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
|
The Rodney Local Board will confirm the minutes of the 17 May 2018
business meeting at the meeting on 21 June 2018.
|
5 Leave
of Absence
At the close of
the agenda no requests for leave of absence had been received.
6 Acknowledgements
At the close of
the agenda no requests for acknowledgements had been received.
7 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 Rodney 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.
|
Rodney Local
Board
24 May 2018
|
|
Rodney
Local Board Transport Targeted Rate
File No.: CP2018/07116
Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report
1. To
decide on the proposal for a Rodney Local Board Transport Targeted Rate
(RLBTTR) to support additional transport investment in the Rodney Local Board
area.
Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary
2. To
accelerate improvement in the transport services in the Rodney Local Board area
a targeted rate of $150 per separately used or inhabited part of a rating unit[1]
(SUIP) was proposed to raise $41 million[2]
over ten years. This was consulted on as part of the draft 10 Year Budget
2018-2028.
3. Forty
three per cent of respondents were opposed to the proposal with 36 per cent in
support. Twenty one per cent of respondents indicated partial support for
the proposal.
4. The
original proposal was based on accelerating investment in transport
improvements in the Rodney Local board area. The base transport program
for the area in the draft Regional Land Transport Plan (RLTP), including
projects funded by the proposed Regional Fuel Tax (RFT), has expanded
considerably and now includes additional investment over ten years in road
sealing, public transport service enhancements and footpaths.
5. Given
the changes to the base case, officers have developed an alternative proposal
for consideration. This would invest $46 million in bus services,
Park-N-Rides and footpaths funded by a targeted rate of $150 per SUIP raising
$4.0 million in 2018/2019 ($46 million over 10 years).
6. The
proposal also includes a conservative estimate of possible NZTA funding.
If this funding eventuates the proposal makes provision for an additional bus
service starting in the 2019/2020 year.
7. The
proposal includes capital expenditure so will require Governing Body’s
approval for taking on additional debt. To ensure any possibility of
future NZTA funding for the projects they will need to be included in the RLTP
by Auckland Transport.
8. The projects in this option
have changed from the original proposal. The benefits are still
distributed widely across the local board are although the form of the benefits
has changed with seal extensions now funded from within the RLTP. The
Rodney Local Board will need to consider this option and the original proposal
the context of the statutory criteria discussed in the report and in particular
the:
· nature
of the additional benefits to the Rodney area of the original proposal and
alternative option in excess of the transport investment proposed in the RLTP
(including projects funded by the RFT)
· distribution
of the benefits between ratepayers in the area
· overall
impact of the proposed rate on the community.
|
Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s
That
the Rodney Local Board:
a)
recommend that the Governing Body
either:
i) does
not adopt the proposed Rodney Local Board Transport targeted rate.
ii) adopt
the Rodney Local Board Transport targeted rate as proposed in the draft
10-Year Budget 2018-2028 if the Regional Land Transport Plan and Regional
Fuel Tax are adopted but does not include the investments in the
Rodney Local Board area noted in this report.
iii) adopt
an alternative Rodney Local Board Transport targeted rate of $150 per
separately used or inhabited part of a rating unit within the Rodney Local
Board area, to fund $46 million of transport improvements in the Rodney Local
Board area as set out in this report over the next ten years noting the
additional debt impact subject to the
adoption of a Regional Land Transport Plan and Regional Fuel Tax that
includes the investments in the Rodney Local Board area noted in this report.
b) request
that if recommendation a) ii) or iii) above are adopted that Auckland
Transport includes the projects to be funded by the targeted rate in the
Regional Land Transport Plan.
|
Horopaki / Context
Rodney Local
Board area transport investment program in draft RLTP
9. The
draft capital programme set out in the RLTP (including projects funded by the
RFT) includes the following projects in the Rodney local board area:
· seal extension programme, $121 million (being current
plans $12 million, RFT $24 million and RLTP $85 million) – nearly all of
which is for Rodney based on current prioritisation
· Supporting Growth projects in Warkworth, including the
Matakana Link Road
· Warkworth temporary park and ride facility (utilising
existing parking area)
· additional footpath investment from regional allocation
in RLTP of $45 million.
10. The
RLTP and RFT are presently being consulted on. The Governing Body will
make budget decisions at its meeting on 31 May 2018.
Rodney Local
Board Plan and Proposed targeted rate
11. The
Rodney Local Board consulted on investigating a targeted rate to fund transport
improvements, as part of its local board plan. The Consultation Document
for the 10 Year Budget 2018-2028 proposed a targeted rate of $150 per SUIP to
raise $41 million[3]
over ten years to fund the transport service improvements.
12. The
proposed service improvements are set out in the table below, for full details
see Option Three in Attachment B: Transport investment options for Rodney Local
Board that was in the December report to the Rodney Local Board entitled Rodney
Local Board transport targeted rate. For full details refer to Attachment D,
the original report and proposal from the Rodney Local Board business meeting
of 5 December 2017.
Table 1: Proposed projects, costs[4] and delivery
timeframes
|
Project
|
10 year OPEX
|
10 year CAPEX
|
10 year Total
|
|
Bus
service from Huapai to Westgate
Delivery
from 2019 calendar year
|
2,300,000
|
|
2,300,000
|
|
Bus service
from Riverhead to Westgate Delivery from 2019 calendar year
|
5,270,416
|
200,000
|
5,470,416
|
|
Warkworth
Park and Ride - 2018/19 – 2020/21
|
285,208
|
110,000
|
395,208
|
|
Huapai Park
and Ride – dependant on investigation
|
|
4,000,000
|
4,000,000
|
|
Proposed
seal extension programme – delivery over 10 year period
|
1,100,658
|
12,448,272
|
13,548,930
|
|
Proposed
footpath programme - delivery over 10 year period
|
30,000
|
14,925,826
|
14,955,826
|
|
Total
|
8,986,282
|
31,684,098
|
40,670,380
|
Statutory
decision making criteria
13. The
council (Governing Body and local boards) are required to consider and consult
on any changes to funding for services. The sources of funding for the proposed
transport improvements in the Rodney Local Board area must be considered
against the statutory criteria in section 101(3) of the Local Government Act
2002. The key elements of this assessment are set out in the options
below. A full analysis against the statutory criteria is set out in
Attachment A: Assessment against statutory criteria.
Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu / Analysis and advice
Feedback
14. A
total of 1,452 responses were received (including 1,376 in writing, email or
online) on the proposed targeted rate from the Rodney Local Board area.
The graph below gives an overview of the responses:
|
|
|
Targeted Rate
|
Yes
|
No
|
Partial
|
|
Written
|
510
|
584
|
282
|
|
Social Media (AC)
|
1
|
24
|
0
|
|
HYS
|
11
|
23
|
17
|
|
522
|
631
|
299
|
|
15. Of
the 1,452 total submissions, 1,254 came from residents living in Rodney
(including 1,178 in writing, email or online). The table below shows the
breakdown of just these responses:
|
|
|
Targeted Rate
|
Yes
|
No
|
Partial
|
|
Written
|
428
|
507
|
243
|
|
Social Media (AC)
|
1
|
24
|
0
|
|
HYS
|
11
|
23
|
17
|
|
440
|
554
|
260
|
|
16. Forty-three
per cent of respondents did not support the proposal with 36 per cent in
support. However, 21 per cent of submitters partially support the
proposal (which would bring the combination of support/partially support to 57
per cent).
17. The
comments provided by those that gave partial support shows varying degrees of
support for the proposal, ranging from those that support the proposal in
principle, but not the individual projects or the specific amount ($150); those
that want assurances that the rate would be spent in Rodney; and, those that
are sceptical that the rate will be collected and spent correctly at all. A
notable number qualified their support stating that they could not support the
proposal if the regional fuel tax was also implemented.
18. Submissions
that did not support the targeted rate commonly cited that rates are already
too high; that they object to paying for services other parts of Auckland get
from general taxation; or, that they did not know what the projects proposed
were/the proposed projects had no value for them.
Response to
feedback
19. The
targeted rate is legally required to be spent on transport projects in the
Rodney Local Board area. The council will maintain a reserve account for
the funding and record expenses against that account as they are incurred on
the projects by Auckland Transport.
20. The
average impact of the rate in conjunction with the proposed regional fuel tax
is estimated to be between $270 and $290 per year or $5 to $6 per week.
This is the sum of the rate of $150 and the fuel tax on a vehicle of average
fuel consumption travelling 15,000km per year ($120 to $140 per year).
The cost will vary depending on the number of vehicles a household operates,
fuel consumption and mileage and whether the residents are owner occupiers or
renters.
Alternative
option
21. The
base transport investment in the Rodney Local Board area in the RLTP (including
RFT funded projects) is substantially increased from that on which the original
proposal is made. The detailed program is set out in Attachment B:
Transport investment options for Rodney Local Board. Given these changes the
board may wish to consider an alternative funding package that reflects these
changes.
22. Officers
have developed the following package based on an indication of preferences from
the board. This replaces seal investment with a range of bus services and
adding the RLTP funded temporary Park-N-Ride proposal for Warkworth. The
projects are[5]:
· additional buses on 122 service from Huapai/Kumeu to Westgate ($230K
per annum)
· new bus service from Riverhead to Westgate ($547K per annum)
· new bus service from Wellsford to Warkworth $525K per annum)
· new bus service from Helensville to Silverdale ($695K per annum)
(from 2019/2020
depending on overall NZTA subsidy success)
· new bus service from Huapai to Albany ($670K per annum)
· 120 space Park-N-Ride in Warkworth ($1.485m)
· Huapai/Kumeu Park-N-Ride ($4.0m including land purchase)
· approximately 30 new footpaths ($15m).
23. The
bus services proposed will be reviewed annually to determine whether or not
their use justifies them being:
· taken over and fully funded by AT
· continued under RLBTTR funding
· discontinued.
24. The
Rodney Local Board will monitor the performance of the projects and determine
whether to reprioritise its expenditure. A material change to spending
priorities may require further appropriate consultation. Officers note
that rates must be reset each year as part of the annual or long-term plan
process.
25. To
fund the proposed expenditure would require a rate set per SUIP of $150 year to
raise $4.0 million in 2018/2019. The proposed rate is set conservatively
given the uncertainty around the project costs. Financial modelling
envisages the rate increasing at 2 per cent per annum. However, the key
determinant of future rates levels will be the actual project costs, the
success of any applications for NZTA funding and subsequent community consultation
and local board decisions.
Distribution
of benefits
26. The
projects are spread broadly over the Rodney area but the cost of investment
varies by subdivision, see table below. The table doesn’t include
the costs of the Helensville to Silverdale service proposed for 2019/2020 which
would add to the benefits for Kumeu and Dairy Flat.
|
Subdivision
|
Rodney
|
Kumeu
|
Wellsford
|
Warkworth
|
Dairy Flat
|
|
No
of SUIPs
|
30,798
|
12,280
|
3,185
|
12,673
|
2,660
|
|
Annualised
expenditure
|
$3,932,108
|
$2,184,827
|
$516,560
|
$938,858
|
$291,863
|
|
Investment
per SUIP
|
$147
|
$205
|
$187
|
$85
|
$126
|
Note: It is proposed to set the rate at $150 given
the uncertainty around the project costs as noted above:
27. The
nature of projects proposed has been structured to deliver a reasonable
distribution of investment and benefit across the Rodney Local Board
area. The costs vary across the region resulting in a variation in
investment value in different sub-regions but provide similar levels of benefit
relative to population. The subdivisions are established for electoral purposes
but don’t align with the likely distribution of transport benefits.
28. The
costs of providing some projects, park and rides, (Warkworth $1.2 million and
Huapai $4 million), varies widely whereas the benefits are similar.
Accordingly sharing the costs across the Rodney area is justified on a benefits
basis for these projects.
NZTA
funding
29. The
Government Policy Statement released on 4 April indicates a change in priority
for NZTA funding which would make the proposed projects more likely to qualify
for a subsidy. A comprehensive business case is required to support
applications for NZTA funding. Fifty one per cent of a qualifying project may
be funded by NZTA. It is not clear whether these projects would meet the
criteria at this time given their relative priority in the RLTP.
30. Given
the above a conservative approach has been taken to budgeting for NZTA
potential subsidies. Officers propose adding an additional bus service to
the project list rather than reducing the targeted rate requirement by 51 per
cent. The service would be planned to begin in the 2019/2020 year if
applications for NZTA funding are successful for some or all of the other
projects. This is roughly equivalent to achieving an overall NZTA funding
of 20 per cent. If a higher level of funding is achieved the local board
can decide whether to fund additional projects, bring some of projects forward
or reduce the rates requirement.
31. To
ensure these projects are eligible for subsidies in future they need to be
included in the RLTP. Officers recommend that the Rodney Local Board ask
AT to include them in the RLTP.
Funding
options
32. A
fixed rate per SUIP is proposed as the basis for the rate. The projects
in both the original proposal and alternative option are spread over the entire
Rodney Local Board area (distribution of benefits is less on a project cost
basis in Warkworth) providing benefits to all residents and properties in the
form of:
a) improved personal transport choices
and outcomes (bus services, new footpaths and Park and Ride facilities)
b) improved
residential amenity (additional new footpaths).
33. Given
the nature of the benefits:
· business owners and farms will benefit at a similar level
to residential properties rather than in proportion to their scale of activity
or capital value
· residential properties of differing capital value will
benefit similarly.
34. As
the direct transport benefit to all properties is relatively similar a rate set
as a fixed charge per separately used or inhabited part of a rating unit (SUIP)
is appropriate on the basis of distribution of benefits.
35. As
there is a strong relationship between capital value and income, a rate applied
on capital value would place more charge on those potentially better able to
afford it. A rate applied on capital value
would also increase the share paid by business and farm/lifestyle properties as
they tend to have higher property values. Business and farm properties
can claim back GST and expense rate for tax purposes.
36. A
full analysis of alternatives to the form of the rate, including general rates
funding, were discussed in officers’ advice in December and is set out in
Attachment A: Assessment against statutory criteria.
Overall
impact
37. The
cost of the proposed and alternative rates are $150 per annum ($2.90 per
week). Those ratepayers with affordability issues can access the
council’s rates postponement scheme or apply for the rates rebate which
the council administers on behalf of the Department of Internal Affairs.
Whilst business properties and more remote farms will benefit less than
residential properties they can expense rates and claim back GST which means
the net cost to them will be $93.90 per year $1.75 per week).
38. For
residential ratepayers the cost of a targeted rate adopted in conjunction with
the RFT is discussed in paragraph 20 above.
Ngā whakaaweawe ā-rohe me ngā tirohanga a te
poari ā-rohe /
Local impacts and local board views
39. The
Governing Body has decision making authority for setting rates. The
Rodney Local Board will communicate their views on this proposal to the
Governing Body if they wish to proceed. No other local board provided
comment in their feedback on the draft 10-Year Budget.
Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori / Māori impact
statement
40. The
council does not hold information on the ethnicity of ratepayers so is not able
to identify the exact impact of policy changes on Māori. The impact of the
policy options on Māori will be similar to that on other residents in
Rodney.
Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea / Financial implications
41. The
capital expenditure proposed as part of either the original proposal or
alternative option will require additional borrowing of $5.65 million. As
the council is operating at close to its borrowing limits the Governing
Body’s approval will be required.
Ngā raru tūpono / Risks
42. There
is a risk that individual projects proposed may cost more than the estimates in
the report. This will be managed by Auckland Transport providing updated
advice to the local board before commitments are entered into.
Ngā koringa ā-muri / Next steps
43. If the rate
is adopted by the Governing Body the next steps will be:
· Auckland
Transport to set in place plans to deliver the projects
· Auckland
Transport to establish reporting regime for Rodney Local Board
· establishment
of a targeted rate reserve account.
Ngā
tāpirihanga / Attachments
|
No.
|
Title
|
Page
|
|
a⇩ 
|
Assessment against statutory criteria
|
15
|
|
b⇩
|
Alternative transport investment option for Rodney
Local Board
|
21
|
|
c⇩ 
|
Legislative information alternative information
|
27
|
|
d⇩
|
Rodney Targeted Rate report and proposal, 5 December
2017
|
29
|
Ngā kaihaina / Signatories
|
Authors
|
Andrew Duncan - Manager Financial Policy
|
|
Authorisers
|
Ross Tucker - Acting General Manager, Financial
Strategy and Planning
Lesley Jenkins - Relationship Manager
|
|
Rodney Local Board
24 May 2018
|
|
Local board feedback on the Local
Government (Community Well-being) Amendment Bill
File No.: CP2018/07982
Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report
1. To
provide an opportunity for local boards to formally provide feedback on the
government’s Local Government (Community Well-being)
Amendment Bill.
Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary
2. The
Government introduced the Local Government (Community Well-being) Amendment
Bill (the Bill) into Parliament on 5 April 2018. The Bill has been referred to
Select Committee and submissions are now open.
3. On
1 May 2018, the Planning Committee approved that staff would develop a
submission on the Local Government (Community Well-being) Amendment Bill and
established a political working group to approve the final
submission.
4. The
political working group consists of the chair and deputy chair of the Planning
Committee, chair and deputy chair of the Environment and Community Committee,
chair and deputy chair of the Community Development and Safety Committee, a
member of the Independent Māori Statutory Board and two local board
chairs.
5. The
Bill seeks to address two main areas:
· to
reinstate the purpose of local government to promote the social, economic,
environmental and cultural well-being of communities
· to
restore the power to collect development contributions for a wider group of
infrastructure projects.
6. Both
of these areas can have significant impact on council’s way of working,
as they define local government’s purpose and its ability to collect
funds.
7. In
both 2012 and 2014 changes were made to the Local Government Act 2002 (the Act)
regarding these two main themes. Auckland Council made submissions
opposing those changes. The submission to this new Bill will be founded
on the evidence from those previous submissions.
8. Broadly
the submission intends to support the amendments. However, staff require
time to ensure a robust analysis of any potential impact, particularly of the
development contribution changes.
9. To
develop a submission, staff will work across the council family, including
CCOs, and with the Independent Māori Statutory Board.
10. An
opportunity is provided for local boards to formally provide feedback on the
government’s Local Government (Community Well-being) Amendment Bill.
11. Submissions
on the Bill close on 25 May 2018. Due to the tight timeframes, local
boards need to provide their feedback for consideration by 16 May. Any
formal feedback received after 16 May and before 21 May 2018 will be attached
to the final submission.
12. In order to
meet timeframes for the Governing Body meeting on this matter the local board
has provided informal feedback on the Bill, this is attached as Attachment A to
the agenda report for retrospective approval.
|
Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s
That the Rodney Local Board:
a) retrospectively
approve the feedback on the Local Government (Community
Well-being) Amendment Bill attached as Attachment A to the agenda
report.
|
Horopaki / Context
13. The Local
Government (Community Well-being) Amendment Bill (the Bill) has two main
themes:
· to
reinstate the purpose of local government to promote the social, economic,
environmental and cultural well-being of communities
· to
restore the power to collect development contributions for a wider group of
infrastructure projects.
14. Specifically,
the Bill seeks to:
· restore
the purpose of local government to promote the social, economic, environmental,
and cultural well-being of communities, taking a sustainable development
approach
· restore
territorial authorities' power to collect development contributions for any
public amenities needed as a consequence of development
· make
a minor technical modification to the development contributions power to allow
territorial authorities to collect development contributions for projects
financed through financial advances from the New Zealand Transport Authority.
15. The
Governance and Administration Select Committee deadline for submissions on the
Bill is 25 May 2018.
Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu / Analysis and advice
16. The Local
Government Act 2002 Amendment Act 2012 made significant changes to the purpose
of local government through an amendment to section 10. This removed the focus
on social, economic, environmental and cultural well-being of communities and
reoriented the purpose towards the provision of cost-effective infrastructure
and core services.
17. In 2014,
there was another amendment to the Act which made an array of changes including
to the development contributions regime. This limited territorial
authorities’ ability to collect development contributions for community
amenities (e.g. sports grounds, swimming pools and libraries).
18. In both 2012
and 2014, Auckland Council made submissions opposing these changes to the Act.
19. The
development of this submission will be based on the evidence of the
council’s previous submissions on the Act.
20. Broadly the
submission intends to support the amendments. However, staff require the
remaining time to gain input from subject matter experts across the council
family and ensure a robust analysis of the impact, particularly of the
development contribution changes.
21. In order to
meet timeframes for the Governing Body meeting on this matter the local board
has provided informal feedback on the Bill, this is attached as Attachment A to
the agenda report for retrospective approval.
Ngā whakaaweawe ā-rohe me ngā tirohanga a te
poari ā-rohe /
Local impacts and local board views
22. An
opportunity is provided for all local boards to provide formal feedback.
Local Board Services sent out an email on 13 April to all local board members
outlining the objectives of the Bill and that staff would be requesting local
board involvement.
23. Submissions
on the Bill close on 25 May 2018. Due to the tight timeframes, local
boards need to provide their feedback for consideration by 16 May. Any
formal feedback received after 16 May and before 21 May 2018 will be attached
to the final submission.
24. Additionally,
two local board chairs have been invited to participate on the political
working group that endorses the final council submission.
25. The proposed
restoration of the purpose of local government to include social, economic,
environmental and cultural well-being aligns well with local boards planning
for and delivering on issues of local importance, as defined in the Local Board
Plans.
26. The
restoration of local government’s power to collect development
contributions will allow for better access to funding of key local facilities
that are of significant interest to local boards such as swimming pools and
sports grounds.
Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori / Māori impact
statement
27. The
Bill’s proposed changes align well with the Independent Māori
Statutory Board’s Māori Plan for Tāmaki Makaurau that describes
the implementation of their key directions through the lens of the four pou of
social, cultural, economic and environmental wellbeing areas.
28. Māori
experience disproportionately high negative social, economic and health
outcomes. The reinstating of a more holistic purpose of local government
could have a positive impact on Māori by refocusing local government
decisions to require consideration of broader outcomes.
29. Council staff
will seek to engage and receive input from mana whenua by email. Staff
will also seek input from the Independent Māori Statutory Board.
Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea / Financial implications
30. There are no
anticipated negative financial implications from supporting the Bill, however,
staff will work with the finance team to identify and analyse any impact.
Ngā raru tūpono / Risks
31. If
the local board does not contribute to the submission, then there is a risk
that Auckland Council family’s position on this Bill will not include
their insights.
Ngā
tāpirihanga / Attachments
|
No.
|
Title
|
Page
|
|
a⇩
|
Rodney Local Board Feedback on the Local Government
(Community Well-being) Amendment Bill
|
61
|
Ngā kaihaina / Signatories
|
Authors
|
Bonnie-May Shantz - Principal Policy Analyst
|
|
Authorisers
|
Louise Mason - GM Local Board Services
Jacques Victor - GM Auckland Plan Strategy and
Research
|
