|
MOVED by Chairperson M Miles, seconded by Member J
McLean:
That the Upper Harbour Local
Board:
a)
receive the draft Auckland Council submission
to the Department of Conservation (DOC) proposal on the revocation of certain
delegations to territorial authorities under the Reserves Act 1977, noting
that the Environment and Community Committee will be retrospectively
endorsing council’s submission at its May 2019 business meeting.
b)
support council’s draft
submission on the Department of Conservation (DOC) proposal, and specifically
support the following aspects which have been included in the submission:
i.
that the DOC proposal lacks a clear
identification of the problems created by territorial authorities in
exercising dual delegations under the Reserves Act 1977, and the local board
supports the view that revocation of these delegations will likely undermine
local decision-making and community outcomes
ii.
that revocation of Ministerial
delegations will likely add additional costs and significant delay to all
Reserves Act processes, which could severely impact council’s ability
to be responsive to communities and the changing needs of residents, which
could lead to a decline in resident trust and confidence in both local and
central government
iii.
that DOC is seeking to take action in
response to the Opua Coastal Preservation Inc v Far North District Council
(2018) decision, yet the court did not reach a conclusion on the
lawfulness of the dual decision-making process as part of its ruling, noting
that the Opua decision has been appealed to the Supreme Court which could
make any changes to Ministerial delegations premature
iv.
that revocation of Ministerial
delegations would undermine the primary outcomes sought from improved
delegation under the Reserves Act 1977, in that it would be a backwards step
to unwind decision-making at the local level and will serve to disempower
local communities, thereby creating a risk that the proposed changes will
reduce council’s ability to deliver a range of health, well-being and
social outcomes as identified in the Auckland Plan and local board plans
v.
that the DOC proposal is silent on how
the department intends to resource the significant volume of work required to
process decisions in relation to reserve management plans, reserve
classification, land exchanges, easements and leases / licences, and
expresses concern that these issues will be exacerbated in Auckland due to
the rate of growth and the high number of infrastructure projects that
require management under the Reserves Act 1977, particularly given that the
Auckland region is home to over 4000 parks and reserves comprised of over
18,000 parcels of land.
c) note
that there is a proven record of successful decision-making with regard to
Auckland Council reserves that includes liaison with local communities, so
therefore the board believes there is no justification to change the current
Ministerial delegation to local authorities under the Reserves Act 1977.
A division was called for,
voting on which was as follows:
|
For
Member J McLean
Chairperson M Miles
Member B Neeson
|
Against
Member N Mayne
|
Abstained
Member U Casuri Balouch
|
The motion was declared carried by 3 votes to 1.
CARRIED
|
