Agenda of Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board

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

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 Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board:

a) confirm the ordinary minutes of its meeting, held on Tuesday, 25 September 2018 as a true and correct record.

5 Leave of Absence

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

6 Acknowledgements

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

7 Petitions

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

8 Deputations

Standing Order 7.7 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 Maungakiekie-Tāmaki 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.”

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Chairperson's Report October 2018	11

Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board

23 October 2018

Road Name Approval: New Roads for Fenchurch 4A & 4B, and Fenchurch 5A

File No.: CP2018/19061

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1. To seek approval from the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board to name two public and three private roads within the Fenchurch regeneration neighbourhoods Stage 4A & 4B, and one public walkway within Fenchurch 5A, all within in Glen Innes (Special Housing Area).

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

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

3. The Applicant, Tamaki Regeneration Company (“TRC”), has proposed the following names for consideration by the Local Board, for the new roads within the Fenchurch Stages 4A & 4B, and 5A developments:

4. Fenchurch Stages 4A & 4B:

- 1 existing public road extension, with the existing name proposed to be retained

- 1 new public road

- 3 new private roads, being jointly owned access lots (JOALs)

Table 1: Fenchurch 4A & 4B Proposed Road Names
Road Reference	Preferred Names	Road Type
Public Road 1 (Extension) Proposed to retain existing name	Kestrel	Place
Public Road 2	Rita Meredith	Road
JOAL 1 (Private)	Kōmitimiti	Lane
JOAL 2 (Private)	Lalanga	Lane
JOAL 3 (Private)	Teuila	Grove
Pool of Alternative Names for Fenchurch 4A & 4B:
These alternative names can be used for any of the roads listed above, except Public Road 1 (Extension of ‘Kestrel Place’), as this existing road name is proposed to be retained.	Takoto	Lane
	Papatotara	Lane
	Konatu	Lane
	Matawhero	Lane
	Lumanai	Lane

5. Fenchurch Stage 5A:

- 1 new public walkway between Taniwha Street (opposite Kiano Place) and Sunnymead Road

Table 2: Fenchurch 5A Proposed Public Walkway Names
Applicant’s Preference	Name	Road Type
Preferred name	Te Ra Putanga	Walk
Alternative name 1	Ukutoia	Walk
Alternative name 2	Wākāinga	Walk

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board:

a) Approve the retention of the existing road name ‘Kestrel Place’ for the public road to be extended in the Fenchurch 4B development site (Public Road 1), pursuant to section 319(1)(j) of the Local Government Act 1974.

b) Approve 4 names for the following new roads within the Fenchurch 4A & 4B development, Glen Innes, in accordance with section 319(1)(j) of the Local Government Act 1974 (resource consent references BUN60078048, SUB60235862, and LUC60147906):

· Public Road 2: (local board to insert chosen name)

· JOAL 1: (local board to insert chosen name)

· JOAL 2: (local board to insert chosen name)

· JOAL 3: (local board to insert chosen name)

c) Approve the name (local board to insert chosen name) for the new public walkway within the Fenchurch 5A development, Glen Innes, in accordance with section 319(1)(j) of the Local Government Act 1974 (resource consent reference R/JSL/2016/785).

Horopaki / Context

6. Location and Site plans of the subject developments, Fenchurch Stages 4A, 4B and 5A, can be found in Attachments A and B.

7. In accordance with the National Addressing Standards for road naming (the AS/NZS 4819-2011 standard), the roads described below require road names because they each serve more than 5 lots.

Fenchurch Stages 4A & 4B:

8. Fenchurch Stages 4A & 4B involve construction of 71 new dwellings (23 to be state-owned) and associated subdivision, between Taniwha Street, Kestrel Place and Kiano Place, as well as creation of two new public roads and three new private JOALs to service the development.

9. One of the two new public roads is an extension to an existing public road, currently named ‘Kestrel Place’.

This cul-de-sac will become an extended open-ended roadway, for which applicant TRC requests to retain the existing road name out of respect for the existing residents, and to avoid any confusion of addressing along the continuous roadway.

10. Resource consent was issued in August 2017, references BUN60078048, SUB60235862, and LUC60147906, approved under the Housing Accords and Special Housing Area Act 2013 (HASHAA).

Fenchurch Stage 5A:

11. Fenchurch Stage 5A involves the construction of 70 new residential dwellings and associated subdivision. The subject public walkway to be named (shown as Lot 200) was originally planned to be a “Local Purpose Reserve”, which applicant TRC described as ‘a linear park shaped to encourage pedestrian access between Taniwha Street (opposite Kiano Place) and Sunnymead Road’. However, Auckland Council has since determined that the “Reserve” will instead have to be legally vested as a “Road”; therefore, this pedestrian walkway now requires a road name.

12. Resource consent for Fenchurch Stage 5A was issued 20 July 2017, reference R/JSL/2016/785. The other roads within Fenchurch Stage 5A have already been named by the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board (meeting held 25 September 2018).

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu / Analysis and advice

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

14. Auckland Council’s road naming criteria typically require that road names reflect one of the following local themes, with the use of Maori names being actively encouraged:

- a historical or ancestral linkage to an area;

- a particular landscape, environmental or biodiversity theme or feature; or

- an existing (or introduced) thematic identity in the area.

15. Assessment: The names proposed by the Applicant (detailed below) have been assessed to ensure that they meet Auckland Council’s Road Naming Guidelines and the National Addressing Standards for road naming.

16. Confirmation: Land Information New Zealand (LINZ) has confirmed that all of the proposed names are acceptable and not duplicated elsewhere in the region

17. Road types: The road types suggested by the applicant and detailed below, such as ‘Lane’ and ‘Walk’, have been assessed as acceptable, in suiting the form and layout of the respective roads to be named, as per the Auckland Council Road Naming Guidelines.

18. Mana whenua consultation: has been undertaken, as detailed in the ‘Māori impact statement’ section of this report (item 27-29, below).

19. Community Consultation: Proposed road names for both Fenchurch 4A, 4B and 5A have been produced via consultation with the community and key stakeholder groups, such as TRC’s Community Liaison Committee, Lalaga Pasifiki, the Glen Innes and Panmure Business Associations, and other community organisations.

20. Permission: from relatives has been obtained for the use of Rita Meredith’s name.

Fenchurch Stages 4A & 4B

21. Road Name Themes (Fenchurch 4A & 4B): Applicant TRC has stated that the preferred road name options for the proposed new JOAL “were selected to respectfully acknowledge existing and former residents within the development site and to reflect the multi-cultural history of this Glen Innes community. The preferred road name options also offer key attributes of this future neighbourhood”.

22. The Applicant’s proposed names and meanings for Fenchurch 4A & 4B are set out in the table below:

Table 3: Fenchurch 4A & 4B Preferred Road Names & Meanings
Road reference	Preferred Name	Meaning (as described by applicant)
ROAD 1 (extension)	Kestrel Place	It is proposed to retain this existing road name out of respect for the existing residents on Kestrel Place and to avoid re-addressing issues.
ROAD 2	Rita Meredith Road	Named after Rita Meredith [deceased] - a Samoan who migrated to New Zealand with her parents and 12 siblings in the 1950s. She married John and together they had 8 children. They moved their family to Glen Innes in 1963 to a new state house in Taniwha Street. She was such a hard-working mother who was popular with the neighbours children and their families. Rita was an active member of the Glen Innes Catholic community, netball team and other local schools. She is renowned for being a gifted seamstress and worked in Glen Innes at Amco Jeans and Hutchwilco. In 1992 her son bought a house in a street off Taniwha Street. When the family were moving into their new home Rita collapsed and passed away a few days later. She is an inspirational role for all mothers. Preference is to locate this proposed road name near the Meredith family home in Kiano Place.
JOAL 1	Kōmitimiti Lane	Te Reo Māori word - means ‘to mingle, integrate, blend, combine, mix, come together, fuse, merge, and intermingle’. With a mix of terraced housing and single dwellings, this JOAL will provide access to many families who will hopefully mingle and get to know each other and form a close-knit neighbourhood.
JOAL 2	Lalanga Lane	A Tongan and Samoan word which means ‘weaving’. Our community are weaved together as one people, one community, one nation. This lane will run between Taniwha Street and the proposed Rita Meredith Road and will complement the history of mixed cultures in this area.
JOAL 3	Teuila Grove	Samoan name for the national flower in Samoa (from the ginger plant) and name of the South Pacific’s largest cultural festival held annually in Samoa. Proposed to acknowledge the local Polynesian community and compliment the other new road names. There will be a grove of trees opposite the entrance to this small laneway, which will provide a peaceful landmark for this new subdivision.

23. TRC has provided a pool of names that can be used as alternatives for Fenchurch 4A & 4B:

Table 4: Fenchurch 4A & 4B Pool of Alternative Names (can be used for any of the subject roads)
Proposed Name	Meaning (as described by applicant)
Takoto Lane	Te Reo Māori word meaning: (as a verb) (-ria) ‘to lie down, lie, lay, lie in the future’, or (as a noun) ‘layout, topography’. Suggested as a word to promote future aspirations and acknowledgement of the beautiful geographic surroundings.
Papatotara Lane	Te Reo Māori word for the inner side of the bark of the Totara, and a term used to refer to high-ranking women. Used in Ngaati Whanaunga’s waiata. (Suggested by Ngaati Whanaunga as part of mana whenua consultation)
Konatu Lane	Te Reo Māori word - [verb] “to stir, mix, blend”. Chosen to reflect that new residents and families will live in the development and will blend together as a community, which many past residents did in Glen Innes when the area was originally established.
Matawhero	Te Reo Māori name for the planet Mars. Inspired by the Matariki Festival held in Glen Innes every year.
Lumanai Lane	Samoan word that means 'the future'. Lumanaʻi, (as a verb) – “to have before one, to have in prospect, either of time or place”.

Fenchurch Stage 5A

24. Road Name Themes (Fenchurch 5A): Applicant TRC commented that their preferred and alternative road name options for the proposed pedestrian walkway were selected in Te Reo to reflect the cultural heritage and history of Māori in the Glen Innes community. Like the walkway, the name will symbolically link the history of the area with its future.

25. The Applicant’s proposed names and meanings for Fenchurch 5A are set out in the table below:

Table 5: Fenchurch 5A Proposed Road Names & Meanings

Proposed Name

(& Preference)

Meaning (As Described By Applicant)

Te Ra Putanga Walk

(Preferred Name)

Te Reo Māori meaning ‘the rising sun’.
An appropriate designation for a walkway which will lead across from the east (sunrise) to the west, providing light between the new houses. Inspires and links hope, history and homes.

Ukutoia Walk

(Alternative 1)

Traditional Māori name for Glen Innes (the name means “to pull the waka up on to the clay”). Symbolic sound of the waka pulled ashore commemorating the resting place of the waka.

Nearby Wai o Taiki Bay and Pt England Reserve were areas where waka were brought up from the Tāmaki River by early Māori.
Suggested as a word to promote future aspirations and acknowledgement of the beautiful geographic surroundings.

Wākāinga Walk

(Alternative 2)

Te Reo Māori word - means 'true home, home base, home'.
Suggested as a word that promotes good community spirit.
The walkway will physically provide a safe pedestrian link between all the new homes in and around this new subdivision.

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

26. The decision sought for this report does not trigger any significant policy and is not considered to have any immediate impact on the community.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori / Māori impact statement

27. The applicant wrote to all relevant local mana whenua (via email) and invited comments on the proposed road names. Nga Maunga Whakahii o Kaipara, Ngati Manuhiri, Ngāti Whātua, Te Kawerau a Maki, and Ngāti Whātua Ōrākei all responded to defer their interests to the other Ngati Whatua entities. Ngāi Tai ki Tāmaki objected to some of the proposed names, which the applicant has respected and therefore those names have not been submitted as part of this application.

28. No objections or additional comments were raised by Mana Whenua for any of the other proposed names

29. Auckland Council and the Road Naming Guidelines actively encourage the use of Maori names for roads, buildings and other public places as an opportunity to publicly demonstrate a Maori identity that is Auckland’s point of difference in the world.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea / Financial implications

30. The applicant has responsibility for ensuring that appropriate signage will be installed accordingly once approval is obtained for the new road names.

Ngā raru tūpono / Risks

31. There are no significant risks to Council as road naming is a routine part of the subdivision development process.

Ngā koringa ā-muri / Next steps

32. Approved road names are notified to Land Information New Zealand who records them on their nationwide land information database, which includes street addresses issued by all Councils.

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Attachment A - Site Plans	21
b ⇩	Attachment B - Location Plans	23

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Author

Elizabeth Salter - Subdivision Technical Officer

Authorisers

Trevor Cullen - Team Leader Subdivision

Victoria Villaraza - Relationship Manager

Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board

23 October 2018

Road Name Approval: New Private Road at 7-11 Tamatea Avenue, Point England

File No.: CP2018/19067

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1. To seek approval from the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board to name a new private road, being a jointly owned access lot, created by way of a subdivision development at 7-11 Tamatea Avenue, Point England.

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

3. The Applicant, Tamaki Regeneration Company (“TRC”), has proposed the following names for consideration by the Local Board, for the new private jointly owned access lot (JOAL) that will service 6 new dwellings:

· Poe Tiare Close (preferred name)

· Kaute Lane (alternative 1)

· Tokomaha Lane (alternative 2)

4. The proposed road names have been assessed to ensure that they meet Auckland Council’s Road Naming Guidelines and the National Addressing Standards for road naming. Mana Whenua were also consulted.

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board:

a) approve the name ‘[local board to insert chosen name from the abovementioned list of options]’ for the new private road (a jointly owned access lot) created by way of a subdivision at 7-11 Tamatea Avenue, Point England, in accordance with section 319(1)(j) of the Local Government Act 1974. Council resource consent references BUN60313761, LUC60313762 & SUB60313763.

Horopaki / Context

5. Resource consent for a 10-lot residential subdivision development at 7-11 Tamatea Avenue was granted in March 2018, including removal of the three existing dwellings on the site and replacement with 10 new dwellings, all of which are planned to be state-owned (Council resource consent references BUN60313761, LUC60313762 & SUB60313763).

6. The subdivision will be accessed by a new private JOAL off of Tamatea Avenue, servicing 6 of the 10 new dwellings. The remaining dwellings have access directly onto Tamatea Avenue.

7. A map and plan of the development is attached in Appendix 1.

8. In accordance with the National Addressing Standards for road naming (the AS/NZS 4819-2011 standard), the JOAL requires a road name because it serves more than 5 lots.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu / Analysis and advice

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

10. Auckland Council’s road naming criteria typically require that road names reflect one of the following local themes, with the use of Maori names being actively encouraged:

- a historical or ancestral linkage to an area; or

- a particular landscape, environmental or biodiversity theme or feature; or

- an existing (or introduced) thematic identity in the area.

11. Road Name Themes: Applicant TRC has stated that the preferred road name options for the new JOAL “were selected to respectfully acknowledge existing and future residents near the development site and to convey beautiful images of Polynesian influence within Point England. The preferred road name options also describe key attributes of the future mini-neighbourhood (in the Tamaki Regeneration area)”.

12. The Applicant’s proposed names and meanings are set out in the table below:

Proposed Names (& preferences)

Meaning (as described by applicant)

Poe Tiare Close

(preferred name)

Cook Island Māori word, meaning ‘closed flower’. Submitted for evoking a ‘positive vibe’ - 'Tiare' is the common name used across Polynesia to mean a beautiful flower. This name acknowledges the Polynesian population represented throughout Tamaki and should convey a closeness of community in this access way

Kaute Lane

(alternative 1)

Cook Island Māori word, to describe the hibiscus flower, found on all islands in and throughout the Pacific including here in the warmer areas of NZ. Tamaki has a high concentration of Pacific tenants and organisations. It would be nice to have a familiar term as a street name.

‘Kaute’ is also a Te Reo Māori verb meaning ‘to count, add up’.

Tokomaha Lane (alternative 2)

Te Reo Māori word meaning: (noun) ‘many people, a crowd, majority’. This word reflects the close-knit quarters for residents within this small development.

13. Assessment: The names proposed by the Applicant have been assessed to ensure that they meet Auckland Council’s Road Naming Guidelines and the National Addressing Standards for road naming.

14. Confirmation: Land Information New Zealand (LINZ) has confirmed that all of the proposed names are acceptable and not duplicated elsewhere in the region.

15. Road type: ‘Close’ and ‘Lane’ are acceptable road types for the new private road, suiting the form and layout of the road, as per the Auckland Council Road Naming Guidelines.

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

16. The decision sought for this report does not trigger any significant policy and is not considered to have any immediate impact on the community.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori / Māori impact statement

17. A list of more than 20 proposed names was submitted by Tamaki Regeneration Company to Mana Whenua for consideration on 10 September 2018 through to 28 September 2018. Most responses from mana whenua were to defer to other groups, who in turn provided no further responses or comments.

18. Only Ngāi Tai ki Tāmaki replied with an objection to some names on the list - these comments were respected and those names have not been submitted as part of this application.

19. There were no other comments or objections concerning the names proposed for this application.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea / Financial implications

20. The applicant has responsibility for ensuring that appropriate signage will be installed accordingly once approval is obtained for the new road name.

Ngā raru tūpono / Risks

21. There are no significant risks to Council as road naming is a routine part of the subdivision development process.

Ngā koringa ā-muri / Next steps

22. Approved road names are notified to Land Information New Zealand who records them on their nationwide land information database, which includes street addresses issued by all Councils.

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Attachment 1: Road Naming Location and Site Plan	31

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Author

Emerald James - Subdivision Advisor

Authorisers

Trevor Cullen - Team Leader Subdivision

Victoria Villaraza - Relationship Manager

Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board

23 October 2018

Draft Facility Partnership Policy

File No.: CP2018/19476

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1. To seek local boards’ views on the draft Facility Partnerships Policy.

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2. A ‘facility partnership’ is where Auckland Council invests in a community facility alongside others. Done well, partnerships can enable and empower our communities, and help us provide more of the quality facilities Auckland needs, faster and more cost-effectively.

3. The council intends to meet more facility needs through partnerships in future, and a new regional policy (refer Attachment B) has been developed to guide their selection and support.

4. Key policy positions outlined in the draft Facility Partnerships Policy and summarised in Attachment A include:

· a focus on shared outcomes

· partnerships that recognise, value and honour Te Ao Māori

· multiple partnership models, with fit-for-purpose arrangements

· ‘Proactive’ and ‘Responsive’ partnership tracks

· principles to shape eligibility and investment priorities

· valuing (and costing) in-kind support

· a stronger focus on the partnership relationship

· greater acknowledgement of the complexity of developing/managing assets.

5. During policy development, staff engaged with Māori to explore specific opportunities and barriers for facility partnerships with Māori. The findings from this engagement (refer Attachment C) have shaped a commitment in the draft policy to partner in ways that align with the Treaty of Waitangi principles, and acknowledge the distinct characteristics of marae.

6. The draft policy was endorsed by the Environment and Community Committee in June 2018 for public consultation and formal engagement with local boards. The consultation activities carried out and the community feedback received are summarised in Attachment D. Public feedback was highly supportive of the draft policy overall.

7. Staff attended local board workshops on the draft policy during July and August. This report invites local boards to formally indicate their support for the proposed approach, and/or provide any additional feedback on the policy they would like the committee to consider.

8. A summary of all feedback and a final policy will be tabled for consideration and adoption by the Environment and Community Committee in November 2018.

9. Implementation of the new approach is expected to begin during the 2019/2020 financial year.

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board:

a) support the adoption of the Draft Facility Partnerships Policy, and provide any additional feedback on the proposed approach for the Environment and Community Committee’s consideration.

Horopaki / Context

10. Auckland Council is a major provider of community, arts and sports facilities, but not the only provider. A ‘facility partnership’ is where the council invests in a community facility alongside others. Done well, partnerships can enable and empower communities, and help the council to provide more of the quality facilities Auckland needs, faster and more cost-effectively.

11. There are already around 300 of these arrangements in Auckland, and the council has signalled more facility needs will be met through partnerships in future. There is currently no regional policy to guide the selection and support of facility partnerships.

12. In 2016, a cross-council team began work on a new regional policy. The team met with a number of partners and experts to understand existing practice and how policy could improve decision-making in the partnering experience.

13. Findings from discovery work were shared in December 2016 at walk-throughs with elected members, staff and participating partners, and reported to the Environment and Community committee in February 2017 (resolution number ENV/2017/9).

14. A new approach was developed and tested at walk-throughs in February 2018. The committee endorsed the draft policy for public consultation and formal engagement with local boards in June 2018 (resolution number ENV/2018/74).

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu / Analysis and advice

Facility partnerships benefit the council and the community

15. Auckland Council supports facility partnerships because they can:

· leverage external investment and community effort

· empower communities, and help us respond to Auckland’s increasing diversity

· optimise the existing facility network and reduce the need for new facilities.

Facility partnership selection and management is ad-hoc and inconsistent

16. Discovery work in 2016 and into 2017 identified a range of issues that are preventing the council from realising the full potential of facility partnerships.

17. Currently, facility partnership decisions are made on an ad-hoc basis. Often the lifetime costs and benefits of the partnership have not been fully considered, or how these relate to network gaps and evolving community needs.

18. Investment opportunities and selection decisions lack transparency, and our management processes tend to be uncoordinated and inconsistent. Many partners report that they feel under-prepared and insufficiently supported by council to deliver successfully.

Proposed policy provides strategic approach with tailored process

19. Staff have developed a new policy (refer Attachment B) to respond directly to these findings.

20. This will enable the council and partners to make more informed and strategic investment decisions. Advice will be based on clearer evidence of need and impact and comprehensive costings and will emphasise viability and sustainability.

21. The new approach introduces a more transparent and contestable selection process. Requirements will be tailored to reflect the scale, complexity and risk of each proposal. The policy recognises the importance of quality relationships, and the need to better coordinate staff expertise and support to improve partners’ experience and build capability.

22. The draft policy proposes:

· a focus on shared outcomes

· partnerships that recognise, value and honour Te Ao Māori

· multiple partnership models, with fit-for-purpose arrangements

· ‘Proactive’ and ‘Responsive’ partnership tracks

· principles to shape eligibility and investment priorities

· valuing (and costing) in-kind support

· a stronger focus on the partnership relationship

· greater acknowledgement of the complexity of developing/managing assets.

23. A summary of key policy positions relating to these themes is provided as Attachment A.

Public engagement held during July and August 2018

24. Staff undertook public consultation and briefed interested advisory panels between June and August 2018. Public consultation activities included six drop-in consultation events across Auckland, and online submissions via the council’s ‘Have Your Say’ website.

25. Public feedback was highly supportive of the draft policy overall. Those providing feedback generally saw the value of having a policy for this activity and were positive about its intent. Responses to questions about specific aspects of the policy were also strongly affirmative.

Public feedback shows strong support for new approach

26. Key themes that emerged from the public consultation are:

· Most respondents agree the new approach will better enable council to invest in the right facility partnerships and ensure that partnerships work for both partners and council.

· The investment principles, the proposal to enable appropriate commercial activities in facilities, and the establishment of Lead Relationship Brokers were all positively received by the majority of respondents.

· The ‘Track, Type and Scale’ model was also welcomed for encompassing a wide range of facility partnerships, and the intention to ensure requirements are proportionate.

· Respondents hope the new approach will make it easier for partners to navigate the multiple council systems and processes involved and get good support from staff.

· Using the Treaty of Waitangi (Treaty) principles to guide partnerships with Māori was welcomed by most, but this was acknowledged as a complex area.

· Respondents appreciated a more visually appealing document that is easier to navigate.

Most public concerns relate to application of policy

27. Concerns identified included:

· how the investment principles will be applied in practice, especially where they must be ‘traded off’ against each other

· whether some communities will be unfairly advantaged by the new approach

· whether the higher level of staff support will be properly resourced, and implemented as intended across all parts of council

· whether the process is flexible enough to respond to the ‘messy reality’ of partnerships.

28. A full summary of the public consultation activities to date and a more in-depth description of key feedback themes is provided as Attachment D for local board consideration.

29. Key national and regional stakeholders will also be briefed prior to the draft being finalised.

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

30. Local boards have a strong interest in facility partnerships and some decision-making responsibility in this area, including:

· determining local outcomes and advocating for local investment priorities

· governing local and sub-regional facility partnership relationships and agreements

· allocating local discretionary funding and community leases of council property.

31. Staff have engaged with local boards informally at various stages throughout the discovery work and subsequent policy development. Local board member views and concerns have helped shape the draft policy.

32. During July and August 2018, local boards were offered a workshop to hear an overview of the proposed policy approach and seek clarification on any areas of local interest or concern. Eighteen local boards requested a workshop.

Formal local board feedback sought September and October 2018

33. Community feedback has now been summarised for local boards’ consideration. Staff are seeking to understand local boards’ views on the new approach and requesting a formal indication of support at local board business meetings during September and October 2018.

34. Staff would particularly value local board feedback on the following parts of the draft policy (refer Attachment B), which are likely to have the most bearing on local board decision-making:

· the Tracks, Types and Scales model (p.16-23) to differentiate partnerships and customise the partnership process

· the draft investment principles (p.26) and priorities (p.33)

· proposed eligibility criteria for investment (p.27-30)

· the proposal to allow facility partnerships to generate revenue through appropriate commercial activities (p.31)

· the focus on quality relationships, as outlined in the proposed partnering principles (p.35) and supported by allocation of a lead relationship broker (p.38).

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori / Māori impact statement

35. Marae are a focal point for Māori social, economic, environmental and cultural development, and are identified in the Community Facilities Network Plan as potential facility partners.

Engagement to better understand facility partnerships and Te Ao Māori

36. In 2017, staff undertook additional engagement with Māori, with a focus on marae, to ensure that the new policy incorporates any special context, barriers or opportunities for facility partnerships with Māori. A summary of the findings is provided as Attachment C.

37. The draft policy reflects these findings and commits the council to partnering with Māori in ways which align with the Treaty principles and reflect the distinct characteristics of marae.

38. The draft policy approach and the findings report will be shared at hui with interested marae during September, as part of initial discussions on a new Marae Investment Policy.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea / Financial implications

39. The Facility Partnerships Policy is not supported by a dedicated budget. Future investment in facility partnerships will be provided through existing budgets for facility development and operation, allocated through the Long-term Plan 2018-2028 and Annual Plans. Local boards may also award grants and community leases of council property to support facility partnerships.

Ngā raru tūpono / Risks

Risk	Mitigation
Adoption of a new policy may create expectations that there will be additional budget to support facility partnerships.	All public-facing communications and guidance about the new policy will reference the funding available from existing regional and local budgets and how this will be allocated.
Existing facility partners may be concerned that the new policy will impact arrangements already in place, or ongoing council investment.	The new policy will guide decisions on new facility partnerships only, unless an existing partnership is already scheduled for review, and guidance will clearly state this. Where existing partnerships are to be reviewed, staff will ensure partners are adequately supported to prepare.
The transition to the new policy approach will be operationally complex. It impacts multiple teams across the council, and new business processes, guidance and forms will need to be designed to support it.	Detailed implementation planning will be required to ensure the transition is as smooth as possible. Phased implementation over the first financial year (2019/2020) may be necessary to achieve this.

Ngā koringa ā-muri / Next steps

40. A summary of all feedback and a final policy will be tabled for consideration and adoption by the Environment and Community Committee in November 2018.

41. Implementation of the new approach is expected to begin during the 2019/2020 financial year.

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a	Facility Partnerships Policy - summary of key policy positions (Under Separate Cover)
b	Draft Facility Partnerships Policy (Under Separate Cover)
c	Facility partnerships with Māori - Summary report (Under Separate Cover)
d	Draft Facility Partnerships Policy - Public feedback summary report (Under Separate Cover)

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Author

Rebekah Forman - Principal Policy Analyst

Authorisers

Kataraina Maki - GM - Community & Social Policy

Victoria Villaraza - Relationship Manager

Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board

23 October 2018

Review of the Code of Conduct

File No.: CP2018/19477

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1. To seek local board feedback on the draft Code of Conduct (code).

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2. The council’s initial code was prepared by the Auckland Transition Agency prior to Auckland Council commencing and was last reviewed in 2013. The code has worked well but there have been a number of issues identified. The Governing Body agreed that the code be reviewed through the Joint Governance Working Party. Presentations were made to local board cluster meetings earlier this year.

3. Based on feedback to date, an amended code has been drafted and the Joint Governance Working Party has approved it to be reported to local boards for feedback. The proposals contained in the draft code address the issues that were identified.

4. A comparison of the draft code with the current code can be summarised as follows:

· the code itself is more concise

· material breaches are defined

· there are separate complaint processes depending on whether a complaint relates to a non-material breach, a material breach or conflict of interest

· the current independent review panel is replaced by a Conduct Commissioner, who can impose sanctions

· findings of the Conduct Commissioner (for material breaches) will be made public to assist compliance with sanctions imposed by the Conduct Commissioner

· there is no political involvement in determining a complaint or imposing sanctions

· related documents are bundled in with the code and key policies and protocols and adopted with the code:

o Conflict of Interest Policy

o access to information protocol

o election year policy

o communications policy

o media protocols.

5. Local board feedback is being sought on the draft code.

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board:

a) provide its feedback on the draft Code of Conduct attached to this report.

Horopaki / Context

What is the Code of Conduct

6. A code of conduct essentially sets out a council’s expectations about how members will conduct themselves. Every council is required to adopt a code of conduct (Local Government Act 2002, schedule 7, clause 15). It must set out:

(a) understandings and expectations adopted by the local authority about the manner in which members may conduct themselves while acting in their capacity as members, including—

(i) behaviour toward one another, staff, and the public; and

(ii) disclosure of information, including (but not limited to) the provision of any document, to elected members that—

(A) is received by, or is in the possession of, an elected member in his or her capacity as an elected member; and

(B) relates to the ability of the local authority to give effect to any provision of this Act; and

(b) a general explanation of—

(i) the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987; and

(ii) any other enactment or rule of law applicable to members.

7. Once adopted, a code of conduct requires a 75 per cent majority to change it.

8. Members of local boards must comply with the code of conduct that is adopted by the Governing Body (Local Government Act 2002, schedule 7, clause 36B).

Reasons for reviewing the Code of Conduct

9. In working with the current code, the council has experienced a number of issues:

· It is not easy to follow. It includes principles, descriptions of roles and responsibilities and statements about relationships and behaviours. However, a complaint about a breach can only relate to the section on relationships and behaviours.

· Although a positive aspect of the current code is a focus, initially, on resolving complaints to the satisfaction of the complainant, it is not appropriate for an allegation about a conflict of interest to be resolved to the satisfaction of the complainant. Conflict of interest allegations need to be tested against the law.

· The code does not distinguish between non-material and material breaches. All allegations of breaches are treated the same.

· The final point of escalation of a complaint is to the independent review panel which comprises three members. This process is valuable but is underused because it can be expensive with three members being required.

· There needs to be a requirement that a complainant has tried to resolve their complaint prior to submitting it to the formal complaint process in the code.

· The code is underused because it is seen to ‘lack teeth’. There needs to be a review of available sanctions.

10. PWC were commissioned to review the current code and the Governing Body agreed at its February 2018 meeting that the current code should be reviewed. The Joint Governance Working Party is overseeing the development of the code.

Engagement to date

11. Staff made presentations to local board cluster meetings and a Governing Body workshop earlier this year. Among the issues discussed was whether a revised code should be concise and principles-based or prescriptive.

12. The approach to the draft code was discussed with the Joint Governance Working Party, whose guidance included that there should be no political involvement in the determination of complaints and the imposition of sanctions.

13. A draft was presented to the Joint Governance Working Party on 12 September 2018 which the working party approved for reporting to local boards for their feedback.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu / Analysis and advice

The draft code

14. The draft code is at attachment A.

15. The draft code is presented as two documents:

· The code itself contains:

o principles

o descriptions of material breaches

o the complaints process.

· The second document contains attachments which provide more detail:

o policies and protocols which are adopted along with the code and are an intrinsic part of the code. Elected members must abide by the conduct set out in these documents

o description of applicable legislation which the Local Government Act requires all codes to contain

o documents which are described as ‘external’ in the sense that they are agreed outside the code but are relevant to the conduct of members. An example is the Expenses Policy, which is agreed by the Finance and Performance Committee and approved by the Remuneration Authority. It is useful to have these documents included for easy reference and to provide context to some aspects of the code.

16. The code describes two key principles – trust and respect. The principle of trust captures the expectations of the community in their elected representatives. For example, the community trusts that members will act in the interest of the community and not their own interest. This principle encompasses the ethical dimension of conduct.

17. The principle of respect captures the expectations members have of each other in terms of their conduct towards each other and towards the public.

18. The principles are written in a style which indicates personal commitment (‘I will’).

The complaints process

19. The draft code contains definitions of ‘material breaches’. This defines what the bottom line is and at what point a breach needs to be treated more seriously than other breaches. A complaint which relates to a material breach is treated differently to a complaint which relates to a non-material breach.

20. A complaint is lodged with the Chief Executive. A complaint must set out what part of the code has been breached, must provide evidence of the breach and evidence of attempts to resolve the breach (where the code refers to Chief Executive, this includes a nominee of the Chief Executive).

21. If the complaint relates to a conflict of interest, the Chief Executive will arrange for the member to receive advice from either Legal Services or Audit and Risk. The complainant has no further role. If the member does not comply with advice, the matter becomes a material breach for investigation by the Conduct Commissioner.

22. In other cases, the Chief Executive refers the complaint to an ‘investigator’. An investigator is appointed by the Chief Executive and may be a staff member or external person.

23. The investigator conducts a preliminary assessment of the complaint and has the discretion to dismiss the complaint if it is frivolous or vexatious or without substance.

24. If the complaint relates to a non-material breach, the investigator may make non-binding recommendations, including a recommendation to apologise or undertake voluntary mediation.

25. If the complaint relates to a material breach, it is referred to a Conduct Commissioner. A Conduct Commissioner is a person of the calibre of a retired High Court judge and is selected from a list of such persons which has been approved by the Governing Body.

26. The Conduct Commissioner may direct mediation or conduct an investigation, which may include a hearing.

Sanctions

27. The Conduct Commissioner has the power to impose sanctions, including a requirement to apologise, withdraw remarks or make a public statement. The report of the Conduct Commissioner is formal and made public, to promote compliance with the sanctions imposed by the Conduct Commissioner.

28. The Conduct Commissioner replaces the current independent review panel, which is not used frequently due to the cost associated with it having three members.

29. Staff had been asked to investigate whether there could be financial sanctions. The Remuneration Authority was asked whether it would agree to a reduction of salary paid to a member who breached the code. The reply included the following:

· The Authority is often asked whether the performance of an individual or individuals is considered when making a determination. Performance does not feature in the list of criteria that the Authority is required to take into account. Therefore, it has no mandate to consider performance.

· Section 14 (implementation of determinations) of the Remuneration Authority Act 1977 says that every determination issued by the Authority must be implemented according to their tenor and it is unlawful to act contrary to a determination. This prevents a council from making deductions from an elected member’s salary.

Attachments to the code

30. The attachments include:

· policies and protocols that are adopted along with the code:

o Conflict of Interest Policy

o access to information protocol

o election year policy

o communications policy

o media protocols

· a description of legislation that is required by the Local Government Act 2002

· documents that are external to the code but are included because they are relevant to conduct:

o guide to governance roles and responsibilities

o guide to working with staff

o Expenses Policy.

31. The attached policies include the Conflict of Interest Policy which has been rewritten, and a new ‘access to information’ protocol. All other documents attached to the code are from existing sources and are not new.

Conflict of Interest Policy

32. The Conflict of Interest Policy has been updated to reflect the current legal position relating to conflicts of interest and pre-determination, as the current policy is out of date.

33. It remedies a current inconsistency between the treatment of financial and non-financial interests (being automatically disqualified from decision-making for a financial interest, but not for a non-financial interest).

34. It includes a new section on pre-determination, which is a separate legal concept to conflicts of interest.

35. It places stronger emphasis on the interests of the council in the probity and integrity of its decisions, as the consequences of failing to manage are more commonly borne by the council.

36. It is intended to be more user-friendly and accessible.

New protocol included: Elected member access to information

37. Included in the policies and protocols attached to the Code of Conduct is a new ‘Access to information protocol’. This protocol puts a framework around elected members’ legal right to council information under the ‘need-to-know’ principle. This protocol is in addition to the existing ways that elected members can gain access to information. It is aimed at addressing circumstances where there has been lack of clarity over requests for information where it is not clear if it is or is not confidential.

The ‘need-to-know’ principle for elected members

38. In addition to rights under the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 (LGOIMA), elected members have a legal right to council information under the ‘need-to-know’ principle established by the common law. Under this principle, a good reason to access council information exists if an elected member shows that access to the information is reasonably necessary to enable them to perform their statutory functions as a member of the council. In some limited cases, elected members may also be able establish a ‘need-to-know’ council information relevant to their representative duties.

Why we are proposing a protocol

39. The purposes of the draft protocol are to:

· give effect to the legal ‘need-to-know’ principle

· enable elected members to properly perform their statutory functions as democratically elected local decision-makers, and to facilitate them in fulfilling their representative duties. This promotes democratic and effective local government

· provide elected members with better and more efficient access to council information than is provided for LGOIMA, by reducing the number of withholding grounds that can apply to the information and the timeframes for response

· provide for transparent and impartial Chief Executive decisions on requests under this protocol, and a democratic mechanism for the reconsideration of such decisions

· to provide that confidential council information will be made available to elected members in a manner that reflects the council’s legal duty to protect the confidentiality of the information and does not prejudice the interests protected by LGOIMA.

40. We have agreed with the Chief Ombudsman that we will develop a protocol to better manage elected member access to information.

41. Because this is the first time that council is adopting such a protocol, staff are suggesting that it is revisited and reviewed within 18 months of its adoption to ensure that it is working effectively, best enabling elected members to properly perform their statutory functions as democratically elected local decision-makers and facilitating them in fulfilling their representative duties.

Summary of suggested process in draft protocol

42. The protocol sets out a framework and process for elected member requests for council information. In summary, the process in the protocol is:

· elected members make a request for information held by council and explain why they need the information

· the Chief Executive makes a decision on whether the information is reasonably necessary for the elected member to exercise their statutory functions or performance of their representative duties, and whether any of the limited reasons to withhold may apply (for example if personal information should be redacted for Privacy Act reasons)

· decision and the provision of information to the elected member (with conditions if necessary for confidential information) within five working

· if an elected member is not happy with the Chief Executive decision, they can ask it to be reconsidered by the Audit and Risk Committee.

Local board feedback

43. Local board views are being sought on the proposed changes in the draft code and the supporting policies that will be adopted alongside the code. In particular:

· the principles based and positive intent in the drafting of the code

· defining material breaches and making the findings of complaints of a material breach public

· replacing the current independent review panel with an independent Conduct Commissioner, who can impose sanctions which means having no political involvement in determining a complaint or imposing sanctions

· support for the access to information protocol.

44. Feedback from local boards will be considered by the Joint Governance Working Party at its meeting on 31 October 2018. The working party will then recommend a final draft code to the Governing Body for adoption. Once adopted by the Governing Body, the code applies to all elected members.

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

45. Local board feedback will be reported to the Joint Governance Working Party. The code impacts local boards in that all members must abide by it.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori / Māori impact statement

46. The Code of Conduct is an internal procedural document. The principles and values expressed in the document provide for inclusivity and specifically, disallow discrimination.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea / Financial implications

47. There may be financial implications if the investigator that the Chief Executive appoints is external. Escalation to the Conduct Commissioner will have lesser financial implications than referral to a full review panel as provided in the existing code, but because of the reduced financial cost, may be utilised more often.

Ngā raru tūpono / Risks

48. There is a risk that some elected members will not be fully socialised with the new code. Staff will investigate how best to ensure all elected members are fully aware of the new code.

Ngā koringa ā-muri / Next steps

49. The feedback from local boards will be reported to the meeting of the Joint Governance Working Party on 31 October 2018. The working party will then recommend a final draft code to the Governing Body for adoption.

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Draft Code of Conduct	51
b ⇩	Draft Code of Conduct Attachments	65

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Author

Warwick McNaughton - Principal Advisor - Democracy Services

Authorisers

Marguerite Delbet - General Manager Democracy Services

Louise Mason - GM Local Board Services

Victoria Villaraza - Relationship Manager

Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board

23 October 2018

Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board

23 October 2018

Addition to the 2016-2019 Maungakiekie-Tamaki Local Board Meetings Schedule

File No.: CP2018/19706

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1. To seek approval for one meeting date to be added to the 2016-2019 Maungakiekie-Tamaki Local Board meeting schedule in order to accommodate the Annual Plan 2019/2020 timeframes.

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2. The Maungakiekie-Tamaki Local Board adopted the 2016-2019 meeting schedule on 22 November 2016.

3. At that time the specific times and dates for meetings for local board decision making in relation to the local board agreement as part of the Annual Plan 2019/2020 were unknown.

4. The board is being asked to approve one meeting date as an addition to the Maungakiekie-Tamaki Local Board meeting schedule so that the Annual Plan 2019/2020 timeframes can be met.

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board:

a) approve one meeting date to be added to the 2016-2019 Maungakiekie-Tamaki Local Board meeting schedule to accommodate the Annual Plan 2019/2020 timeframes as follows:

i) Tuesday, 4^th June 2019

b) note the venue for the meeting will be at the Maungakiekie-Tamaki Local Board office, 7-13 Pilkington Road, Panmure, starting at 1pm.

Horopaki / Context

5. The Local Government Act 2002 (LGA) and the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 (LGOIMA) have requirements regarding local board meeting schedules.

6. In summary, adopting a meeting schedule helps meet the requirements of:

· clause 19, Schedule 7 of the LGA on general provisions for meetings, which requires the chief executive to give notice in writing to each local board member of the time and place of meetings. Such notification may be provided by the adoption of a schedule of business meetings.

· sections 46, 46(A) and 47 in Part 7 of the LGOIMA, which requires that meetings are publicly notified, agendas and reports are available at least two working days before a meeting and that local board meetings are open to the public.

7. The Maungakiekie-Tamaki Local Board adopted its business meeting schedule at its 22 November 2016 business meeting.

8. The timeframes for local board decision making in relation to the local board agreement which is part of the Annual Plan 2019/2020 were unavailable when the meeting schedule was originally adopted.

9. The board is being asked to make decisions in mid-December and early June to feed into the Annual Plan 2019/2020 process. The June timeframe is outside the board’s normal meeting cycle.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu / Analysis and advice

10. The board has two choices:

i) Add the meeting as an addition to the meeting schedule.

ii) Add the meeting as an extraordinary meeting.

11. For option one, statutory requirements allow enough time for the meeting to be scheduled as an addition to the meeting schedule and other topics may be considered as per any other ordinary meeting. However there is a risk that if the Annual Plan 2019/2020 timeframes change or the information is not ready for the meeting there would need to be an additional extraordinary meeting scheduled anyway.

12. For option two, only the specific topic Annual Plan 2019/2020 may be considered for which the meeting is being held. There is a risk that no other policies or plans with similar timeframes or running in relation to the Annual Plan 2019/2020 process could be considered at this meeting.

13. Since there is enough time to meet statutory requirements, staff recommend approving the meeting as an addition to the meeting schedule as it allows more flexibility for the board to consider a range of issues.

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

14. This report requests the board’s decision to schedule one additional meeting and consider whether to approve it as an extraordinary meeting or an addition to the meeting schedule.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori / Māori impact statement

15. There is no specific impact for Māori arising from this report. Local boards work with Māori on projects and initiatives of shared interest.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea / Financial implications

16. There are no financial implications in relation to this report apart from the standard costs associated with servicing a business meeting.

Ngā raru tūpono / Risks

17. There are no significant risks associated with this report.

Ngā koringa ā-muri / Next steps

18. Implement the processes associated with preparing for business meetings.

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Author