Agenda of Upper Harbour Local Board

An apology from Member John McLean has 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.

The Auckland Council Code of Conduct for Elected Members (the Code) requires elected members to fully acquaint themselves with, and strictly adhere to, the provisions of Auckland Council’s Conflicts of Interest Policy. The policy covers two classes of conflict of interest:

i) A financial conflict of interest, which is one where a decision or act of the local board could reasonably give rise to an expectation of financial gain or loss to an elected member; and

ii) A non-financial conflict interest, which does not have a direct personal financial component. It may arise, for example, from a personal relationship, or involvement with a non-profit organisation, or from conduct that indicates prejudice or predetermination.

The Office of the Auditor General has produced guidelines to help elected members understand the requirements of the Local Authority (Member’s Interest) Act 1968. The guidelines discuss both types of conflicts in more detail, and provide elected members with practical examples and advice around when they may (or may not) have a conflict of interest.

Copies of both the Auckland Council Code of Conduct for Elected Members and the Office of the Auditor General guidelines are available for inspection by members upon request.

Any questions relating to the Code or the guidelines may be directed to the Relationship Manager in the first instance.

4 Confirmation of Minutes

That the Upper Harbour Local Board:

a) confirm the ordinary minutes of its meeting, held on Thursday, 20 September 2018, including the confidential section, 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 Upper Harbour 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 ⇩	Upper Harbour Local Board open unconfirmed minutes - 20 September 2018	9
b ⇩	Upper Harbour Local Board minutes attachments - 20 September 2018	23

Upper Harbour Local Board

18 October 2018

Expression of interest priorities for the Albany Community Hub, Albany, the Headquarters building and the Sunderland Lounge, Hobsonville Point

File No.: CP2018/18866

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1. To approve the local board priorities for the Albany Community Hub (Te Pokapū ā-Hapori o Ōkahukura), the Headquarters building and the Sunderland Lounge.

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2. The Upper Harbour Local Board has approved that the following community facilities be operated by local community organisations:

· the Albany Community Hub (Te Pokapū ā-Hapori o Ōkahukura) (resolution number UH/2017/4)

· the Headquarters building and the Sunderland Lounge, Hobsonville Point (resolution number UH/2018/2).

3. A suitable community group is to be sought by 1 July 2019 through an expression of interest (EOI) process in order that the Albany Community Hub, and the Headquarters building with the Sunderland Lounge, can transfer from council to community management.

4. Workshops have been held with the local board to develop a vision for the operation of these facilities. These priority areas will be used as criteria for the EOI process for both the Albany Community Hub, and the Headquarters building with the Sunderland Lounge.

5. Staff from departments across council will assess the EOI applications using criteria that includes the local board plan outcomes and the approved local board priorities for the facilities.

6. Analysis and recommendations for the applications will be brought to the local board for a decision in April 2019.

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Upper Harbour Local Board:

a) approve the priorities for the Albany Community Hub, Albany, and the Headquarters building with the Sunderland Lounge, Hobsonville Point, to be used as part of the community management expression of interest criteria, which are:

i) the ‘place’ becomes, or is seen as, the heart of the community, managed by a local organisation

ii) the ‘place’ is an inclusive space that is used by the diverse and changing community and is not identified as belonging to a select community group

iii) a ‘place’ where placemaking, events and other community empowering activities can happen in and around the ‘place’, even if delivered through partnerships and other external relationships.

Horopaki / Context

7. Albany Community Hub, at 575 Albany Highway, opened in 2017 and is currently under council management.

8. The Headquarters building, and the Sunderland Lounge, are being refurbished as part of a development in Hobsonville Point. The Headquarters building is due to be completed in late 2018 and the Sunderland Lounge by early 2019.

9. The local board have approved the transfer from council to community management of the Albany Community Hub (resolution number UH/2017/4), and the Headquarters building and the Sunderland Lounge (resolution number UH/2018/2).

10. Staff recommend running two concurrent EOI processes for the Albany Community Hub, and for the Headquarters building together with the Sunderland Lounge, to find an appropriate community provider to deliver services from the facilities.

11. The 2017 Upper Harbour Local Board Plan also provides a focus area for the EOI criteria, in particular, the outcome:

· Empowered, engaged and connected Upper Harbour communities. People living in Upper Harbour are able to influence what happens in their neighbourhoods.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu / Analysis and advice

12. After a period of advertising and engagement from November 2018, both EOI applications will open for the month of February 2019.

13. The assessment criteria for the EOI applications (refer Attachment A) will include the local board plan outcomes and the approved local board priorities for the facilities.

14. Staff from departments across council will review the applications and bring analysis and recommendations to the local board for a decision in April 2019. The assessment panel will include the following council staff roles:

· Review facilitator: Community Facilities Contracts Senior Administrator

· Community Places representative: Senior Relationship Advisor

· Community Empowerment representative: Specialist Advisor

· Local Board Services representative: Relationship Manager.

15. Based on feedback received after two workshops with the local board on 19 April 2018 and 9 August 2018, staff identified the following priority areas for the Albany Community Hub, the Headquarters building and the Sunderland Lounge:

· the ‘place’ becomes, or is seen as, the heart of the community, managed by a local organisation

· the ‘place’ is an inclusive space that is used by the diverse and changing community and is not identified as belonging to a select community group

· a ‘place’ where placemaking, events and other community empowering activities can happen in and around the ‘place’, even if delivered through partnerships and other external relationships.

16. Approval of the local board’s priorities for the facilities will enable staff to include them as EOI criteria, to ensure that the successful application is aligned with the direction set by the local board.

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

17. At the workshop held in August 2018, the local board discussed their priorities for the Albany Community Hub, with the Headquarters building and the Sunderland Lounge to be included as part of the assessment criteria for the EOI process.

18. Community management of the facilities is supported by the Empowered Communities Approach and allows communities and local people to have greater control and influence over things they care about.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori / Māori impact statement

19. Mana whenua and mataawaka will be consulted as part of the EOI process to ensure they have the opportunity to participate.

20. As part of council’s commitment to upholding its responsibilities under Te Tiritii o Waitangi, Māori outcomes have been included as a section in the application (refer Attachment A).

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea / Financial implications

21. The Albany Community Hub has an existing asset-based services budget of $52,000 for the delivery of services and operational costs. This budget will be transferred to the successful EOI applicant on1 July 2019, which will be included in the terms of their contract.

22. The Headquarters building and the Sunderland Lounge have $78,000 asset-based services budget for the delivery of services and operational costs. This will be transferred to the successful EOI applicant on 1 July 2019, which will be included in the terms of their contract.

Ngā raru tūpono / Risks

23. To ensure that the EOI process receives a sufficient number of good quality applications, staff will ensure that it is well advertised in the community and that expectations for the management of the facilities is clearly communicated.

24. To ensure a successful transition from council to community management of the facilities, staff will provide ongoing support to the new management staff throughout the process.

Ngā koringa ā-muri / Next steps

25. The EOI process for the Albany Community Hub and for the Headquarters building and the Sunderland Lounge will be advertised from November 2018 and will open for the month of February 2019.

26. Staff will review the applications received and present them to the local board at a workshop for discussion in March 2019.

27. The recommendations for both EOI processes will be presented to the local board for a decision at the April 2019 business meeting.

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Expression of interest application criteria	53

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Author

Marilyn Kelly – Community Places Senior Relationship Advisor

Authorisers

Graham Bodman - General Manager Arts, Community and Events

Eric Perry - Relationship Manager

Upper Harbour Local Board

18 October 2018

Review of the Code of Conduct

File No.: CP2018/18672

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 Upper Harbour 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. Price Waterhouse Coopers (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’ regarding 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 days

· 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	63
b ⇩	Draft Code of Conduct attachments	77

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Author

Warwick McNaughton - Principal Advisor - Democracy Services

Authorisers

Marguerite Delbet - General Manager Democracy Services

Eric Perry - Relationship Manager

Upper Harbour Local Board

18 October 2018

Upper Harbour Local Board

18 October 2018

2018/2019 Upper Harbour Local Grants applications: Round one

File No.: CP2018/18114

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1. To fund, part-fund or decline the 2018/2019 Upper Harbour Local Grant applications round one.

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2. This report presents applications received in round one of the 2018/2019 Upper Harbour Local Grants (refer Attachment B) and Multi-board Grants (refer Attachment C).

3. The Upper Harbour Local Board adopted the Upper Harbour Local Grants Programme 2018/2019 on 20 April 2017 (refer Attachment A). The document sets out application guidelines for contestable community grants submitted to the local board.

4. The Upper Harbour Local Board has set a total community grants budget of $113,425 for the 2018/2019 financial year.

5. Eight applications were received in this round, with a total amount requested of $56,803.

6. Sixteen further applications were received as multi-board applications, requesting a total of $74,262.99.

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Upper Harbour Local Board:

a) agree to fund, part-fund or decline each application in round one of the 2018/2019 Local Grant applications, as outlined in the following table:

Application ID	Organisation	Main focus	Requesting funding for	Amount requested	Eligibility
LG1917-106	Greenhithe Residents Ratepayers and Community Hall Association	Community	Towards the costs to repair and paint the exterior of the Greenhithe Old School Hall	$12,950	Eligible
LG1917-110	Kaipatiki Project Incorporated	Environment	Towards the delivery of running six stalls at the community markets	$5357	Eligible
LG1917-109	Circability Trust	Events	Towards delivery of the event ‘Circus in the Park’, including technical costs, advertising, contributions to the creative director, producer and professional facilitator and performer fees	$10,454	Eligible
LG1917-101	Raquel Chaviz-Nguyen	Sport and recreation	Towards the costs of venue hire, equipment, operational costs and marketing material	$2169	Eligible
LG1917-104	North Harbour Bike Motocross (BMX) Club	Sport and recreation	Towards the purchase of a laptop, tablet, printer, modem router, bar code scanner, and a scanner to match the upgraded track and race programmes	$4920	Eligible
LG1917-105	East Coast Bays and Districts Cricket Club (ECBCC) Incorporated	Sport and recreation	Towards the cost of three months facility fees at Windsor Park	$9000	Eligible
LG1917-108	Windsor Park Board Incorporated	Sport and recreation	Towards repairing corroded steel trusses on Windsor Park clubhouse	$8483	Eligible
LG1917-111	Rosedale Park Sports Trust	Sport and recreation	Towards maintenance costs of the clubhouse located in Rosedale Park	$3470	Eligible
Total				$56,803

b) agree to fund, part-fund or decline the multi-board applications in round one of the 2018/2019 Local Grant applications, as outlined in the following table:

Application ID	Organisation	Main focus	Requesting funding for	Amount requested	Eligibility
MB1819-132	Kaipatiki Community Facilities Trust	Arts and culture	Towards the cost of delivering the ‘Tartan Day Tattoo Celebration Event North Shore 2019’	$1500	Eligible
MB1819-144	The Operating Theatre Trust	Arts and culture	Towards various costs, including hosting volunteers, rehearsal room, venue and ticketing costs from The PumpHouse Theatre, additional lighting hire, costume and set materials, royalties, printing, mailout costs and promotional costs in various media for ‘The Santa Claus Show '18' (1 to 22 December 2018) and ‘The Man Whose Mother was a Pirate' (6 to 29 April 2019)	$2000	Eligible
MB1819-151	New Zealand Dance Advancement Trust	Arts and culture	Towards the costs of venue hire, studio hire and the dance education coordinator, artistic executive, production manager, dancers and senior dance tutors for the ‘2019 Youth and Community Engagement’ programme	$2500	Eligible
MB1819-160	New Zealand Nepal Society Incorporated	Arts and culture	Towards the audio-visual hire and operational costs of Nepal Festival	$8350	Eligible
MB1819-134	North Shore Centres of Mutual Aid (CMA) Incorporated	Community	Towards a proportion of operational costs, excluding wages, for CMA centres for the six-month period 1 January 2019 to 30 June 2019	$3750	Eligible
MB1819-138	Whanau Marama Parenting Limited	Community	Towards salary and travel expenses for the course facilitators to deliver 16 free parenting courses in the North Shore libraries for the period February to December 2019	$2340	Eligible
MB1819-142	La Leche League North Shore	Community	Towards room hire, leader’s training costs, conference costs, subscriptions, library and brochure purchases, printing and membership costs from 1 October 2018 to 1 August 2019	$737.50	Eligible
MB1819-147	Auckland Central Riding for the Disabled Association	Community	Towards the purchase of helmets for the association	$753	Eligible
MB1819-154	StarJam Charitable Trust	Community	Towards the costs to run StarJam music workshops including the programme coordinator salary, tutor fees, venue hire, equipment and administration costs	$3500	Eligible
MB1819-191	PHAB Association Incorporated	Community	Towards the costs of the PHAB workers' salary, and coordinators and administrators' wages	$1500	Eligible
MB1819-101	Badminton North Harbour Incorporated	Sport and recreation	Towards the changing room upgrade costs	$12,000	Eligible
MB1819-112	North Shore Group Riding for the Disabled Incorporated	Sport and recreation	Towards core operating costs including farrier, vet, horse feed, electricity, internet, phone, stationary and hygiene consumables for the North Shore Group Riding for Disabled from November 2018 to 31 October 2019	$3090.49	Eligible
MB1819-114	Bike Auckland	Sport and recreation	Towards the cost to run the Bike Burb programme, including venue hire, development fees, workshop costs and communications	$3000	Eligible
MB1819-165	Harbour Sport Trust	Sport and recreation	Towards the coach developer wages from 15 January to 31 July 2019	$10,000	Eligible
MB1819-167	Redwood Park Golf Club Incorporated	Sport and recreation	Towards coaching, equipment and marketing costs for a school holiday programme at Redwood Park Golf Club	$2149	Eligible
MB1819-173	Gymnastics Community Trust	Sport and recreation	Towards the purchase of new equipment for the Glenfield, Glamorgan, Orewa and Stanmore Bay facilities and salary costs for the recreational and schools coach for the period 1 November 2018 to 30 September 2019	$17,100	Eligible
Total				$74,269.99

Horopaki / Context

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

8. The local board grants programme sets out:

· local board priorities

· lower priorities for funding

· exclusions

· grant types, the number of grant rounds and when these will open and close

· any additional accountability requirements.

9. The Upper Harbour Local Board adopted the Upper Harbour Local Grants Programme 2018/2019 on 20 April 2017 (refer Attachment A).

10. The Upper Harbour Local Board will operate two local grant rounds, and three quick response rounds in this financial year. Upper Harbour Local Grant round one 2018/2019 closed on 24 August 2018.

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

12. The Upper Harbour Local Board has set a total community grants budget of $113,425 for the 2018/2019 financial year.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu / Analysis and advice

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

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

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

15. The local board is requested to note that Section 48 of the Community Grants Policy states:

‘We will also provide feedback to unsuccessful grant applicants about why they have been declined, so they will know what they can do to increase their chances of success next time.’

16. Summaries of each application received through round one of the 2018/2019 Upper Harbour Local Grant and Multi-board Grant applications are attached to the report (refer Attachments B and C).

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori / Māori impact statement

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

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea / Financial implications

18. The allocation of grants to community groups is within the adopted Long-term Plan 2018-2028 and local board agreements.

19. The Upper Harbour Local Board has set a total community grants budget of $113,425 for the 2018/2019 financial year.

20. Eight applications were received in this round, with a total amount requested of $56,803.

21. Sixteen further applications were received as multi-board applications, requesting a total of $74,262.99

Ngā raru tūpono / Risks

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

Ngā koringa ā-muri / Next steps

23. Following the Upper Harbour Local Board allocating funding for round one local grants, commercial and finance staff will notify the applicants of the local board’s decision.

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Upper Harbour Local Board Grants Programme 2018/2019	145
b ⇩	Upper Harbour Local Grants round one 2018/2019 applications	149
c ⇩	Upper Harbour Local Grants round one 2018/2019 multi-board applications	175

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Author

Erin Shin - Community Grants Coordinator

Authorisers

Marion Davies - Grant Operations Manager

Shane King - Head of Operations Support

Eric Perry - Relationship Manager

Upper Harbour Local Board

18 October 2018

PDF Creator

Upper Harbour Local Board

18 October 2018

Auckland Transport monthly report - October 2018

File No.: CP2018/18836

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1. To respond to requests on transport-related matters, provide an update on the current status of the Local Board Transport Capital Fund (LBTCF), provide a summary of consultation material sent to the local board, and to provide transport-related information on matters of specific application and interest to the Upper Harbour Local Board and its community.

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2. A decision is not required this month. In particular, this report:

· notes consultation information sent to the local board for feedback, in particular the Supporting Growth: North-west consultation, and decisions of the Traffic Control Committee as they affect the board area

· notes the update to the Local Board Transport Capital Fund for Rame Road

· notes the North Shore final piece of the New Bus Network.

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Upper Harbour Local Board:

a) receive the Auckland Transport update for October 2018.

Horopaki / Context

3. This report addresses transport-related matters in the Upper Harbour Local Board area.

4. Auckland Transport (AT) is responsible for all of Auckland’s transport services, excluding state highways. AT reports monthly to local boards, as set out in the local board engagement plan. This reporting commitment acknowledges the important engagement role local boards play within and on behalf of their local communities.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu / Analysis and advice

Local Board Transport Capital Fund (LBTCF) update

5. The LBTCF is a capital budget delivered by AT and is provided to all local boards by Auckland Council. Local boards can use this fund to deliver transport infrastructure projects that they believe are important but are not part of AT’s work programme. Projects must also:

· be safe

· not impede network efficiency

· be in the road corridor (although projects running through parks can be considered if there is a transport outcome).

6. The Upper Harbour Local Board’s LBTCF allocation, as outlined in the following table, is $1,835,080 for the current political term. In addition, there is a sum of $764,795 which has been approved by the council and is available from 1 July 2018. This takes into account the increase of the LBTCF approved by the Governing Body during council’s long-term plan (LTP) budgeting process.

Electoral term allocation 2016/17 to 2019/20 as at 30/06/18			$1,835,080
Budget committed to date (projects below)			$1,938,222
		STATUS
Gills Road pedestrian bridge	$297,222	Complete
School stay-put signs	$45,000	Complete
Chester/Wickham cycle route	$56,000	Complete
Rame Road upgrade	$1,540,000	Design
Current budget remaining to allocate in term			-$103,142
Additional budget in RLTP for 18/19 and 19/20			$764,795
New total budget remaining for electoral term			$661,653

7. The following table provides an update on the board’s current projects:

Project

Description

Status

Gills Road

footpath and pedestrian bridge

To construct a footpath along Gills Road

This project has been completed and is open to the public.

Rame Road upgrade

A full upgrade of Rame Road

The timeline is as follows:

· baseline data and surveys complete – 19 October 2018

· draft design complete – 14 December 2018

· present to the Local Board – December 2018.

8. The Upper Harbour Local Board have submitted five new project applications to AT to assess following a series of workshops.

Supporting Growth: North-west consultation

9. The Supporting Growth Programme is planning what transport networks will be needed to support growth in the future urban areas of Auckland over the next 30 years.

10. Consultation is now open for transport plans being investigated in Auckland's north-western future urban growth areas.

11. Public information days were held during late-September as follows:

· Massey Birdwood Settlers Hall, Tuesday 25 September, 4-7pm

· Riverhead Hall, Wednesday 26 September, 3-7pm

· Kumeū Community Hall, Friday 28 September, 3-7pm

· North-West Mall, Saturday 29 September, 10am-1pm.

12. In order to provide the community with robust information about what is proposed to support growth in the short term (ahead of the programme’s longer-term focus), a number of other projects have been showcased at these information days, including:

· Huapai Triangle project (AT)

· Safe Roads SH16 Brigham Creek to Waimauku upgrade (New Zealand Transport Agency)

· SH16-18 Connections Project (New Zealand Transport Agency)

· Dairy Flat Highway safety improvements (AT)

· Huapai-Kumeū Town Centre Plan (Auckland Council)

· Whenuapai Plan Change (Auckland Council).

13. Feedback closes at 5pm on Friday 19 October 2018. Consultation information and feedback forms are available at: http://supportinggrowth.govt.nz/have-your-say/north-west-auckland/

North Shore: The final piece of the New Bus Network

14. At the beginning of October 2018, the final piece of Auckland's New Bus Network was put into place on the North Shore. The new network is a simpler bus network with more frequent services. There are fewer routes with higher frequency, particularly between 7am and 7pm, seven days a week, with services being better connected.

15. Auckland's population continues to grow, and its transport system needs to grow with it. The new network is making public transport a more attractive option for more people.

16. Over the past two years, new bus networks have been rolled out in Auckland's south, west, east and central suburbs. This has led to significant increases in patronage. As an example, in west Auckland there was a 10 per cent increase in end-to-end journeys after the new network launched.

17. Throughout the North Shore, there were 78 routes running 2545 trips each week day. From 30 September 2018, there are 55 routes running 3672 trips each week day. This is a service increase of more than 44 per cent.

18. On the North Shore, buses have also been designed to connect with ferries. As an example, the 814 service now runs between the Devonport ferry and Akoranga Busway Station, and will meet every scheduled ferry arriving from downtown.

19. Before the new network, 215,500 Aucklanders lived within 500m of a frequent or rapid network route stop. From 30 September 2018, there are 527,600 people within 500m of a frequent or rapid stop, a 144 per cent increase.

20. Before the new network, buses travelled 44.6 million km per year on the frequent and rapid network. From 30 September 2018, they cover 59.1 million km.

21. Consultation regarding the North Shore New Bus Network took place in 2015, and 2279 responses were received. Based on this feedback, 21 changes were made, including adding two more routes and changing the frequency or hours of operation of 15 of the proposed routes.

22. For the first week of the new network, AT ambassadors were at key stops throughout the North Shore and in the city centre, to help customers plan their journeys.

Thirty red-light runners caught per day as six more red light cameras go live

23. Six new red-light safety cameras are operating in Auckland from 1 October 2018, adding to six already in operation that have issued 2314 infringements in just two and a half months.

24. The new cameras, which are enforced on a rotational basis, are operating at:

· Great South Road and Cavendish Drive – two sites

· Te Irirangi Drive and Accent Drive – two sites

· Great North Road and Rata Street

· Great South Road and Reagan Road.

25. The purpose of the cameras is to save lives and stop injuries, which is why AT advised drivers where the cameras are located and when they became operational.

26. There is a culture among some drivers that red lights can be ignored. That is blatantly wrong and puts the safety of others on the road at risk.

27. When red-light cameras were trialed between 2008 and 2010, there was a 43 per cent reduction in red-light running and an average 63 per cent decrease in crashes attributable to red-light running.

28. Between 21 June and 7 September 2018, 2314 infringements were issued from the six cameras that were already in place. This translates to 30 times a day when motorists put their own lives and the lives of other at risk.

29. With deaths and serious injuries increasing on Auckland roads by 78 per cent in the last four years, three times the national average, AT have to change this attitude. This is the reason that installing additional cameras has been necessary.

30. The new cameras are in addition to the six red-light cameras that began enforcing in June 2018.

31. Money from infringements goes to the Crown’s National Consolidated Fund, and not to AT or the council.

32. Seven-hundred million dollars will be invested in road safety improvements in the next 10 years, partly funded by the Regional Fuel Tax.

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

Issues investigated and responses

33. The local board have requested that the following issues be investigated:

Bush Road parking removal and afternoon/evening clearway

34. AT undertook observations concerning removal of parking in Bush Road to install a clearway in the afternoon/evening. The observations indicated merit in a combination of parking removal and afternoon/evening clearway installation for vehicles approaching the Albany Highway.

35. This proposal was discussed with Business North Harbour who requested that parking observations and a parking survey be undertaken and reported back to them and the local board.

36. AT still needs to undertake internal/external consultation as per the normal process.

Visibility issues: Bernleigh Terrace into Luckens Road, West Harbour

37. AT has completed investigations concerning visibility at the intersection of Bernleigh Terrace and Luckens Road.

38. AT noted that when the road was recently re-sealed, some of the line markings outside number 20 Luckens Road were not restored. This has been passed on to AT’s maintenance team who will replace the missing markings. Once the markings have been restored, it will discourage individuals from parking close to the intersection and so make it easier for vehicles to turn right out of Bernleigh Terrace.

39. The visibility at the intersection to the right of Bernleigh Terrace was also assessed. However, it is considered that visibility is acceptable, and no changes will be made at this stage.

Safety issues: Mayfair Retirement Village

40. Initial investigations have confirmed the need for a pedestrian crossing on Oteha Valley Road, near Harrowglen Drive. Two options are being considered:

· a mid-block signalised crossing between Harrowglen Drive and Mayfair Drive

· an alternative option to fully signalise the Harrowglen Drive intersection.

41. Because Oteha Valley Road has two traffic lanes in either direction, only signalised options are being considered. Detailed planning is currently underway and will determine the best long-term solution.

42. Consultation drawings for pedestrian improvement works near to Harrowglen Drive will be available by the end of October 2018.

43. A wider safety review is also underway along the length of Oteha Valley Road, from Albany Highway to East Coast Road, to understand the safety concerns along the road corridor.

44. AT will keep the board updated on progress.

Street lighting: Brigham Creek Road

45. AT have installed additional lights fitted to power poles along Brigham Creek Road. However, there were only a few poles where Vector would approve new lights.

46. Most of the road is still rural but developers are required to upgrade the carriageway and lights as properties along Brigham Creek Road are developed. This has already happened in Whenuapai.

47. AT have no immediate plans to upgrade the lighting along Brigham Creek Road. However, it will be requested that the lights are upgraded at the same time as the road.

Signage on cycleway: Oteha Valley Road

48. AT attended the site where it was reported that two signs were located on the berm. The retailers were spoken to about the signs and are now aware that all signage is to be kept clear of the cycle lane and footpath.

49. Under Clause 14 and Schedule 1 of the Signage Bylaws 2015, retail shops that have direct ground floor access to the road can place one portable sign on the road reserve and others on private property. The bylaw contains a number of rules about the size and location of portable signs. Of relevance is that where there is a grass verge, the sign must be located on the verge.

50. At the site in question, signage could be placed either between the footpath and cycleway, or between the cycleway and roadway, so long as the sign does not obstruct road users on those paths. An obstruction would be in breach of Section 9 (1) (b) of the bylaw.

51. If retail signage is again observed obstructing the cycle path or the footpath rather than being on the grass in this location, it is recommended this be raised with Auckland Council’s bylaws team to enforce the signage bylaw.

Issues still under investigation

52. The following issues are still under investigation on behalf of the local board and AT will report back once the work is completed:

· Caribbean Drive pedestrian crossing request

· Hobsonville, Brighams Creek and Williams Road intersection safety

· Meadowood Drive traffic counts

· Westpark Marina Ferry Terminal development issues.

Consultation documents on proposed improvements

53. Consultation documents for the following proposals have been provided to the Upper Harbour Local Board for feedback, and are summarised here for information purposes only. Following consultation, AT considers the feedback received and determines whether to proceed further with the proposal as consulted on, or amend the proposal if changes are considered necessary:

· proposal to install new no stopping at all times (NSAAT) road markings on the bend outside properties 10 and 23 Mulroy Place, Pinehill

· proposal to install NSAAT on Sunset Road, Unsworth

· proposal to install NSAAT on Marae Road, Greenhithe

· Albany paid parking – a workshop was held on 11 October 2018 to discuss this further

· Airfields Stage 2, Hobsonville – traffic and parking controls.

Auckland Transport’s Traffic Control Committee (TCC) report

54. Decisions of the TCC during the month of September 2018 affecting the Upper Harbour Local Board area are listed in the following table:

Date	Street (suburb)	Type of report	Nature of restriction	Decision
1 September 2018	Bush Road, Rosedale	Permanent traffic and parking changes combined	No stopping at all times (NSAAT), bus stop, bus shelter, footpath, flush median, edge-line	CARRIED
1 September 2018	Red Shed Lane, Samuels Lane, Clemows Lane, Kristin Lane, Albany	Permanent traffic and parking changes combined	NSAAT, traffic island, roundabout controlled by give-way	CARRIED
1 September 2018	Brigham Creek Road, Hobsonville Road, Williams Road, Hobsonville	Permanent traffic and parking changes combined	Lane arrow markings, flush median, shoulder marking, edge-line, traffic island, stop control, give-way control	CARRIED
1 September 2018	Don McKinnon Drive, Civic Crescent, Rosedale Road, Bush Road, Munroe Lane, Rosedale	Permanent traffic and parking changes combined	NSAAT, bus stop, bus shelter, cycle lane, shared cycle path, lane arrow markings, traffic island, roundabout controlled by give-way, give-way control, flush median, traffic signal control, edge-line, shoulder markings	CARRIED
1 September 2018	Bronzewing Terrace, Unsworth Drive, Unsworth Heights	Permanent traffic and parking changes combined	NSAAT, bus stop, flush median, traffic island, give-way control	CARRIED
1 September 2018	Corinthian Drive, Don McKinnon Drive, Oracle Drive, Albany	Permanent traffic and parking changes combined	NSAAT, bus stop, bus shelter, roundabout controlled by give-way, traffic island, flush median, give-way control	CARRIED
1 September 2018	Oakway Drive, Laurel Oak Drive, Schnapper Rock Road, Aberley Road, Medallion Drive, Fernhill Way, Masons Road, Oteha	Permanent traffic and parking changes combined	NSAAT, bus stop, bus shelter, traffic island, roundabout controlled by give-way, give-way control, flush median, edge-line	CARRIED

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori / Māori impact statement

55. Receipt of this monthly report has no impacts or opportunities for Māori. Any engagement with Māori, or consideration of impacts and opportunities, will be carried out on an individual project basis.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea / Financial implications

56. There are no financial implications in receiving this monthly update.

Ngā raru tūpono / Risks

57. Receipt of this monthly report has no risks. AT has risk management strategies in place for the transport projects undertaken in the local board area.

Ngā koringa ā-muri / Next steps

58. AT provides the Upper Harbour Local Board with the opportunity to comment on transport projects being delivered in the local board area.

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Authors

Owena Schuster – Elected Member Relationship Manager

Jonathan Anyon – Elected Member Relationship Team Relationship Manager

Authoriser

Eric Perry - Relationship Manager

Upper Harbour Local Board

18 October 2018

Draft Facility Partnerships Policy

File No.: CP2018/17844

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 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 2019/20 financial year.

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Upper Harbour 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 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 Plan. 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 (2019/20) 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 2019/20 financial year.

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Facility Partnerships Policy - summary of key policy positions	263
b ⇩	Draft Facility Partnerships Policy	265
c ⇩	Facility partnerships with Māori - Summary report	309
d ⇩	Draft Facility Partnerships Policy - Public feedback summary report	337