Agenda of Finance and Performance Committee

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	20190307 Appointments, Performance Review and Value for Money Committee - Auckland Council progress report on savings up to 31 December 2018	13

Finance and Performance Committee

19 March 2019

Auckland Council Green Bond Activities and Green Bond Pledge

File No.: CP2019/02874

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To update committee members on council’s green bond activities and to seek endorsement of Auckland Council’s commitment to the Green Bond Pledge.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. Green Bonds are debt instruments where proceeds are used to finance climate-friendly or environmental projects. This market has grown rapidly offshore over the last decade, but the New Zealand market is in its early stages of development.

3. Auckland Council established its Green Bond Framework in May 2018 and was the first New Zealand issuer of a Green Bond in June 2018, raising $200m to refinance Auckland Transport’s electric trains.

4. Council has received international recognition for its market leading green bond issuance. Some other New Zealand organisations have since issued green bonds.

5. The Green Bond Pledge is a joint initiative developed and designed by international climate finance and environmental groups including the Climate Bonds Initiative, Mission 2020, CDP (formerly the Carbon Disclosure Project), Ceres, Citizens Climate Lobby, California Governor's Office, California Treasurer's Office, Global Optimism, the Natural Resources Defense Council and The Climate Group.

6. The Pledge seeks to further drive the rapid growth of a green bonds market, consistent with global best practices, recognising that green bonds can play a key role in financing climate resilient and low carbon infrastructure and capital projects.

7. Committing to the Green Bond Pledge will further demonstrate Auckland Council’s commitment to identifying and delivering more sustainable finance options as well as our broader commitments to act on climate, deliver a more sustainable Auckland and improve our natural environment.

8. Staff recommend that the Committee endorses Auckland’s commitment to the Green Bond Pledge.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Finance and Performance Committee:

a) note the update on council’s green bond activities

b) endorse Auckland Council’s commitment to the Green Bond Pledge.

Horopaki

Context

Green Bonds

9. Green Bonds are debt instruments where the proceeds are earmarked to finance or refinance projects, assets or business activities with a “green” environmental benefit, such as low carbon transport, renewable energy, water and waste management, and low carbon buildings.

10. The key difference between conventional and green bonds is the specified use of proceeds. Investors are increasingly focused on integrating environmental, social and governance (ESG) factors into their investment processes and actively seeking investments that can demonstrate broader social and environmental outcomes.

11. Locally, this increased focus on responsible investment has seen a 2500% growth in New Zealand funds with some form of ESG screening, reaching a total of NZ$42.7billion in 2016 (ref: https://responsibleinvestment.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/Media-Release_RIAA_NZ-RI-Benchmark-Report.pdf).

Auckland Council Green Bond Activity

12. Auckland Council established a Green Bond framework in May 2018 (https://www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/about-auckland-council/business-in-auckland/Documents%20%20Green%20Bond%202018/green-bond-framework-9-may-2018.pdf) and issued its inaugural green bond in June 2018 (http://ourauckland.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/articles/news/2018/6/green-bond-issue-a-success-with-200-million-raised-for-electric-trains/).

13. The Auckland Council Green Bond was the first issuance by a domestic New Zealand borrower and raised $200m for the refinancing of Auckland Transport’s electric trains.

14. The Green Bond issue also saw broader benefits to Auckland Council including:

· an increase in the diversity of Auckland Council’s investor base;

· deeper engagement with investors through increased visibility; and

· reinforcement of our commitments to the environment and sustainability.

15. Auckland Council has received international recognition for its green bond issuance, including KangaNews’ 2018 New Zealand Innovation Debt Deal of the Year (http://www.kanganews.com/news/9308-kanganews-awards-2018-winners-announced) and a Certificate of Recognition at the Climate Bonds Initiative 2019 Green Bond Pioneer Awards (https://www.climatebonds.net/resources/press-releases/2019/03/cbi-2019-green-bond-pioneer-award-winners).

16. Since Auckland Council’s inaugural Green Bond issue in June 2018, two further Green Bonds have been issued into the market, by Contact Energy (https://www.nzx.com/announcements/330689) and Argosy Property Limited (https://www.nzx.com/announcements/330833).

Green Bond Pledge

17. The Green Bond Pledge is a joint initiative developed and designed by international climate finance and environmental groups including the Climate Bonds Initiative, Mission 2020, CDP (formerly the Carbon Disclosure Project), Ceres, Citizens Climate Lobby, California Governor's Office, California Treasurer's Office, Global Optimism, the Natural Resources Defense Council and The Climate Group.

18. Council has worked with The Green Bond Pledge on a tailored commitment comprising four clauses:

a) A statement that all infrastructure and capital projects should be climate resilient and where relevant, support the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions.

b) An acknowledgment of the role that green bonds can play in helping to achieve the financing of that infrastructure.

c) The commitment of signatories to support the rapid growth of a green bonds market, consistent with global best practices that can meet the financing needs being faced globally, and a commitment to issue, whenever applicable and appropriate, bonds for infrastructure as green bonds.

d) The commitment of signatories to support this goal by establishing a green bonds strategy that will finance infrastructure and capital projects that meet the challenges of climate change while transforming into a competitive, prosperous and productive economy. For example, future Green Bond issuance must be cost effective.

19. Current signatories to the Green Bond Pledge include:

· the Government of Mexico City,

· the City and County of San Francisco,

· the Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of the People’s Republic of China;

· the Luxembourg Green Exchange;

· and New South Wales’ Local Government Super.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

20. Council has engaged with the Climate Bonds Initiative, convenors for the Green Bond Pledge, to clarify and confirm the specific requirements and commitments of the Green Bond Pledge.

21. Council’s legal team has done review of the Green Bond Pledge. This legal review has also informed the proposed wording of the commitments set out in paragraph 18, which the legal team is comfortable with.

22. Further rationale and analysis for each of the four Green Bond Pledge commitments is set out below.

23. The requirement that infrastructure and capital projects should be climate resilient noted in clause (a) reflects the broad consensus regionally, nationally and internationally that climate change will have numerous impacts that could affect physical assets and infrastructure. For Auckland, these effects are highlighted in the Auckland Region Climate Change Projections and Impacts report commissioned by Auckland Council and released in 2018. Ensuring our assets and infrastructure are resilient to these climate change impacts will have long term positive implications socially, environmentally and financially. Impacts to communities and natural resources can be reduced through the development of more resilient infrastructure, whilst long term financial costs associated with renewals and repairs of climate-impacted assets could also be minimised or even avoided.

24. Auckland’s infrastructure also has a role to play in supporting the region’s greenhouse gas emissions reduction targets, both through the specific construction materials and methods employed, as well as in the nature and form of the infrastructure systems that are developed. For example, improving our public transport system and investing in low and zero emissions vehicles will help to reduce the region’s transport greenhouse gas emissions.

25. As noted above, proceeds of green bond issuances are specifically used to finance projects, assets or business activities with a “green” environmental benefit and therefore can be used to finance climate resilient, low carbon infrastructure, as set out in clause (b) of the commitments.

26. Clause (c) of the commitments notes that the Green Bond Pledge does not require all future bond issuances from Council to be Green Bonds, simply those that are applicable and appropriate. The applicability of assets will be determined by the criteria set out in Auckland Council’s Green Bond Framework (https://www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/about-auckland-council/business-in-auckland/Documents%20%20Green%20Bond%202018/green-bond-framework-9-may-2018.pdf). Whether the issuance of a green bond is appropriate will be determined by council’s Green Bond Working Group established by the Green Bond Framework and will take into consideration aspects such as cost-effectiveness and market conditions.

27. The Green Bond Framework that has been developed by Auckland Council addresses the requirements of the clause (d) in the Green Bond Pledge to establish a green bonds strategy.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

28. The proceeds of green bond issuances by council can be used to fund both Council and council-controlled organisation infrastructure.

29. Council has therefore engaged with the relevant council-controlled organisations whose assets have received, or may in the future receive, green bond proceeds on the commitments set out within the Green Bond Pledge. The council-controlled organisations have provided feedback on the Green Bond Pledge and are comfortable with the proposed commitments set out above.

Ngā whakaaweawe ā-rohe me ngā tirohanga a te poari ā-rohe

Local impacts and local board views

30. Local boards were not consulted on this report as this is a region-wide issue and not specific to a particular local board.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

31. Māori are more likely to be negatively affected by the impacts of climate change. Many Māori communities and marae are located in coastal areas, and Māori hold significant investments in climate-exposed primary industries. Māori also have Treaty of Waitangi interests in the protection of their ancestral lands and waterways.

32. Therefore, issuing Green Bonds and directing finance towards low carbon and climate adaptation projects has the potential to improve outcomes for Māori. The environment and climate focus of projects that could be funded by green bonds also has the potential to improve outcomes for those aspects that are particularly important to Māori, such as te mauri o te wai.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

33. The financial implications of issuing Green Bonds relative to a traditional bond are minor. There is likely to be pricing benefits (although difficult to quantify given the early development stage of the market in New Zealand) offset by marginally higher set-up costs and ongoing assurance and reporting costs.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

34. The risks of Green Bonds are very similar to that of a traditional bond, (for example, lack of investor demand or pricing exceeding expectations).

35. The additional risks are mainly associated with reputational issues (for example, ineffective messaging) or failing to comply with ongoing audit and reporting requirements.

36. There is also a risk resulting from the fact that the NZD Green Bond market is largely untested, so investor reaction is less certain.

37. The risks associated with committing to the Green Bond Pledge are minimal as it does not require all future bond issuances to be green, simply those that are appropriate and applicable.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

38. Following endorsement of this report an announcement on Auckland Council’s commitment to the Green Bond Pledge will be made.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Alec Tang - Principal Specialist Corporate Sustainability

John Bishop - Treasurer and General Manager Financial Transactions

Authorisers

Jacques Victor - GM Auckland Plan Strategy and Research

Matthew Walker - Group Chief Financial Officer

Finance and Performance Committee

19 March 2019

Approval of Auckland Regional Amenities Funding Act levy 2019-2020

File No.: CP2019/01980

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To consider the Auckland Regional Amenities Funding Act (ARAFA) levy for 2019/2020.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. The Auckland Regional Amenities Funding Act 2008 (the Act) provides for ten regional organisations to submit annual funding applications to the Auckland Regional Amenities Funding Board (Funding Board).

3. At its 20 March 2018 meeting this committee was advised that one of those regional organisations (the New Zealand Maritime Museum) had been integrated into Regional Facilities Auckland (RFA), and that the funding to the Maritime Museum is now provided through RFA (FIN/2018/37).

4. The Funding Board must analyse the funding applications from the nine remaining regional organisations and prepare a draft funding plan. The Funding Board now seeks a total levy from council of $15,504,500.

5. The Funding Board believes that the levels of funding proposed in this plan are in line with the key funding principles outlined in the Act, and in accordance with the primary purpose of the Act, which is the provision of a mechanism for adequate, sustainable and secure funding for the specified amenities.

6. Staff recommend that council approves the 2019/2020 funding levy request of $15,504,500 as it is consistent with the funding principles in the Act and those established by council.

7. The levy contains $340,000 for the Funding Board’s administration costs. The Funding Board has received the same level of administrative funding ($315,000) each year since its establishment in 2008, and the amount requested this year represents an increase of $25,000.

8. The administrative costs cover the directors’ honorarium fees and cost of the Advisory officer and general office expenses including printing, meeting costs and other legal and consultancy requirements.

9. The proposed levy is within the levy cap provided for by legislation but is more than what is allowed for in the 10-year Budget 2018-2028 because there was no allowance made for increases.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Finance and Performance Committee:

a) approve the total levy applied for by Auckland Regional Amenities Funding Board of $15,504,500 for 2019/2020.

Horopaki

Context

10. The Act was put in place to establish a mechanism to provide adequate, sustainable and secure funding for the specified amenities that provide arts and culture, educational and rescue services throughout the Auckland region.

11. The Act established a Funding Board, which is an independent body whose role is to receive annual funding applications from the specified amenities identified in the Act, and to assess what would be a reasonable contribution towards the amenities’ operational costs.

12. The Funding Board assesses the annual funding applications received from the amenities against the funding principles within the Act, and any additional principles adopted by Auckland Council. The funding principles include the following:

· funding is primarily for provision of facilities or services by the amenities (i.e. operational)

· funding is not available for capital expenses

· funding is not for any part of facilities or services provided outside the Auckland region

· funding is available only if the amenity has made all reasonable endeavours to maximise their funding from other available sources

· the Funding Board must have regard to council’s proposed rates increase for the forthcoming year

· the amenities should align their activities to the Auckland Plan, and adopt relevant performance measures.

13. Once the Funding Board has conducted the analysis of the amenities’ funding applications it is required under the Act to prepare a funding plan, circulate the plan for public consultation, and call for public submissions.

14. The amenities, like council, may provide a submission on the draft funding plan. The Funding Board must consider the submissions received when preparing the final funding plan.

15. The Act also requires that the funding plan must provide any information that is necessary for council to make an informed assessment of the annual levy (s25(2)(i)).

16. The Funding Board, having considered the amenities’ funding request, and any submissions, proposes a levy to Auckland Council.

17. Council’s decision-making role regarding the levy is confined to providing a submission on the Funding Board’s draft funding plan, reviewing the total levy proposed by the Funding Board, and either agreeing to or rejecting the proposed levy. Allocations to individual amenities are the role of the Funding Board, not council.

18. Council staff are not able to comment on the amount of the funding being provided to the individual amenities, as it is the role of the Funding Board to analyse the funding requirements of each amenity.

Council’s submission on the 2019/2020 Funding Plan

19. The committee at its 12 December 2018 meeting approved delegation of the council’s submission on the Funding Board’s draft annual plan to the chair and deputy chair of this committee (FIN/2018/179). This submission (attachment B) noted the contribution of the Funding Board and the nine regional amenities to make Auckland a better place to live and visit.

20. The council’s submission also acknowledged the ongoing funding pressures that these amenities face. The submission noted that ratepayers have provided generous financial support to the regional amenities noting both the increasing funding demands and the growth within the Auckland region.

21. In response the Funding Board considered council’s submission and a response from the chair, Vern Walsh is at attachment C, advises:

(i) the Funding Board shares council’s concerns with the funding requests for future years (2020/2021 and 2021/2022) and notes the request from the Funding Board to the amenities to take a more realistic approach to forecasting future funding requirements

(ii) the Funding Board notes that the increased costs from the amenities is also reflective of the value of funds ‘returned’ to Auckland Council as hireage, consents and other costs which have continued to increase.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Key elements of the 2019/2020 Funding Plan

22. The final 2019/2020 Funding Plan proposes a total levy of $15,504,500. This represents an overall increase of $877,500 or 6.14% compared to 2018/2019.

23. By way of comparison, the increases for the previous five years were:

Year	Total Funding Levy	$ increase / decrease	% increase / decrease from previous year
2019/2020 (proposed)	$15,504,500	$877,500	6.14%
2018/2019*	$14,602,000	$576,000 (across nine amenities)	% increase in previous years across ten amenities. Is not relevant due to NZ Maritime Museum’s funding moving to RFA.
2017/2018	$16,165,500	$23,000	0.14%
2016/2017	$16,142,500	$994,100	6.56%
2015/2016	$15,148,400	$837,400	5.85%
2014/2015	$14,311,000	$215,000	1.53%
2013/2014	$14,096,000	$344,500	2.5%

*Excludes the NZ Maritime Museum levy.

24. Increases can vary from year to year due to the needs of the individual amenities, and some one-off factors including an amenity not applying for funding, or a one-off grant being given to an amenity to fund a strategic review of their business.

Analysis

25. Under s.34(1)(c) of the Act 2008 the total maximum levy that can be proposed by the Funding Board is the amount equal to two percent of the revenue from rates of the Auckland Council in the previous financial year. This equates to $34,360,000. The final 2019/2020 Funding Plan proposes a total levy of $15,504,500 which represents forty-five percent of the maximum amount that could be charged.

26. The Act provides a ‘needs based’ funding mechanism, where the amenities receive the funding they require to keep them sustainable. That level of funding will vary over time for each amenity, due to changes in their operating environments. It is therefore difficult to make direct comparisons with previous year’s levies. The proposed increase in the levy is not out of line with previous year’s increases.

Advice

27. In line with council’s role in the Auckland Regional Amenities Funding Act levy process the following options are outlined below.

· Option One – approve the levy. There is no evidence that the proposed levy is inconsistent with the funding principles, and therefore there would be no grounds for council to reject the levy.

· Option Two – reject the proposed levy. This option is not recommended as there are no appropriate reasons for rejecting the levy because the Funding Board have advised they are satisfied with the specified amenities’ funding applications.

28. Approving the 2019/2020 Funding Plan will reinforce council’s ongoing commitment and long-term support for the nine specified amenities and support for the Funding Board’s rigorous approach to their work in the assessment and analysis of each specified amenities’ individual applications.

29. Staff recommend that the committee approves the levy for 2019/2020 being $15,504,500 as the levy request is consistent with the Act and there is no reason to dispute the levy.

Ngā whakaaweawe ā-rohe me ngā tirohanga a te poari ā-rohe

Local impacts and local board views

30. Decision making and oversight on regional activities is the responsibility of the Governing Body. This report relates to the funding relationship between the council, the Funding Board and the nine regional amenities.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

31. The amenities have the ability to make positive contributions to Maori wellbeing, and to deliver on Auckland Plan outcomes and contribute to effective Maori capacity.

32. Some amenities have outlined the various programmes delivered that contribute to Maori wellbeing.

33. Additionally, a Funding Board member (Precious Clark) has been appointed to represent the interests of Maori in the Auckland region. Therefore, Maori wellbeing and perspectives are criteria for consideration throughout the Funding Board discussion at meetings.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

34. The proposed levy is within the levy cap provided for by legislation but is more than what is allowed for in the 10-year Budget 2018-2028 because there was no allowance made for increases.

35. Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

36. The ongoing risk to council is that the Auckland Regional Amenities Funding system provides little ability for council to ensure value for money from the amenities. There is also no direct accountability to council for the funding that the amenities receive.

37. The Funding Board works directly with the individual amenities. As well as analysing the funding applications of the amenities, the Funding Board also reviews the amenities’ annual and half year reports. This oversight by the Funding Board helps ensure that there is some scrutiny of the amenities’ activities, and that the amenities are only receiving funding for activities that they are entitled to under the Act.

38. There is also the ongoing risk to council from the indicated funding requests from the nine specified amenities for future years. The indication from the amenities is that they will be seeking substantial increases in future years. This risk is mitigated by the scrutiny that the Funding Board applies to the annual funding applications submitted by the amenities. Any increases to funding would need to be justified by the amenities in terms of the Act’s funding principles.

39. A further mitigation to substantial future funding requests is that the amenities have a statutory obligation to maximise revenue from other sources. Council is meant to be the funder of last resort for these organisations, a point which the Funding Board noted in its response to council’s submission on the draft funding plan.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

40. If the committee approves the proposed levy, payment will be made to the Funding Board on 1 July 2019.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Draft 2019-2020 Funding Plan	47
b ⇩	Council's submission to the 2019-2020 draft Funding Levy	107
c ⇩	Letter from Funding Board (response to council's submission)	109

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Josie Meuli - Senior Advisor

Authorisers

Alastair Cameron - Manager - CCO Governance & External Partnerships

Phil Wilson - Governance Director

Matthew Walker - Group Chief Financial Officer

Finance and Performance Committee

19 March 2019

Approval of the Museum of Transport and Technology levy 2019/2020

File No.: CP2019/00749

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To consider the 2019/2020 levy for the Museum of Transport and Technology (MOTAT).

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. MOTAT is one of Auckland’s cultural heritage institutions.

3. The Museum of Transport and Technology Act 2000 (the Act) allows MOTAT to levy Auckland Council for funding on an annual basis. Auckland Council through Regional Facilities Auckland can provide feedback on MOTAT’s draft Annual Plan 2019/2020 (draft Annual Plan).

4. MOTAT’s Board monitors outcomes and financial performance, with RFA and Council only having an indirect role in this.

5. This year the MOTAT levy request is for $15.812 million. This year’s levy is a 13 per cent increase from the levy in 2018/2019 and includes a request for an additional $1 million per year for 10 years for the “Approach 2” set of works.

6. Approach 2 is a $12.5 million set of capital projects which were part of the larger MOTAT masterplan which was not approved for funding under council’s Long-term Plan 2018-2028. Council’s funding will be used to take on a bank loan, to be paid back through the increased levy and anticipated increased revenues. By agreeing to the increased levy, council will be committing to funding these works for the next ten years.

7. MOTAT’s draft Annual Plan (Attachment A) sets out its organisational structure, core objectives, performance measures, and supporting financial information. MOTAT continues to pursue improvements in basic museum operations (such as collection care), as well as offering interesting experiences for visitors.

8. Longer-term, MOTAT’s major challenge is to have a clearly defined strategic role within the Auckland cultural heritage sector. The cultural heritage review which is now moving into its second phase will assist with defining MOTAT’s role.

9. Staff recommend approval of the MOTAT levy request for 2019/2020, as it meets the purposes of MOTAT as set out in the Act, and the draft MOTAT Annual Plan for 2019/2020 clearly sets out MOTAT’s planned activities for the coming year. Regional Facilities Auckland has worked with MOTAT on the draft MOTAT Annual Plan for 2019/2020 and recommends that it be approved (Attachment B).

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Finance and Performance Committee:

a) approve the total levy applied for by the Museum of Transport and Technology of $15,811,739 for 2019/2020.

Horopaki

Context

Legislative framework

10. MOTAT operates under the Museum of Transport and Technology Act 2000. The Act requires the Board to maintain, manage, and develop MOTAT and its collections and provide for the recording and presentation of the history of transport and technology in Auckland and New Zealand. The Board must also provide maximum community benefit, including providing for education which engages and entertains, promoting historical and scientific research and achieving customer satisfaction through continuous improvement.

11. Council is obliged to fund MOTAT under the levy provisions of the Act, which gives MOTAT security of public funding for its activities, including maintenance and development. These provisions were originally developed in the pre-amalgamation context to ensure that all councils in the Auckland region contributed equitably to MOTAT.

12. The levy must be set by 30 April 2019, either through agreement or arbitration.

Role of Regional Facilities Auckland

13. Regional Facilities Auckland and Auckland Council have an Advisory and Management Agreement under which Regional Facilities Auckland has been appointed council’s advisor for MOTAT’s annual funding process.

14. The legislation requires MOTAT to publish its draft annual plan and publicly consult on the levy request being made to Auckland Council. Regional Facilities Auckland made a written submission and MOTAT has considered this along with other submissions received.

15. Regional Facilities Auckland has written to Auckland Council and recommends approval of the levy. Regional Facilities Auckland notes the funding request is within the legislative levy cap. Other elements of Regional Facilities Auckland’s advice, as expressed in the submission and the letter to council, have been incorporated into this report.

Cultural heritage review

16. In 2017, Auckland Council approved the establishment of a review of its investment in cultural heritage institutions. The scope of the review includes Auckland War Memorial Museum, Auckland Art Gallery, the New Zealand Maritime Museum, Stardome Observatory and Planetarium, the Museum of Transport and Technology, and the role of Regional Facilities Auckland in the cultural heritage sector.

17. The review’s first phase concluded in October 2018 with the receipt by council of the report from Stafford Strategy Limited. Phase 2, which will lead to recommendations to council about the key strategic objectives for the cultural heritage sector and the nature of any sector governance changes to support achieving those objectives, is currently getting underway. Council will be asked to approve terms of reference for Phase 2 in a separate report to council’s Governing Body.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

18. The levy indicated within the final draft MOTAT Annual Plan for 2019/2020 is
$15.812 million. The requested levy represents a 13 per cent increase over the 2018/2019 levy of $13.973 million. This is made up of a base operational levy of $14.812 million (increase of 6 per cent on the previous year) and an additional $1 million per year for 10 years for the Approach 2 set of works. By agreeing to the increased levy, council will be committing to funding these works for the next ten years.

‘Approach 2’ – summary

(see pages 18-19 of draft Annual Plan)

· Funding for Athfield Masterplan not approved as part of 2018-2028 Long-term Plan

· MOTAT has identified smaller projects from the masterplan which it considers critical for improving visitor experience, collection care, and demonstrating “positive change and progression”. The projects are:

· new carpark at Meola Rd site (“MOTAT 2”)

· new entranceway and café at MOTAT 2

· acoustic, thermal and weathertightness for building 6 at MOTAT 1

· re-roofing and internal improvement to building 5 at MOTAT 1

· new connection to Western Springs Lakeside Park.

· Total cost: $12.5 million, to be financed by bank loan, funded by council ($1million) per year for 10 years) and increased revenue.

19. Staff have worked with MOTAT on the proposed projects and consider them prudent investments while awaiting longer term decisions about more substantial capital investment in the cultural heritage sector. The cultural heritage review will look at the overall priorities for the sector and any investment needs, with a view to ensuring council can be confident about making more significant investments in future. In the meantime, MOTAT has been open about its use of the levy to undertake these smaller projects, and staff are comfortable that what is proposed is consistent with MOTAT’s purpose under the Act.

20. The part of the MOTAT draft Annual Plan setting out 2019/2020 intentions begins from page 18. It sets out the three-main organisational ‘hubs’ of MOTAT – Museum Experience, Collections, and Business Services. There is a clear description of what each of these hubs does, which of the strategic/core objectives they contribute to, and planned activities. The longer-term future plan is set out on page 51 and gives a good sense (in practical terms) of what MOTAT is planning.

21. MOTAT’s core objectives are set out, with measures and alignment with the Auckland Plan 2050 and Toi Whitiki, on pages 38 to 47 of the draft Annual Plan. These objectives are:

1) maximise the visitor experience

2) empower the MOTAT team

3) improve the quality of the collection and its care

4) improve MOTAT’s business, and sustainability

5) engage with likeminded institutions.

22. The objectives are the same as the previous year, with the exception of objective 5 which has been added for 2019/2020. This reflects a clear and welcome commitment to both the other institutions in Auckland (and the aim of Toi Whitiki to promote a network of collaborative institutions), to the Western Springs precinct, and to tangata whenua.

23. The way MOTAT sets out its organisational structure, core objectives, and performance measures and targets is logical and clear. While the measures are somewhat output focussed, they have a clear link to the objectives, and are relatively consistent with measures used in previous years, which allows progress to be tracked in specific areas. If a clear set of sector-wide outcomes emerge from the cultural heritage sector review, this would assist MOTAT to develop a wider outcomes perspective.

24. The Financial Overview section is similarly clear. The indicative budgets show clear summaries of revenue and expenditure. Operating expenditure is then shown according to each of the three organisational hubs, making it clear to track what is driving increased expenditure. Broadly speaking, the additional levy requested for 2019/2020 is being directed at exhibitions (museum experience hub).

25. We note that the two-year outlook for the levy is for a 3.7 per cent increase for 2020/21 and 3.2 per cent in 2021/2022.

26. Staff recommend approval of the MOTAT levy request, as the MOTAT draft Annual Plan 2019/2020 aligns with MOTAT’s purposes under the Act.

27. The other option is to dispute the levy amount and enter arbitration. This is not recommended, for two reasons. Firstly, we consider there are no grounds for disputing the levy amount, because the MOTAT levy request meets the purposes of the museum as set out in its legislation, and the draft Annual Plan 2019/2020 has clearly set out MOTAT’s planned activities for the coming year. Regional Facilities Auckland has worked with MOTAT on the plan and has recommended to Auckland Council that it be approved.

28. Secondly, if successful at arbitration, this would leave MOTAT in a position where it was likely unable to complete the Approach 2 works. These works comprise essential maintenance works (such as roofing and weathertightness) and improvements to maintain MOTAT’s ability to attract paying visitors.

29. Longer-term, MOTAT is awaiting progress on the cultural heritage review, and Regional Facilities Auckland has made clear council’s expectation that MOTAT will participate fully in that process, and to respond to recommendations arising from it.

30. Finally, staff note that Auckland Council is acknowledged clearly and appropriately in the draft Annual Plan (page 58).

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

31. As noted above, Regional Facilities Auckland provides council with advice on the levy each year and maintains a cooperative relationship with MOTAT throughout the year to encourage alignment with council priorities. In particular, RFA’s letter refers to how Auckland Zoo and Auckland Stadiums have worked with MOTAT on joined-up thinking on opportunities across the Western Springs precinct. MOTAT has also provided support to the New Zealand Maritime Museum (an RFA business unit) in relation to storage of some of its collection objects.

32. More generally, the legislative levy systems under which MOTAT and Auckland Museum are funded continue to represent a financial risk to the council group. The lack of formal accountability to council, the inability of council to have genuine formal engagement with the plans of the museums, and the way the systems were designed to lock-in financial commitments of multiple councils that no longer exist mean the levies are not ideal mechanisms for building a modern relationship with these two institutions.

Ngā whakaaweawe ā-rohe me ngā tirohanga a te poari ā-rohe

Local impacts and local board views

33. Decision making and oversight in respect of regional activities is the responsibility of the Governing Body.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

34. Key objectives for the year for MOTAT are contained under objective 5.1: “Tangata whenua technology and tikanga”. These are to implement the bicultural strategy which was developed in 2018/2019, and more generally to promote tangata whenua technology and innovation, through exhibitions and displays. One aspect of this which continues to be in development is a travelling exhibition focusing on Māori technology.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

35. The levy request for 2019/2020 is $15.812 million. This is an increase of $1.839 million over the amount included in the 2018-2028 Long-term Plan and will lead to an increase in council’s 2019/2020 Annual Budget.

36. The terms of the loan arrangement MOTAT proposes to enter into for the Approach 2 works are no worse than those which could be secured through council lending directly.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

37. There are three main risks for council. The first is that MOTAT continues to require long-term decision-making about its capital development plans, a risk which is being dealt with through the cultural heritage review.

38. Secondly, and related to the need for long-term decisions, last year’s levy report identified the risk that the condition of buildings at MOTAT meant that bids for emergency funding might arise. This has been borne out this year, in the shape of the Approach 2 projects. While staff consider these projects prudent, it is an example of additional funding being required, and represents a 13 per cent increase from the previous year’s levy. It reinforces the need to resolve the long-term situation of MOTAT – its purpose in the group of council-funded institutions, and its capital needs to fulfil that role.

39. Finally, there is the ongoing risk to council from MOTAT seeking increases to its levy in the future. As noted above, MOTAT has signalled additional levy increases for 2020/2021 and 2021/2022 and it can be anticipated that these rises will continue. Given the current levy systems imposed on council by legislation, there is little council can do to mitigate this risk except to work closely with MOTAT to minimise the ongoing requests. In this regard, Regional Facilities Auckland plays a key role. The relationship between Auckland Council, Regional Facilities Auckland and MOTAT is strong and cooperative at present.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

40. If this committee approves the proposed levy, payment will be made on 1 July 2019.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	MOTAT Draft Annual Plan 2019-2020	117
b ⇩	RFA letter to Auckland Council re MOTAT Draft Annual Plan 2019-2020	179

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Edward Siddle - Principal Advisor

Authorisers

Alastair Cameron - Manager - CCO Governance & External Partnerships

Phil Wilson - Governance Director

Matthew Walker - Group Chief Financial Officer

Finance and Performance Committee

19 March 2019

Approval of Auckland War Memorial Museum levy, 2019-2020

File No.: CP2019/01701

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To consider the 2019/2020 levy for the Auckland War Memorial Museum (the Museum).

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. The Auckland War Memorial Museum Act 1996 (the Act) allows the Museum to levy Auckland Council for funding on an annual basis. Auckland Council through Regional Facilities Auckland (RFA) can provide feedback on the Museum’s draft Annual Plan (Attachment A).

3. This year the Museum’s levy request is $32.292 million, an increase of 2.5 per cent from last year’s $31.504 million, which itself was a 2.5 per cent increase.

4. Regional Facilities Auckland has worked closely with Auckland Museum throughout the development of the museum’s 2019/2020 draft Annual Plan, which has let to improvements in the layout of the Annual Plan and the information provided. However, the Annual Plan could be clearer about how Auckland’s growth is specifically impacting on costs at the Museum.

5. The Annual Plan 2019/2020 meets the requirements of the Museum’s legislation.

6. Staff recommend the Museum’s levy is approved for 2019/2020. Disputing the levy amount and entering arbitration is the alternative, but this is not recommended.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Finance and Performance Committee:

a) approve the total levy applied for by the Auckland War Memorial Museum of
$32.292 million for 2019/2020, noting that this is an increase of 2.5 per cent from 2018/2019.

Horopaki

Context

Legislative framework

7. Council is obliged to fund the Museum under the levy provisions of the Auckland War Memorial Museum Act 1996. This Act was designed to ensure the seven councils in the Auckland region at the time all contributed to the Museum, and to put in place what was then a world-leading provision for direct indigenous people’s involvement in governance.

8. The purpose of the levy is to fund the Museum’s activities, including maintenance, operations and development. This gives the Museum security of public funding, including to fund its depreciation. The levy must be set by 30 April 2019, either through agreement or arbitration.

9. Since 1996, both Auckland’s local governance model and the Māori context has changed significantly. In particular these new elements include:

· the amalgamation of local authorities into Auckland Council

· the Tamaki Collective settlement of 2012

· new understandings of Treaty of Waitangi obligations about the care of taonga through the Wai 262 Ko Aotearoa Tenei report in 2011.

10. Furthermore, the Auckland Plan (2012) and Auckland Plan 2050 (2018) were developed in response to requirements in sections 79-80 of the Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2010. Both versions of the Auckland Plan emphasised council’s responsibility to a wider group of 19 mana whenua iwi in the Auckland region.

11. This means the legislative context under which council and the Museum operate has changed since the Auckland War Memorial Museum Act 1996 came into force.

Role of Regional Facilities Auckland

12. Regional Facilities Auckland and Auckland Council have an Advisory and Management Agreement under which Regional Facilities Auckland has been appointed council’s advisor for the Museum’s annual funding process.

13. The legislation requires the Museum to publish its draft Annual Plan and publicly consult on the levy request being made to Auckland Council. Regional Facilities Auckland made a submission and the Museum has considered this along with other submissions received.

14. Regional Facilities Auckland has written to Auckland Council and recommends approval of the levy (Attachment B). Regional Facilities Auckland notes the funding request is within the levy cap calculated based on the legislative formula. Other elements of Regional Facilities Auckland’s advice, as expressed in the submission and the letter to council, have been incorporated into this report.

Cultural heritage review

15. In 2017, Auckland Council approved the establishment of a review of its investment in cultural heritage institutions. The scope of the review includes Auckland Museum, Auckland Art Gallery, the New Zealand Maritime Museum, Stardome Observatory and Planetarium, the Museum of Transport and Technology, and the role of Regional Facilities Auckland in relation to cultural matters.

16. The first stage of the review was the commissioning of a report by Stafford Strategy Limited, which was workshopped with councillors in October 2018 and subsequently released publicly. A second phase, working alongside the institutions to agree a way forward, will begin in April 2019. The proposed terms of reference for ‘phase 2’ will be brought to council’s Governing Body.

17. The ongoing cultural heritage review provides an opportunity for council to consider its relationship with Auckland’s various cultural institutions, including for council to develop a strong strategic sense of what it wants to achieve from its investment in this area. There is also the possibility to consider governance involvement for mana whenua, and consideration of long-term investment needs in the sector.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Key elements of the Annual Plan 2018/2019

18. The Museum’s draft Annual Plan proposes a total levy of $32.292 million, representing an increase of $788,000, or a 2.5 per cent increase over the 2018/2019 levy. The levy request includes $9.60 million for depreciation.

19. Future levy requests are projected to increase by 2.5 per cent in 2020/2021 and 2 per cent in 2021/2022.

20. The following graph shows the Museum’s levy increases over the past decade, including the 2019/2020 request and the next two years’ projected requests.

Auckland Museum levy from Auckland Council, 2009 to 2022, $ millions

21. The six strategic priorities from the Museum’s five-year strategic plan are the organising principle for the museum’s draft 2019/2020 Annual Plan, which builds on those of previous years. The focus for 2019/2020 is the capital transformation of the Museum.

22. This capital programme is being achieved largely by spending down the Asset Replacement Reserve (see page 37). The Reserve is the saved depreciation portion of the council levy.

Analysis

23. Last year the committee approved the levy but requested “that the Museum improves the transparency of its financial information so that Aucklanders are better informed about the link between expenditure and outcomes, and what is driving cost increases.”

24. Regional Facilities Auckland has worked closely with Auckland Museum throughout the development of the museum’s draft 2019/2020 Annual Plan, with an extensive correspondence between the two organisations having been engaged in.

25. This has resulted in an improved layout for the six focus/outcome areas, whereby objectives (“how will we add value for Aucklanders”) sit underneath the outcomes, with measures alongside. These are accompanied by references to the Auckland Plan outcomes and the outcomes in the Auckland Arts and Culture Strategic Action Plan, Toi Whitiki. Pages 34 and 35 of the museum’s draft 2019/2020 Annual Plan shows operating expenditure both by strategic priority area, and also by categories such as exhibitions, commercial activities, collections care, business services, visitor services, and specific projects areas such as He Korahi Māori and Teu le Va.

26. The Museum’s commentary on page 38 to justify the levy request describes cost (and levy) increases as largely being caused by the increasing population of Auckland and the consequent increase in visitors to the Museum. A relatively straight-line relationship between visitor growth and costs is assumed.

27. The Plan excludes a specific line about staffing costs (unlike, for example, the MOTAT Annual Plan 2019/2020 which is clear in this regard). It is clear from the Museum’s annual reports over several years that this represents a key driver of ongoing cost increases. The basis of the museum’s levy request would be enhanced if a more direct line could be drawn between the expected increases in visitation (whether onsite, online or offsite), the key categories which would be affected by that increased visitation (eg. digital experience, visitor services, learning and public programmes, and safety and security), and the staffing increases required to service that.

28. Council and Regional Facilities Auckland staff will explore with the Museum the specific impact of growth pressures and how best to manage them.

Advice

29. There are two options available to council. The first, which is recommended, is to approve the Museum’s levy request. The annual plan aligns with the Museum’s purposes as set out in the Act, and the council therefore has little ability to challenge the levy sought. Approving the levy will reinforce council’s ongoing commitment and long-term support for the Museum.

30. The second option is to refuse the request and enter arbitration. This is not recommended, because there is no evidence which would justify rejecting the levy request, which aligns with the broad purposes set out in the Act.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

31. As described above, Regional Facilities Auckland has a specific role in the levy setting process. As such, its advice has been incorporated into the content of this report.

Ngā whakaaweawe ā-rohe me ngā tirohanga a te poari ā-rohe

Local impacts and local board views

32. Decision making and oversight about regional activities is the responsibility of the Governing Body. The views of local boards were not sought.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

33. The Museum aims to be a bicultural organisation and makes positive contributions to Māori aspirations in Auckland and around New Zealand. The Museum’s He Korahi Māori document sets out the nature of the Museum’s Māori dimension, which builds on the structural place of Māori built into the Museum’s governance through its Taumata-a-Iwi (Māori advisory committee).

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

34. The levy request for 2019/2020 is $32.292 million. This is within the levy cap provided for by legislation but is an increase of $792,000 over the amount included in the 2018-2028 Long-term Plan and will lead to an increase in council’s 2019/2020 Annual Budget.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

35. There are two main risks for the Museum itself. The first is that the Museum is unable to deliver on what is an ambitious capital programme. As the programme is relatively well advanced, it appears that this risk is low at this time. Secondly, Regional Facilities Auckland has noted the ongoing lack of a comprehensive asset management plan covering not just the heritage building but all aspects of collection storage and systems, staff spaces, and Information Technology (for example). RFA will continue to work with the Museum to develop this.

36. For Council there is ongoing financial risk from the legislative levy systems under which MOTAT and Auckland Museum are funded. The lack of formal accountability to council, and the way the systems were designed to lock-in financial commitments of multiple councils that no longer exist, mean the levies are not ideal mechanisms for building a modern relationship with these two institutions. Council and Regional Facilities Auckland staff will work closely with the museum to mitigate this risk but ultimately has limited ability to do so because of the legislative framework.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

37. If this committee approves the proposed levy, payment will be made on 1 July 2019.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Auckland War Memorial Museum draft Annual Plan 2019/2020	189
b ⇩	RFA letter to Auckland Council re AWMM Draft Annual Plan 2019-2020	211

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Edward Siddle - Principal Advisor

Authorisers

Alastair Cameron - Manager - CCO Governance & External Partnerships

Phil Wilson - Governance Director

Matthew Walker - Group Chief Financial Officer

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Finance and Performance Committee Work Programme as at 19 March 2019	217
b	Auckland Council Submsision to New Zealand Productivity Commission (Under Separate Cover)
c	7 March 2019 – Memorandum from Corporate Property regarding an update on the Corporate property Portfolio Strategy (Under Separate Cover)
d	11 March 2019 - Memorandum from Development Programme Office regarding the City Centre Targeted Rate Investment Criteria re ACCAB (Under Separate Cover)

Finance and Performance Committee

19 March 2019

Komiti ā Pūtea, ā Mahi Hoki
Finance and Performance Committee
FORWARD WORK PROGRAMME TO 30 JUNE 2019

The purpose of the Committee is to control and review expenditure across the Group to improve value for money; to monitor the overall financial management and performance of Auckland Council parent and Auckland Council Group; to make financial decisions required outside the annual budgeting processes and to perform the responsibilities of another committee, where it is necessary.

Detailed decisions are reported at the end of this document

Priorities for 2018/19 will be on initiatives which:

1. Planning and Funding

2. Reporting and Performance

3. Value for money

4. Operational

The work of the committee will:

1. approve the Annual Plan 2019/2020 including financial policy, the consultation document and supporting information for recommendation to the Governing Body

2. monitor achievement of financial and other measures of performance and services levels and recommend the Annual Report to the Governing Body

3. approve acquisition and disposal of property related to the Committee’s responsibilities.

4. review and approve financial policy and non-budgeted expenditure.

Lead	Area of work	Reason for work	Finance and Performance Committee role - decision or direction		Expected timeframes
					2018 2019
					Q1 Jul-Sep 24 Jul 21 Aug 18 Sept	Q2 Oct-Dec 17 Oct 23 Oct 14 Nov 20 Nov 11 Dec			Q3 Jan-Mar 13 Feb 19 Feb 19 Mar 20 Mar	Q4 Apr-Jun 16 Apr 21 May 18 Jun 19 June
Planning and Funding
GM Financial Strategy & Planning	Annual Budget	Statutory process	Decision to agree to the Consultation items (including Possible LTP amendment on transfer of legal ownership of properties within the council group) Adopt Consultation Document to consult with Public Consultation runs Hear feedback and deliberate budget scenarios Decisions made for Annual Budget Adopt final Annual Budget				Nov Dec		13 Feb	Apr May June
GM Financial Strategy & Planning	Budget Update (as required). This includes significant unbudgeted one-off expenditure.	Financial management	Decision to agree recommended budget changes outside of AP/LTP budgeting cycle				20 Nov 11 Dec			Apr May Jun
GM Financial Strategy & Planning	Development contributions policy	Statutory requirement to have a DC policy · Align capex figures from LTP	Note that the Governing Body has Agreed to consult on the proposed DC policy (18 October 2018). The GB will Consult on draft Development Contribution policy (19 October 2018 – 15 November 2018). The GB has Adopted the Development Contribution policy (13 December 2018)		Sep
GM Financial Strategy & Planning	Rating Policy and process	Rating	Workshop on approach to rating religious properties Refer to this matter considered as part of the Annual Budget 2019/2020		Sep		23 Oct 20 Nov		13 Feb	May
GM Financial Strategy & Planning	Carry forwards for 2017/2018	Financial Management	Approving budget carry forwards for 2017/2018				17 Oct
GM Financial Strategy & Planning	Infrastructure funding and financing work with Treasury	Financial Management	Discuss ongoing work with central government on Crown Infrastructure Partners and Special Purpose Vehicles for major infrastructure projects – timing for committee as required
GM Financial Strategy & Planning and Treasurer and GM Financial Transactions	Treasury and debt management		Briefing on council debt				21 Nov		19 Mar	Apr
GM Corporate Finance and Property	Weathertightness issues and provision	To provide an update on changes implemented to reduce the future risk of weathertightness claims as well as a summary of how the liability is calculated for accounting purposes	Review information Workshop held 6 March 2019				11 Dec			Apr
Auckland Investment Office	Colin Dale Park	Report on progress of the investigation and negotiations for Speedway (run by Springs Promotions Ltd) to move from Western Springs to Colin Dale Park.	Endorse the Heads of Agreement and Approve to development costs. Note – Venue Development Strategy is being considered at the Planning Committee. Refer also to aspects of this matter being considered as part of the Annual Budget 2019/2020				20 Nov			Apr
Chief Financial Officer	Eden Park	Report on progress regarding the loan guarantee	Review information and make decisions on the loan guarantee						13 Feb 19 Mar
Chief Financial Officer	City Rail Link Limited	Update on financial matters relating to City Rail Link Limited	Review information and make decisions, as required						Feb	Apr May
Te Waka Anga Mua ki Uta	Māori Transformational Activity and Expenditure Report Te Tiriti O Waitangi Audit Response Work Programme	To monitor progress on expenditure and delivery of Maori transformational activity (includes Te Toa Takitini) and on projects to deliver Māori outcomes. This reporting will be carried out bi-annually To monitor progress in responding to 3 yearly Te Tiriti O Waitangi audit	Receive generally no decisions				17 Oct			21 May
Reporting and Performance
GM Corporate Finance and Property	Annual Report	· Statutory requirement · NZX Announcement and release · Draft annual report and Summary on Performance - Sept · Interim audit report – Feb	Receive Annual report Recommend to Governing Body for adoption Note: · NZX announcements are presented to the Audit and Risk Committee · There is a delegation from the Committee to Chair and Deputy Chair of Finance and Performance to recommend to the Mayor and CE to release the preliminary results to the NZ Stock Exchange so that Council can meet NZX reporting deadlines. · Formal adoption of annual report is by the Governing Body	Aug Sept
GM Corporate Finance and Property	Half-yearly report	· NZX listing requirement	Receive Half-yearly report Approve for release Note: · NZX announcements are presented to the Audit and Risk Committee · There is a delegation from the Committee to Chair and Deputy Chair of Finance and Performance to recommend to the Mayor and CE to release the preliminary results to the NZ Stock Exchange so that Council can meet NZX reporting deadlines. · Document will be sent to committee members once it has been reported to the NZX on 28 February 2019					Feb 20 Mar
CCO/External Partnerships	Statements of Intent	· Shareholder feedback on draft SOIs –Aug · Letters of Expectation for 2019/2020 SOIs – Nov · Shareholder comments on draft 2019/2020 SOIs - Apr	Agree 2019/2010 Letters of Expectation	Aug			23 Oct 11 Dec				Apr
Manager Corporate & Local Board Performance	Performance Reporting quarterly - parent	To monitor council parent financial and non-financial performance results	Receive generally no decisions				17 Oct 14 Nov	20 Mar			19 Jun
GM Financial Strategy & Planning	Performance Reporting quarterly – CCOs	To monitor CCO financial and non-financial performance results	Receive validate/challenge				17 Oct 14 Nov	20 Mar			19 Jun
GM Financial Strategy & Planning	Performance Reporting quarterly - group	To monitor Auckland Council group financial performance	Receive generally no decisions				17 Oct 14 Nov	20 Mar			19 Jun
Value for Money
GM Financial Strategy & Planning	Consideration and adoption of Group policy relating to Business Cases		Decision on whether to adopt a new policy								Apr
Operational
Panuku Development Auckland	Recommended disposals or acquisitions. These reports are as required, but generally monthly.	· Panuku is required through its SOI to identify and recommend to council properties that are surplus to requirements and can be considered for disposal. These include general disposals to fund LTP projects. · Panuku recommends properties for acquisition and disposal to the committee for approval where they are located within a priority development location.	Decision to proceed with recommended disposals or acquisitions.	July Sept			23 Oct 20 Nov 11 Dec				Apr May 18 Jun
GM Corporate Finance and Property	Property portfolio	To provide an update on progress of the Corporate Property Portfolio roll out and where required seek approval for any property transactions	Regular reporting				20 Nov	19 Mar			18 Jun
Engineering & Technical Services / Treasury & Financial Transactions / Procurement	Consideration and adoption of Group policies for Performance Bonds	Mayoral Office request	Decide whether to amend current policy								Apr
CCO/External Partnerships	Funding and Levies (including Auckland Regional Amenities, MOTAT and Auckland War Memorial Museum)	Statutory process · RFA respond to draft levy for MOTAT and AWMM (on behalf of council) · December F&P - approve council submission to draft ARAFB Funding Plan · March F&P – approve annual funding levies for ARAFB, MOTAT, AWMM · March F&P (G Body) – approve ARAFB draft · May F&P – approve annual IMSB funding. · May and June 2019 - nine amenities present to F&P committee	Decision to approve submission on draft Funding Plan Decision to approve levies				11 Dec	19 Mar			May 19 June
Parks, Sports and Recreation	Loan restructuring (committee dates as required)	Responding to proposals and recommendations	Decision to approve proposed restructuring

Detailed decisions - Komiti ā Pūtea, ā Mahi Hoki
Finance and Performance Committee
FORWARD WORK PROGRAMME TO 30 JUNE 2019

Lead	Area of work	Finance and Performance Committee role - decision or direction	Detailed decisions
Planning and Funding
GM Financial Strategy & Planning	Annual Budget	Decision to agree to the Consultation items Adopt Consultation Document to consult with Public Consultation runs Hear feedback and deliberate budget scenarios Decisions made for Annual Budget Adopt final Annual Budget	For information on the previous long-term/annual plan processes, please refer to the table at the end of this document.
GM Financial Strategy & Planning	Budget Update (as required). This includes significant unbudgeted one-off expenditure.	Decision to agree recommended budget changes outside of AP/LTP budgeting cycle	For information on previous decisions, please refer to the table at the end of this document.
GM Financial Strategy & Planning	Development contributions policy	Note that the Governing Body has agreed to consult on the proposed DC policy (18 October 2018). The GB has consulted on draft Development Contribution policy (19 October 2018 – 15 November 2018). The GB will adopt the Development Contribution policy (13 December 2018)	Reporting dates: 31/5/18 – Contributions Policy FIN/2018/90 Adopted by the Governing Body: 31/5/18 GB/2018/91 10/9/18 – Workshop on Development Contributions
GM Financial Strategy & Planning	Rating Policy and process	Workshop on approach to rating religious properties (Potentially move into Annual Plan process)	23/10/18 – Workshop on the rating of religious use premises Minutes 20/11/18 – Rating of religious use properties FIN/2018/177 13/2/19 – Amendments to the Revenue and Financing Policy and Rates Remission and Postponement Policy FIN/2019/4 Adopted by Governing Body GB/2019/6
GM Financial Strategy & Planning	Carry forwards for 2017/2018	Approving budget carry forwards for 2017/2018	17/10/18 – 2017/2018 Budget Carry Forwards
GM Financial Strategy & Planning	Infrastructure funding and financing work with Treasury	Discuss ongoing work with central government on Crown Infrastructure Partners and Special Purpose Vehicles for major infrastructure projects – timing for committee as required	11/4/17 - Responsible investment policy and Diversified Financial Asset Portfolio review Resolutions - FIN/2017/44, FIN/2017/45 and FIN/2017/46 20/06/17 - Review of the Diversified Financial Assets Portfolio FIN/2017/88 19/9/17 – Approval of Group Policies FIN/2017/121 11/12/17 – Approval of Treasury Management Policy FIN/2017/161 27/2/18 – Council’s debt funding strategy FIN/2018/10
GM Financial Strategy & Planning and Treasurer and GM Financial Transactions	Treasury and debt management	Briefing on council debt	21/11/18 – Workshop on Debt Management Strategy
Auckland Investment Office	Dividend reinvestment plan	Decision to agree required to approve Dividend Reinvestment Plan
GM Corporate Finance and Property	Weathertightness issues and provision	Review information	6/319 – Confidential workshop held
Executive Director, Auckland Investment Office	Colin Dale Park	Endorse the Heads of Agreement and Approve to development costs.	20/11/18 – Update on Speedway Relocation FIN/2018/184 and FIN/2018/185
Chief Financial Officer	Eden Park	Report on progress regarding the loan guarantee	13/2/19 – Confidential workshop held
Chief Financial Officer	City Rail Link Limited	Update on financial matters relating to City Rail Link Limited	19/2/19 – Confidential briefing held
Te Waka Anga Mua ki Uta	Māori Transformational Activity and Expenditure Report Te Tiriti O Waitangi Audit Response Work Programme	Receive generally no decisions	23/5/17 - 23/5/17 – Third Quarter of 2016/17 FIN/2017/63 13/12/17 - Te Toa Takitini - Quarter One Māori Responsiveness portfolio report FIN/2016/159 15/08/17 – 2016/2017 Year-End Report FIN/2017/112 12/12/17 – Quarter One Report for 2017/2018 financial year FIN/2017/202 20/03/18 – Quarter Two Report for 2017/2018 financial year FIN/20178/14 12/12/17 Report FIN/2017/291 12/3/18 Response Report FIN/2018/45 24/7/18 Te Tiriti o Waitangi Report 2018 FIN/2018/115 17/10/18 Update on the independent assessment of expenditure incurred by Auckland Council to deliver Māori outcomes 17/10/18 Auckland Council group – programmes and projects that have delivered Māori outcomes in 2017/2018 17/10/18 2018 Treaty Audit Response Programme
Reporting and Performance
GM Corporate Finance and Property	Annual Report	Receive Annual report Recommend to Governing Body for adoption Note: · NZX announcements are presented to the Audit and Risk Committee · There is a delegation from the Committee to Chair and Deputy Chair of Finance and Performance to recommend to the Mayor and CE to release the preliminary results to the NZ Stock Exchange so that Council can meet NZX reporting deadlines. · Formal adoption of annual report is by the Governing Body	13/12/2016 - Delegation for approval of releasing interim and full year group results to New Zealand Stock Exchange FIN/2016/168 18/9/18 – Approval of and recommendation for adoption of the 2017/2018 Annual Report for Auckland Council and Group (confidential)
GM Corporate Finance and Property	Half-yearly report	Receive Half-yearly report Approve for release Note: · NZX announcements are presented to the Audit and Risk Committee · There is a delegation from the Committee to Chair and Deputy Chair of Finance and Performance to recommend to the Mayor and CE to release the preliminary results to the NZ Stock Exchange so that Council can meet NZX reporting deadlines.
CCO/External Partnerships	Statements of Intent	Agree 2019/2010 Letters of Expectation	15/8/17 – Approval of 2017/2020 Statements of Intent FIN/2017/111 19/9/17 – Approval of Watercare Services Limited Statement of Intent 2017-20 FIN/2017/122 12/12/17 - Letters of Expectation for Council-controlled Organisations, 2017-2018 FIN/2016/170 20/3/18 – Letters of Expectation for 2018-2021 17/4/18 – proposed shareholder comments on Draft Council-controlled organisation statements of intent FIN/2018/64 21/8/18 – Council-controlled Organisations – Approval of 2018-2021 Statements of Intent FIN/2018/118 21/8/18 – Ports of Auckland Limited – proposed shareholder feedback on the draft Statement of Corporate Intent FIN/2018/119 23/10/18 – Shareholder approval of Ports of Auckland Limited’s final statement of Corporate Intent 2018-2021 FIN/2018/156 23/10/18 – Workshop on Council Controlled Organisations letters of expectation, statements of intent and quarterly reporting. 22/11/18 - 22/11/18 – Proposed priorities for the 2019 letters of expectation to substantive council-controlled organisations FIN/2018/173 19/2/19 – Terms of Reference for Statement of Intent Review FIN/2019/9 19/2/19 – Letters of expectation – Auckland Transport; Auckland Tourism, Events and Economic Development Limited; Panuku Developments Limited; Regional Facilities Auckland; Watercare Services Limited FIN/2019/11
Manager Corporate & Local Board Performance	Performance Reporting quarterly - parent	Receive generally no decisions	13/12/16 - Auckland Council organisation report for the period 1 July 2016 to 30 September 2016 FIN/2016/160 21/2/17 - Auckland Council organisation performance report for the period 1 July 2016 to 31 December 2016 FIN/2017/9 26/5/17 - Auckland Council organisation performance report for the period 1 July 2016 to 31 March 2017 FIN/2017/68 21/09/17 - Organisation Performance 1 July 2016 – 30 June 2017 FIN/2017/133 24/11/17 - 1 July 2017 – 30 September 2017 FIN/2017/177 12/03/18 - 1 July 2017 – 31 December 2017 FIN/2018/34 6/6/18 – Auckland Council parent performance report for the period 1 January 2018 to 31 March 2018 FIN/2018/98 17/10/18 – Auckland Council parent performance report for the period 1 July 2017 to 30 June 2018 14/11/18 – Auckland Council Group, the Council entity and CCO quarterly performance reports to 30 September 2018 FIN/2018/169
GM Financial Strategy & Planning	Performance Reporting quarterly – CCOs	Receive validate/challenge	13/12/16 - Council-controlled organisations first quarter report for 30 September 2016 FIN/2016/158 11/4/17 – CCOs second quarter report for 31 December 2017 26/5/17 – Council-controlled organisations third quarter report for 31 March 2017 FIN/2017/69 21/09/17 - Fourth quarter report for 30 June 2017 (public excluded) FIN/2017/130 24/11/17 - First quarter report for 30 September 2017 FIN/2017/178 12/03/18 – Second quarter report ending 31 December 2017 FIN/2018/18 31/5/18 – Approval of council-controlled organisations accountability policy FIN/2018/91 6/6/18 – Council-controlled organisation third quarter report ending 31 March 2018 FIN/2018/96 and FIN/2018/97 17/10/18 – Council-controlled organisation fourth quarter report ending 30 June 2018 23/10/18 – Workshop on Council Controlled Organisations letters of expectation, statements of intent and quarterly reporting. 4/11/18 – Auckland Council Group, the Council entity and CCO quarterly performance reports to 30 September 2018 FIN/2018/169
GM Financial Strategy & Planning	Performance Reporting quarterly - group	Receive generally no decisions	13/12/16 - Auckland Council Group first quarter financial results to 30 September 2016 FIN/2016/161 21/3/17 - Auckland Council Group quarterly financial report and financial results to 31 December 2016 FIN/2017/28 26/5/17 - Auckland Council Group quarterly financial report and financial results to 31 March 2017 FIN/2017/70 21/09/17 – Report for adoption of the 2016/2017 Annual Report FIN/2017/132 24/11/17 - Quarterly financial report and financial results to 30 September 2017 FIN/2017/176 12/03/2018 - Six monthly financial results to 31 December 2017 FIN/2018/32 6/6/18 – Auckland Council Group quarterly financial report and financial reports to 31 March 2018 FIN/2018/95 17/10/18 – Auckland Council and group financial performance for the year ended 30 June 2018
Value for Money
GM Financial Strategy & Planning	Consideration and adoption of Group policy relating to Business Cases	Decision on whether to adopt a new policy	19/9/17 – Approval of Group Policies FIN/2017/121
Operational
Panuku Development Auckland	Recommended disposals or acquisitions. These reports are as required, but generally monthly.	Decision to proceed with recommended disposals or acquisitions.	Note: A full list of properties to be disposed or acquired is included at the end of this document.
GM Corporate Finance and Property	Property portfolio	Regular reporting	29/3/18 – Workshop on corporate property strategy 17/4/18 – Corporate Accommodation Disposal Recommendation, Corporate Property Portfolio Strategy FIN/2018/58 15/5/18 – Corporate Accommodation Disposal Recommendation, Corporate Property Portfolio Strategy FIN/2018/73 20/11/18 – Disposal of Corporate Accommodation, Corporate Property Portfolio Strategy FIN/2018/188
Engineering & Technical Services / Treasury & Financial Transactions / Procurement	Consideration and adoption of Group policies for Performance Bonds	Decide whether to amend current policy	12/3/18 – Green Bond Framework Establishment and Potential Green Bond Issuance FIN/2018/31
CCO/External Partnerships	Auckland Regional Amenities Levy MOTAT and Auckland War Memorial Museum Levy	Decision to approve submission on draft Funding Plan Decision to approve levies	21/2/17 – Presentations from amenities - New Zealand Opera, Auckland Theatre Company, Coastguard Northern Region, Watersafe Auckland and Surf Life Saving Northern Region FIN/2017/4 21/2/17 - Auckland Regional Amenities draft funding plan 2017-2018, proposed Auckland Council submission FIN/2017/5 21/3/17 – Presentations from amenities – Stardome Observatory and Planetarium; New Zealand Maritime Museum; Auckland Philharmonia Orchestra; Auckland Rescue Helicopter Trust; and Auckland Arts Festival FIN/2017/18 21/3/17 - Approval of Auckland Regional Amenities Funding Act levy 2017/2018 FIN/2071/19 27/2/18 - Presentations from amenities – Auckland Festival Trust; Surf Life Saving Northern Region; Auckland Theatre Company; and Stardome Observatory and Coastguard Northern Region FIN/2018/5 27/2/18 - Auckland Regional Amenities Draft Funding Plan 2018/2019 - proposed Auckland Council submission FIN/2018/6 20/3/18 - Integration of NZ Maritime Museum to Regional Facilities Auckland FIN/2018/37 20/3/18 - Presentations from amenities – NZ Opera: Auckland Philharmonia Orchestra; Auckland Rescue Helicopter; and Drowning Prevention Auckland/Watersafe Auckland Inc FIN/2018/38 17/4/18 – approval of Auckland Regional Amenities Funding Act levy FIN/2018/63 21/3/17 – AWMM – approval of 2017/2018 levy FIN/2017/20 21/3/17 – MOTAT – approval of 2017/2018 levy FIN/2017/21 23/5/18 – AWMM letter – approval of 2017/2018 levy 17/4/18 – MOTAT – approval of 2018/2019 levy FIN/2018/61 17/4/18 - AWMM – approval of 2018/2019 FIN/2018/62 11/12/18 - Auckland Regional Amenities Funding Board: Delegate approval of Auckland Council's submission to the 2019/2020 Levy FIN/2018/179 19/2/19 – Submission on ARAFA funding proposal FIN/2019/11
Parks, Sports and Recreation	Loan restructuring (committee dates as required)	Decision to approve proposed restructuring

Previous annual/long-term plan processes

Meeting Date	Subject
13/12/16	Annual Budget 2017/18 – Mayoral Proposal on items for Public Consultation FIN/2016/173
1/6/17	Annual Budget 2017/2018 - Overview to decision-making FIN/2017/73 Annual Budget 2017/2018 - Local Board budget update FIN/2017/74 Annual Budget 2017/2018 – Local Board Feedback FIN/2017/75 Final Annual Budget 2017/2018 – Mayoral Proposal resolutions - FIN/2017/76, FIN/2017/81, FIN/2017/83, and FIN/2017/85
31/5/18	*10-year Budget* 31/5/18 – 10-year Budget – 2018-2018 Mayor’s final proposal FIN/208/77-84 31/5/18 – Proposal for One Local Initiatives FIN/2018/85 Rodney Local Board Targeted Rate: Rodney Local Board Decision FIN/2018/87 31/5/18 – Fees, charges and other rating matters FIN/2018/89 31/5/18 – Adoption of the Rates Remission and Postponement Policy FIN/2018/92 31/5/18 – Contributions Policy FIN/2018/90 Adopted by the Governing Body: 31/5/18 GB/2018/91 Regional Fuel Tax GB/2018/90
13/2/19	Annual Budget 2019/2010 13/2/19 – Transfer of legal ownership of properties within the council group FIN/2019/2 Adopted by Governing Body GB/2019/1 13/2/19 – Adoption of Consultation Material: Annual Budget 2019/2020 FIN/2019/3 Adopted by Governing Body GB/2019/2-5 13/2/19 – Amendments to the Revenue and Financing Policy and Rates Remission and Postponement Policy FIN/2019/4 Adopted by Governing Body GB/2019/6 13/2/19 – Annual Budget 2019/2020 and Water Strategy Discussion Document – Engagement Approach FIN/2019/5 Adopted by Governing Body GB/2019/6

Panuku disposals/service property optimisation/land exchanges and acquisitions resolutions:

Meeting Date		Property Address	Resolution
13/12/16		Report Units 1-28/150 Mt Wellington Highway, Mt Wellington; and 1/16 Sarona Avenue, Glen Eden	FIN/2016/157
21/2/17		Report 523a Ellerslie-Panmure Highway, Mt Wellington; and 525-529 Ellerslie-Panmure Highway, Mt Wellington	FIN/2017/3
21/2/17		Report Land up to 9ha to NZTA for the Northern Corridor Improvements Project	FIN/2017/7
21/2/17		Report Statutory land exchange process – Rosedale Park	FIN/2017/8
21/3/17		Report Part of 770R Great South Road, Manukau	FIN/2017/25
11/4/17		Report 19 Anzac Road, Browns Bay (deferred); 6 Butler Avenue, Papatoetoe; part of 129R Bairds Road, Otara; 315A Glengarry Road, Glen Eden; Section 1 East Coast Road, Redvale; 78a Great South Road, Papakura; Section 1 493 State Highway 16, Kumeu; Allotment 137 Ahuroa Parish, Woodcocks Road, Woodcocks; Allotment 138 Ahuroa Parish, Woodcocks Road, Woodcocks; Allotment 139 Ahuroa Parish, Woodcocks Road, Woodcocks; Allotment 140 Ahuroa Parish, Woodcocks Road, Woodcocks; Allotment 141 Ahuroa Parish, Woodcocks Road, Woodcocks; and Allotment 147 Ahuroa Parish, Woodcocks Road, Woodcocks	Resolutions - FIN/2017/49, FIN/2017/50
23/5/17		Report 3 Memorial Drive, New Lynn	FIN/2017/57
26/7/17		Report 55a Alnwick Street, Warkworth; 45 Oraha Road, Huapai; 32 Harbourview Road, Te Atatu’ 145a West Tamaki Road, Glen Innes; 343 Swanson Road, Ranui; 24 Waipuna Road, Mt Wellington; 26 Waipuna Road, Mt Wellington; 27b Waipuna Road, Mt Wellington; 1/77 Waipuna Road, Mt Wellington; 93 Waipuna Road, Mt Wellington; 134a Waipuna Road, Mt Wellington; and 3/136b Waipuna Road, Mt Wellington	FIN/2017/97
17/4/18		Report – Unlock Panmure - 59 Mountain Road, Mount Wellington; 59a Mountain Road, Mount Wellington; 3 Mountwell Crescent, Mount Wellington; 7 Mountwell Crescent, Mount Wellington; 3 Kings Road, Panmure; 15 Forge Way, Mount Wellington; 7 and 9 Jellicoe Road, Mount Wellington; 30-34 Potaka Lane, Panmure; 486-492 Ellerslie-Panmure Highway, Mt Wellington; 516 Ellerslie-Panmure Highway, Mount Wellington; Former 528 Ellerslie-Panmure Highway, Mount Wellington; 530 Ellerslie-Panmure Highway, Mount Wellington; 532-534 Ellerslie-Panmure Highway, Mount Wellington; 535 Ellerslie-Panmure Highway, Mount Wellington; 536 Ellerslie-Panmure Highway, Mount Wellington; 7-11 Queens Road, Panmure; 39-41 Queens Road, Panmure; 11-13 Lagoon Drive, Panmure; 16 Lagoon Drive, Panmure; 20 Lagoon Drive, Panmure; 22 Lagoon Drive, Panmure; 26 Lagoon Drive, Panmure; 28 Lagoon Drive, Panmure; 30 Lagoon Drive, Panmure; 32-34 Lagoon Drive, Panmure; 1-19/10 Basin View Lane, Panmure; 23 Domain Road, Panmure; and 28-30 Pilkington Road, Mount Wellington.	FIN/2018/59
15/8/17		Report 187 Flat Bush School Road, Flat Bush;	FIN/2017/108
		Report Unlock Old Papatoetoe - 17 St George Street, Papatoetoe; part 27 St George Street, Papatoetoe; 104 St George Street, Papatoetoe; and 109 St George Street, Papatoetoe	FIN/2017/109
		Report 31-35 Mill Road, Helensville	FIN/2017/110
24/10/17		Report 19 Anzac Avenue, Browns Bay; 10 Felton Matthew Avenue, St Johns; and part Bombay Road, Bombay	Resolutions FIN/2017/144, FIN/2017/145
21/11/17		Report Unlock Avondale Unlock Avondale – 93-99 Rosebank Road, Avondale	FIN/2017/168
12/12/17		Report 80 Vincent Street, Howick (motion lost); 41 Cheshire Street, Parnell; 108 Hepburn Street, Freemans Bay; 9 Matama Street, Glen Eden; and 58/7 Rowlands Road, Mt Wellington	FIN/2017/204
12/12/17		Report Land exchange at Hillary Crescent, Belmont and Northboro Reserve – Recommendation from the Environment and Community Committee	FIN/2017/207
27/2/18		Report 61-117 Clark Road, Hobsonville; and Report 37 New Windsor Road, Avondale (SPO)	FIN/2018/8 FIN/2018/11
20/3/18		Report 3.8ha of reserve land in Upper Harbour Local Board for New Zealand Transport Agency Northern Corridor Improvements	FIN/2018/18
17/4/18		Report – 156 Blockhouse Bay, Avondale; 2a Stokes Road, Mt Eden; 570 Great South Road, Papatoetoe; 139 Kolmar Road, Papatoetoe; and 66R Hallberry Road, Mangere East	FIN/2018/60
	24/7/18	Report – 132 Green Lane East, Greenlane; 28 Lockwood Road, Papakura; Adjacent to 1/18 Edwin Freeman Place Ranui; and Adjacent 18 Parrs Cross Road, Henderson.	FIN/2018/113
	18/9/18	Report – 30R Birmingham Road, Otara; and 8 Hiwi Crescent, Stanmore Bay	FIN/2018/136
	20/11/18	Report – 34 Moore Street, Howick	FIN/2018/187
	11/12/18	Report – 26-32 O’Shannessey Street, Papakura; 36 Coles Crescent, Papakura; 22 and 28A Waipuna Road, Mt Wellington; and 5Z Butler Avenue, Papatoetoe	FIN/2018/178

Budget Update:

Date	Property address(es)	Resolution
13/12/16	Report Additional OPEX budget of up to $104,000 to conduct a by-election for a Howick Local Board Member; and release of $2.7m from existing budget for Putney Way streetscape upgrade, ahead of the Transform Manukau business case	FIN/2016/164
21/3/17	Report Additional CAPEX budget of $960,000 to complete Freyberg Place upgrade; new OPEX budget of $80,000 for Karangahape Road destination marketing; contribution of $300 to the city feature lighting project (led by Heart of the City) – both funded from the City Centre Targeted Rate reserve.	FIN/2017/29
20/6/17	Report Conversion of $3.1m CAPEX budget for multi-purpose community facility in Takanini	FIN/2017/90
26/7/17	Report Purchase of additional trains (rescinded 24/10/17 FIN/2017/189)	FIN/2017/98
19/9/2017	Report Release and allocate Takapuna off-street car park reserve fund $4,269611 to the Gasometer public car park project; release $6.1m form existing Transform Manukau $2.6 CAPEX and $2m OPEX and Transform Onehunga $1.5 OPEX.	FIN/2017/123
24/10/17	Report Approve procurement of 15 3-car electric multiple units of $133m; release of Franklin Parking Reserve Fund ($128,214) for upgrade of carpark at Kitchener Road, Waiuku; OPEX of $828,000 for two by-elections; OPEX budget of $115,400 for by-election for Waitemata Local Board.	FIN/2017/141
12/12/17	Report Update on the purchase of additional trains for Metro Rail	FIN/2017/205
27/2/18	Report Up to $3.2m CAPEX for fit-out for ATEED office and up to $0.8m OPEX for make good of current head office; $3.85m CAPEX for Rawene remedial works; updated city centre targeted rate-funded work programme; and property acquisitions at 155-167 Fanshawe Street and 100 Halsey Street, Auckland	Resolutions - FIN/2018/17, FIN/2018/18
17/4/18	Report Up to $740,000 of additional expenditure ($655,000 OPEX and $85,000 CAPEX) to manage kauri dieback; two additional FTE employees and out-sourced contractors to manage the closures and noting additional expenditure to be prioritised for kauri dieback work such as track improvements, upgrades, landowner support, hygiene station upgrades and washdown facilities.	FIN/2018/65
11/12/18	Confidential Budget Update report

Chairperson	Cr Ross Clow
Deputy Chairperson	Cr Desley Simpson, JP
Members	Cr Josephine Bartley	Cr Penny Hulse
	Cr Dr Cathy Casey	Cr Mike Lee
	Deputy Mayor Cr Bill Cashmore	Cr Daniel Newman, JP
	Cr Fa’anana Efeso Collins	Cr Greg Sayers
	Cr Linda Cooper, JP	Cr Sharon Stewart, QSM
	Cr Chris Darby	IMSB Chair David Taipari
	Cr Alf Filipaina	Cr Sir John Walker, KNZM, CBE
	Cr Hon Christine Fletcher, QSO	Cr Wayne Walker
	Mayor Hon Phil Goff, CNZM, JP	Cr John Watson
	Cr Richard Hills	Cr Paul Young
	IMSB Member Terrence Hohneck

Author	Suad Allie - Governance Advisor
Authoriser	Matthew Walker - Group Chief Financial Officer

Author	Sandra Gordon - Senior Governance Advisor
Authoriser	Matthew Walker - Group Chief Financial Officer