% partially support and 23% do not support shaping our growth. ii) Open space protection needs to be included as ecological corridors and parks seem to be missing. iii) Coastal protection needs to be included as a priority. iv) Environmental protection needs to be included as a priority. v) Business land needs to be in the right locations to support and match residential growth (and employment). vi) There is a lack of focus on the Silverdale area and its business-zoned land. vii) Relocation of the port needs to be included and considered as it will have wide-ranging implications. viii) Refers to a quality compact model but provides no view of this. ix) Concerns as to how to ensure the development strategy is flexible to change when indicated or required as it needs to be far more of a living document to keep up and adapt more easily to change. x) Concern that decisions made by Council Controlled Organisations such as Auckland Transport and Panuku Development Auckland should be consistent with council’s Auckland Plan. This does not seem to have been achieved to date. All agencies of council need to be bound by and deliver the strategic directions in the Auckland Plan, area plans and local board plans. h) provides local board views feedback on the draft Waste Management and Minimisation Plan (WMMP) 2018 (Attachment G) as follows: i) Endorses reducing environmental and marine waste and reducing waste to landfill and carbon emissions as the top priorities for the WMMP. ii) Supports delivering value for money for the ratepayers and Auckland in the delivery of waste management and waste minimisation solutions. iii) Supports the proposal to work closer with and expand waste minimisation practices from businesses and commercial activities across Auckland. iv) Supports increased encouragement of Central Government to ban plastic bags. v) Supports the Governing Body promoting more innovation from council controlled organisations to trial new products from recyclable materials, such as alternative roading materials. vi) Strongly supports the establishment and development of community recycling centres across Auckland and endorses partnerships between local boards to develop new centres across Auckland. vii) Supports product stewardship schemes being encouraged and developed across Auckland and the rest of New Zealand. viii) Expresses its concerns of the high costs of delivering waste minimisation and waste management practices at local events and seeks support to reduce the costs and make waste management and waste minimisation a requirement at all Auckland Council events. ix) Seeks additional engagement on the Tikapa-Moana Hauraki Gulf Islands Draft Waste Plan as the vision and plan is not well understood and received less support as a result. x) Requests that the food waste collection strategy be reviewed to provide for a user-pays approach (tag or ticket system) rather than being subsidised by all ratepayers as currently proposed. xi) Requests that the roll-out of the food waste collection strategy proposed to be rolled out in the 2018/2019 financial year in the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board area be extended to include the Hibiscus Coast subdivision as well as the East Coast Bays subdivision. CARRIED
	Attachments a Revised Attachment C

13 Consideration of Extraordinary Items

There was no consideration of extraordinary items.

5.00 pm The Chairperson thanked Members for their attendance and attention to business and declared the meeting closed.

CONFIRMED AS A TRUE AND CORRECT RECORD AT A MEETING OF THE Hibiscus and Bays Local Board HELD ON

DATE:.........................................................................

CHAIRPERSON:........................................................

Chairperson	Julia Parfitt, JP
Deputy Chairperson	Janet Fitzgerald, JP
Members	Chris Bettany
	Gary Holmes
	Caitlin Watson
	Vicki Watson (from 4.33pm)
	Mike Williamson