I hereby give notice that an ordinary meeting of the Governing Body will be held on:

 

Date:

Time:

Meeting Room:

Venue:

 

Thursday, 27 February 2020

10.00am

Reception Lounge
Auckland Town Hall
301-305 Queen Street
Auckland

 

Tira Kāwana / Governing Body

 

OPEN AGENDA

 

 

 

 

MEMBERSHIP

 

Mayor

Hon Phil Goff, CNZM, JP

 

Deputy Mayor

Deputy Mayor Cr Bill Cashmore

 

Councillors

Cr Josephine Bartley

Cr Richard Hills

 

Cr Dr Cathy Casey

Cr Tracy Mulholland

 

Cr Fa’anana Efeso Collins

Cr Daniel Newman, JP

 

Cr Pippa Coom

Cr Greg Sayers

 

Cr Linda Cooper, JP

Cr Desley Simpson, JP

 

Cr Angela Dalton

Cr Sharon Stewart, QSM

 

Cr Chris Darby

Cr Wayne Walker

 

Cr Alf Filipaina

Cr John Watson

 

Cr Christine Fletcher, QSO

Cr Paul Young

 

Cr Shane Henderson

 

 

(Quorum 11 members)

 

 

 

Sarndra O'Toole

Kaiarataki Kapa Tohutohu Mana Whakahaere / Team Leader Governance Advisors

 

21 February 2020

 

Contact Telephone: (09) 890 8152

Email: sarndra.otoole@aucklandcouncil.govt.nz

Website: www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz

 

 



 

Terms of Reference

 

Those powers which cannot legally be delegated:

 

(a)        the power to make a rate

(b)        the power to make a bylaw

(c)        the power to borrow money, or purchase or dispose of assets, other than in accordance with the Long-Term Plan

(d)        the power to adopt a long-term plan, annual plan, or annual report

(e)        the power to appoint a chief executive

(f)        the power to adopt policies required to be adopted and consulted on under the Local Government Act 2002 in association with the long-term plan or developed for the purpose of the local governance statement

(g)        the power to adopt a remuneration and employment policy

 

Additional responsibilities retained by the Governing Body:

 

(h)        approval of long-term plan or annual plan consultation documents, supporting information and consultation process prior to consultation

(i)         approval of a draft bylaw prior to consultation

(j)         resolutions required to be made by a local authority under the Local Electoral Act 2001, including the appointment of electoral officer

(k)        adoption of, and amendment to, the Committee Terms of Reference, Standing Orders and Code of Conduct

(l)         relationships with the Independent Māori Statutory Board, including the funding agreement and appointments to committees

(m)      overview of and decisions relating to any CCO review including the implementation of any resulting changes to CCOs

(n)        oversight of work programmes of all committees of the governing body.

 

 


Exclusion of the public – who needs to leave the meeting

 

Members of the public

 

All members of the public must leave the meeting when the public are excluded unless a resolution is passed permitting a person to remain because their knowledge will assist the meeting.

 

Those who are not members of the public

 

General principles

 

·         Access to confidential information is managed on a “need to know” basis where access to the information is required in order for a person to perform their role.

·         Those who are not members of the meeting (see list below) must leave unless it is necessary for them to remain and hear the debate in order to perform their role.

·         Those who need to be present for one confidential item can remain only for that item and must leave the room for any other confidential items.

·         In any case of doubt, the ruling of the chairperson is final.

 

Members of the meeting

 

·         The members of the meeting remain (all Governing Body members if the meeting is a Governing Body meeting; all members of the committee if the meeting is a committee meeting).

·         However, standing orders require that a councillor who has a pecuniary conflict of interest leave the room.

·         All councillors have the right to attend any meeting of a committee and councillors who are not members of a committee may remain, subject to any limitations in standing orders.

 

Independent Māori Statutory Board

 

·         Members of the Independent Māori Statutory Board who are appointed members of the committee remain.

·         Independent Māori Statutory Board members and staff remain if this is necessary in order for them to perform their role.

 

Staff

 

·         All staff supporting the meeting (administrative, senior management) remain.

·         Other staff who need to because of their role may remain.

 

Local Board members

 

·         Local Board members who need to hear the matter being discussed in order to perform their role may remain.  This will usually be if the matter affects, or is relevant to, a particular Local Board area.

 

Council Controlled Organisations

 

·         Representatives of a Council Controlled Organisation can remain only if required to for discussion of a matter relevant to the Council Controlled Organisation.

 

 

 


Governing Body

27 February 2020

 

 

ITEM   TABLE OF CONTENTS                                                                                         PAGE

1          Affirmation                                                                                                                      7

2          Apologies                                                                                                                        7

3          Declaration of Interest                                                                                                   7

4          Confirmation of Minutes                                                                                               7

5          Petitions                                                                                                                          7  

6          Public Input                                                                                                                    7

6.1     Public Input:  Direct Action Everywhere New Zealand (DxENZ) - Catering at Council Meetings                                                                                                  7

7          Local Board Input                                                                                                          8

8          Extraordinary Business                                                                                                8

9          Evaluation of the Auckland Council local government 2019 elections                   9

10        Inquiry into the 2019 Local Elections and Liquor Licensing Trust Elections, and Recent Energy Trust Elections                                                                                  21

11        Appointment of representatives to Ark in the Park Governance Group               59

12        Auckland Council Submission on Funding Options for Fire and Emergency NZ 73

13        Governing Body's Forward Work Programme                                                         87

14        Summary of Governing Body information memoranda and briefings - 27 February 2020                                                                                                                               95

15        Recommendation to appoint an Acting Chief Executive and update on Chief Executive recruitment process                                                                                  97  

16        Consideration of Extraordinary Items 

PUBLIC EXCLUDED

17        Procedural Motion to Exclude the Public                                                                 99

C1       CONFIDENTIAL:  Recommendation to appoint an Acting Chief Executive and update on Chief Executive recruitment process                                                     99  

 


1          Affirmation

His Worship the Mayor will read the affirmation.

 

2          Apologies

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

 

3          Declaration of Interest

Members are reminded of the need to be vigilant to stand aside from decision making when a conflict arises between their role as a member and any private or other external interest they might have.

 

4          Confirmation of Minutes

That the Governing Body:

a)         confirm the ordinary minutes of its meeting, held on Thursday, 12 December 2019, including the confidential section and the extraordinary minutes of its meeting, held on Wednesday, 12 February 2020, as a true and correct record.

 

5          Petitions

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

 

6          Public Input

Standing Order 7.7 provides for Public Input.  Applications to speak must be made to the Governance Advisor, in writing, no later than one (1) clear working day prior to the meeting and must include the subject matter.  The meeting Chairperson has the discretion to decline any application that does not meet the requirements of Standing Orders.  A maximum of thirty (30) minutes is allocated to the period for public input with five (5) minutes speaking time for each speaker.

6.1       Public Input:  Direct Action Everywhere New Zealand (DxENZ) - Catering at Council Meetings

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       Dr Michael Morris on behalf of Direct Action Everywhere New Zealand (DxENZ) will be in attendance to address the Governing Board.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       Dr Michael Morris will speak to the Governing Body regarding Auckland Council following the Bay of Plenty Regional Council in restricting catering during all council meetings (including local boards), to plant-based food.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Governing Body:

a)      receive the presentation from Dr Michael Morris on behalf of Direct Action Everywhere New Zealand (DxENZ) regarding plant-based catering at council meetings.

 

7          Local Board Input

 

Standing Order 6.2 provides for Local Board Input.  The Chairperson (or nominee of that Chairperson) is entitled to speak for up to five (5) minutes during this time.  The Chairperson of the Local Board (or nominee of that Chairperson) shall wherever practical, give one (1) day’s notice of their wish to speak.  The meeting Chairperson has the discretion to decline any application that does not meet the requirements of Standing Orders.

 

This right is in addition to the right under Standing Order 6.1 to speak to matters on the agenda.

 

At the close of the agenda no requests for local board input had been received.

 

 

8          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.”


Governing Body

27 February 2020

 

 

Evaluation of the Auckland Council local government 2019 elections

File No.: CP2019/19500

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       The purpose of this report is to:

·        make decisions on three matters for the 2022 local elections

·        receive information on the achievement of outcomes sought for the 2019 elections and the activities undertaken for that election

·        receive information on the emerging results of the research undertaken by the Research Investigations and Monitoring Unit (RIMU).

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       The triennial local government elections are a significant event for any local authority and its community.  For local democracy to flourish it is important that the community engages with the process for deciding those who will be its representatives for the coming term.

3.       A number of initiatives were undertaken for the 2019 elections which received very positive responses, and these are described in the report. 

4.       The outcomes of (i) a free, fair and effective election and (ii) an excellent, user-centric experience were achieved.

5.       The targeted voter turnout of at least 40 per cent and candidate-to-member ratio of 3:1 were not reached and these remain important challenges for the 2022 elections. The local government sector as a whole must address the issue of declining voter turnout. Auckland Council is collaborating with Local Government New Zealand and the Society of Local Government Managers to do this.

6.       Research including behavioural insights, demographics, candidate surveys and voter awareness was conducted. This research is important to informing the council’s on-going approach to encouraging the participation of candidates and voters.

7.       In the lead up to an election there is the opportunity to review representation arrangements (but this is mandatory at least every six years), the opportunity to change the electoral system and the opportunity to establish a Māori ward. All of these matters were reviewed for the 2019 elections and the Governing Body is asked to provide guidance to staff on whether any of these should be reviewed for the 2022 elections.

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Governing Body:

a)      note that the statutory deadline for resolving to change the electoral system for the 2022 local elections from First Past the Post to Single Transferable Vote is 12 September 2020

b)      agree that as the electoral system was reviewed prior to the 2019 elections, no further action be taken for the 2022 elections.

 

 

c)      note that the statutory deadline for resolving to establish a Māori ward for the 2022 local elections is 23 November 2020

d)      agree that as there has not been legislative change to allow the Governing Body to review its membership, no further action on the establishment of a Māori ward be taken for the 2022 elections

e)      note there is the opportunity to review representation arrangements for the 2022 elections but there is no requirement to do this until the 2025 elections

f)       agree that no further action be taken to review representation arrangements for the 2022 elections.

 

Horopaki

Context

Governing Body decisions leading up to the 2019 elections

8.       On 25 March 2015 the Governing Body appointed Mr Dale Ofsoske as Auckland Council’s Electoral Officer.  Mr Ofsoske has been Electoral Officer for the 2016 elections, subsequent by-elections and the 2019 elections.

9.       On 27 July 2017, following local board feedback, the Governing Body approved the council’s submission to the Justice Committee’s Inquiry into the 2016 local government elections.

10.     On 24 August 2017, following local board feedback, the Governing Body resolved to continue the First Past the Post voting system (rather than Single Transferable Vote).

11.     On 28 September 2017 the Governing Body considered the opportunity to establish a Māori ward for the 2019 elections and resolved to support a Māori ward in principle subject to legislative change allowing the council to increase the number of members.

12.     At the same meeting the Governing Body agreed on a process for undertaking the representation review for the 2019 elections, subject to support from local boards.  The development of proposals for consultation was through the Joint Governance Working Party with all local boards having input.

13.     On 24 May 2018 the Governing Body resolved in support of Auckland Council conducting an online voting trial for the 2019 elections.

14.     On 26 July 2018 the Governing Body received recommendations from the Joint Governance Working Party and resolved its initial proposals for Auckland Council’s review of representation arrangements.

15.     On 18 October 2018 the Governing Body received recommendations from the Joint Governance Working Party following the hearing and consideration of public submissions on the review of representation arrangements and approved Auckland Council’s final proposals.

16.     On 13 December 2018 the Governing Body resolved that the order of candidate names on voting documents was to be alphabetical.  At the same meeting the Governing Body confirmed that online voting would not take place due to costs being unacceptable to participating councils but supported Auckland Council continuing to work to trial online voting as soon as possible.

17.     On 10 April 2019 the Local Government Commission determined the representation arrangements for Auckland Council, upholding Auckland Council’s proposals in their entirety.


 

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Upcoming opportunities for change to future elections

18.     The following dates apply to the 2022 elections:

i)        the statutory deadline for a resolution on whether to change the electoral system from First Past the Post to Single Transferable Vote is 12 September 2020 

ii)       the statutory deadline for a resolution to establish a Māori ward is 23 November 2020

iii)      if the council wishes to conduct a review of representation arrangements for the 2022 elections it must give public notice of its first proposal by 8 September 2021.

Electoral system

19.     The Governing Body considered whether to change from First Past the Post to Single Transferable Voting in August 2017.  The Governing Body resolved (GB/2017/94) as follows:

That the Governing Body:

b)             confirm that the First Past the Post voting system will continue to be used for the 2019 elections due to the perceived complexity of the Single Transferable Vote system.

 

20.     Another report on this agenda (on the council’s submission to the Justice Committee’s inquiry into the 2019 local elections) refers to a recommendation from Parliament’s Justice Committee that the Government consider encouraging or requiring the same voting system to be used at all local elections.   There is the possibility of future legislative prescription as to the electoral system to be used for local elections.

21.     In view of the previously resolved position of the Governing Body and the possibility of change arising from the Justice Committee’s recommendations, staff have proposed that electoral system is not reviewed for the 2022 elections.

Review of representation arrangements

22.     A review of representation arrangements was conducted for the 2019 elections and the council’s proposed changes were approved by the Local Government Commission in their entirety.  There is a legislative requirement to conduct reviews at least every six years.  There is no requirement to conduct a review for the 2022 elections.   

23.     Staff consider that, in view of there being no legislative change to allow the council to review the number of members of the Governing Body, a review should not be conducted.

Māori Ward

24.     The formal establishment of a Māori ward received support from the Governing Body but there are matters that need to be addressed before this happens. The resolution of the Governing Body was:

“That the Governing Body:

a)      …..reiterate to government the position adopted by Council in 2015 supporting the need for legislative change to allow Auckland to determine the  number of members on the Governing Body and subject to that, agree in principle to establish a Māori ward and request for a consistent policy regarding Māori representation in line with legislation governing the composition of Parliament.”


 

25.     The statutory deadline for resolving to establish a Māori ward for the 2022 local elections is 23 November 2020. Since there has been no legislative change to allow the council to determine the number of members of the Governing Body, nor has there been government policy to bring Māori representation in line with legislation governing the composition of Parliament, staff propose that no further work be done for the 2022 election.

26.     However, the proposed submission to the Justice Committee on today’s agenda continues to advocate for change in this area. 

Strategic approach to delivering 2019 elections

27.     The strategic approach for staff working on the 2019 local elections was to deliver the following outcomes:

i)        a free, fair and effective election:  with high public confidence in and public understanding of electoral processes

ii)       voter turnout of at least 40 per cent: with increased turnout in low voting communities

iii)      candidate-to-member ratio of 3:1: ward and local board positions have candidates who reflect the communities of Auckland

iv)      excellent, user-centric experience: for candidates and voters.

28.     In order to achieve those outcomes, the team focused on four key area, those being:

i)        communications

ii)       community engagement, with a focus on low voting demographic groups and communities

iii)      reducing barriers to participation

iv)      increasing knowledge of the council and the importance of participation.

Achievement against outcomes

29.     Overall, a free, fair and effective elections process was delivered without material errors and within the statutory timeframe and programme budget. 

30.     However, some outcomes were not met.  There was:

·    a reduction in candidate numbers

·    a reduction in voter turnout.

31.     It is very important to note that council is constrained to a certain extent in its efforts to achieve the outcomes of increased candidates and voter participation by needing to maintain political neutrality and being careful not to give any particular candidate or candidate group an advantage.

32.     The elections team worked hard on the different approaches that are outlined in this report and the commitment of volunteers was valuable in the achievement of the current result. There are many factors that contribute to voter participation and increased candidate numbers, not all of which council can influence.  The proposed submission to government’s Justice Committee on today’s agenda outlines some changes to legislation and practice that should help to achieve better results in future elections.

Free, fair and effective election

33.     Independent Election Services (IES) were contracted as primary supplier ensuring that a successful programme was delivered from a statutory and operational perspective.

34.     The election delivery workstream achieved its objectives, delivering a process that met statutory requirements and maintained the integrity of the elections, resulting in no judicial enquiries, and only two recounts which were for licensing trusts and did not result in any change to the placing of candidates.

35.     Enquiries and issues raised by candidates, voters and media were dealt with in a timely way and risks managed appropriately.

36.     Some innovations and improvements (as detailed in the section ‘Areas of focus’) were delivered.  The elections team that is established for the 2022 elections should continue to be innovative with developing different ways to reach out to Auckland’s diverse community.  

37.     There were some challenges resulting from the decline in the postal service, the high volume of special votes and the votes received from ballot boxes on the final day. These challenges led to minor delays in determining the final result and should be factored into planning for the 2022 elections.

Voter turnout of at least 40 per cent

38.     Voter turnout decreased from 38.5 per cent in 2016 to 35.3 per cent, which was a disappointing result considering the effort put into the marketing campaign and community engagement programme. This is a national issue – low voter turnout is included in the terms of reference for the Justice Committee inquiry into the 2019 elections, which is reported on separately in this agenda.

Candidate-to-member ratio of 3:1

39.     This year, there were 423 candidates for the 170 council positions (a ratio of 2.5:1). Ratios of candidates to position were down on 2016 levels and the programme did not meet the target ratio of three candidates for each ward and local board member position. However, for six wards and five boards the target was exceeded, some of these in low voting areas.

 

Candidates

Positions

Ratio 2019

Ratio 2016

All including mayor

423

170

2.5:1

2.75:1

Ward councillors

54

19

2.8:1

3.7:1

Local board members

348

149

2.3:1

2.5:1

Wards exceeding the target: Manurewa-Papakura, Maungakiekie-Tāmaki, Ōrākei, Waitākere, Waitematā and Gulf, Whau.

Local boards exceeding the target: Devonport-Takapuna, Hibiscus and Bays, Howick, Papakura, Whau.

Excellent, user-centric experience

40.     As described above, the elections team employed a number of efforts to improve user experience, which included:

i)        the voteauckland.co.nz website, with information for candidates and voters, which had almost 300,000 page-views in October 2019

ii)       more than 60 organisations taking part in Vote Friday

iii)      almost 50 ‘One- Stop Shops’ which were highly popular

iv)      taking ballot boxes to where people congregate such as markets.

41.     Voter and candidate survey results will be published on knowledgeauckland.org.nz as soon they have been verified.

Areas of focus

Communications

42.     The campaign in 2016 had as its focus – ‘show your love for Auckland by voting’.  This was also the basis for the 2019 campaign, which used real Aucklanders – including a number of Auckland Council staff – in the campaign collateral.  There were twenty-five different areas targeted across Auckland, complementing the community engagement work. 

43.     Radio advertising mirrored this approach, using a range of different voices, including translated ads on ethnic radio stations.  The marketing mix included digital, outdoor, radio, print, social and experiential. 

44.     A micro-site – voteauckland.co.nz – contained a lot of information for candidates and voters.  The objective was to present information in a clear, easy-to-understand way.  Among the features was a post box search, an address lookup for a voter to find which ward and board they are in, information about how and why to vote for candidates, tips on how to campaign and what is involved in being an elected member.  The website had nearly 300,000 page-views in October 2019.

45.     A video of an interview with two former elected members was live streamed and published to Youtube to assist potential candidates understand more about what is involved in being a candidate.  There have been approximately 300 views of the videos of this interview.

46.     Oscar Kightley hosted an Auckland Conversation on the topic “Voting – why bother?”.  Although Youtube shows there have been only 75 views, the event received media attention and Oscar was interviewed on TVNZ’s Breakfast Show.

Community engagement

47.     For the 2016 elections, we noted the importance of engagement work in building awareness about local government and civic participation. 

48.     For the 2019 elections, rather than a direct council to public approach, the team worked with a range of community partners.  Working in partnership with community groups lent credibility and trust for some parts of the community who can be skeptical of council.  The community partners included RockEnrol, the Chinese New Settlers Trust, Waycom, the Blind Foundation, Deaf Radio and the New Zealand Asian Leaders Network.  Collectively, this gave the elections a presence at more than 200 events.

49.     The former Kids Voting programme was re-designed into the Youth Voting programme / Ngā Pōti ā-taiohi with all material translated into te reo so that kura could take part.  Staff worked with schools to enable them to host candidate nights.  Students asked the questions of candidates and in many cases, brought their families along. 

50.     Part of the team went door-knocking, mailed out postcards to 130,000 Aucklanders and used different messages on voting packs to test some of the behavioural insights that suggest these methods can encourage voting.  Postcards used different messages, so that efficacy could be tracked. Initial results indicate that social norming is the most effective form of messaging (for example “74 per cent of Aucklanders are planning to vote. Join them and vote this election!”).

Reducing barriers

51.     Vote Friday: among the reasons people give for not voting in local elections is a lack of time and not knowing when the deadline is.  “Vote Friday” responds to this.  Organisations agreed to give their employees thirty minutes to vote.  Auckland Council supplied a pack with everything the participating organisations needed.  More than 60 organisations took part – in total that is around 55,000 employees.  Participating organisations included Spark, Stuff, all three Auckland police districts, Xero and the Auckland Philharmonia Orchestra.

52.     Ballot boxes: staff took mobile ballot boxes out to markets, ferry terminals, nursing homes and other places.  The response was overwhelmingly positive. 

53.     One Stop Shops: working with the Electoral Commission, staff and volunteers delivered nearly 50 ‘One Stop Shops’ where people could enroll and vote on the spot.  This was a huge undertaking, involving more than 50 trained volunteers.  The team did not initially appreciate how popular this would prove to be and on a couple of occasions, ran out of special voting papers.  At university events, there were queues of people wanting to vote. At the most popular events, staff and volunteers issued close to 200 special voting papers.  The 50 per cent increase in special votes over previous elections caused delay in issuing final voting results.

54.     Online voting: Senior staff took part in a determined effort to establish a trial of online voting in conjunction with other interested councils. The trial did not go ahead because of the cost.

Increasing knowledge of the council and the importance of participation

55.     One of the main reasons people give for not voting is that they do not know enough about the candidates or what they stand for. Staff provided all candidates with the opportunity to tell voters more about themselves on the website.  This included the 150-word statement from the candidate profile statement, and responses to three additional questions: what they love about the area they are standing in, why they are standing and their priorities if elected.

56.     Legislation requires the chief executive to publish a pre-election report to set out the key issues facing the incoming council.  Improvements were made to the presentation of this report over the 2016 report by having less words and more graphs and pictorial information.  The pre-election report received 1,274 page-views (compared to about 300 views in 2016).

Research

57.     Staff from council’s Research and Evaluation Unit and Citizen Engagement and Insights Department have conducted research that has informed our current approach and will continue to shape our approach going forward. Research was comprised of three strands as set out below.

A trial of using behavioural insights to increase voter turnout

58.     A large-scale trial was instigated to investigate the impact of different election-related messages and engagement approaches on voter turnout. The trial is unique in New Zealand as it ascertained the impact of different messages on actual voter turnout.

59.     130,000 postcards were sent to a random selection of electors, and approximately 8,300 households were canvassed door-to-door.

60.     Results showed that, for electors who were not of Māori descent, a range of postcard messages had a significant positive impact on voter turnout. The most impactful messages were those that highlighted positive social norms about voting (i.e. how the majority of Aucklanders were planning on voting) and explained how each Aucklander’s vote impacts on their daily life (e.g. public transport, roads, parking, water quality, parks and playgrounds).

61.     For electors of Māori descent, the only postcard message that had a positive impact on actual turnout was that which highlighted how your vote could be the decider between someone who represents your views and someone who doesn’t.

62.     Canvassing had potentially significant positive impacts on those talked to but hiring and managing a large group of people to conduct such canvassing in a professional manner proved challenging.  

Candidate demographics

63.     All candidates who stood in 2019 were asked on their nomination forms about their gender, age, ethnicity, country of birth and languages spoken.

64.     In total 298 of the 423 provided their demographic information, representing a response rate of 70 per cent.

65.     Notable results include a significantly higher proportion of Māori candidates, and younger candidates in 2019, compared with results observed in 2016. The gender split remains consistent with that observed in 2016, with about three in five candidates identifying as male, and about two in five identifying as female.

66.     The report is currently going through the peer review process and is expected to be available in March 2020.

Candidate Experience

67.     An online survey was sent to all candidates following the election to allow council to better understand the experience of candidates.

68.     The survey focused on the nomination process, resources provided, candidate information sessions, council’s marketing campaign and the Vote Auckland website.

69.     In total 154 of 423 candidates completed the survey, representing a response rate of 36 per cent.

70.     As with a previous study conducted following the 2016 election, results will be used to review these aspects of the candidate experience and inform election planning in 2022.

71.     The report is currently being written and expected to be available following peer review in March/April 2020.

Voter awareness survey

72.     The voter awareness survey conducted by the Citizen Engagement and Insights Department investigated voters’ awareness of the election campaign and their voting behavior. A random sample of 1,871 Aucklanders were surveyed online. The survey included questions relating to whether they voted or not. Of those who did not vote (643), the top four reasons given for not voting were:

“I didn’t know anything about the candidates” 11 per cent

“I forgot to vote” 11 per cent

“I did not know when voting finished, missed the deadline” 10 per cent

“I was away from home over the voting period” 8 per cent

73.     Of those who did not vote, 25 per cent had filled in all or part of their voting documents but did not cast their vote.  The top four reasons given were:

“I didn’t send it off in time / ran out of time” 29 per cent

“I forgot to send / complete it” 21 per cent

“I had other commitments during that time” 17 per cent

“I didn’t know anything about the candidates” 8 per cent

74.     Non-voters were asked “What could Auckland Council do to encourage you to vote?”.  The top four (unprompted) replies were:

“Have online voting” 19 per cent

“It was my own fault” 8 per cent

“More advertising” 7 per cent

“Send reminders and notifications by post / email / txt” 7 per cent

75.     All respondents were asked whether they preferred online voting or postal voting if they had the choice. 66 per cent preferred online voting and 26 per cent preferred postal voting.

76.     Of non-voters, 28 per cent said they would have been more likely to vote if it had been booth voting.

77.     The full results of all the above research will be published to: knowledgeauckland.org.nz as soon as it is completed and reviewed.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

78.     A substantial amount of paper is consumed in posting voting documents to over one million voters.  Online voting could potentially reduce the amount of paper however the use of online voting needs to be weighed against security risks.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

79.     The pre-election period (the three months prior to an election) is a sensitive period during which time certain principles have to be observed such as the principle of not using council resources in a way which might advantage or disadvantage a candidate.  

80.     Council-controlled organisations were keen to understand how this might affect their operations (for example opening facilities, holding events or undergoing community consultation).  Generally, business continues as usual during this period but with heightened sensitivity to the principles surrounding use of council resources for election purposes.

81.     Some council-controlled organisations were targets in some candidate campaigns.

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

Local impacts and local board views

82.     This report sets out efforts to engage more with local communities.  However, in keeping with the thrust of the Local Electoral Act 2001 to keep all elected members at a distance from the operation of elections, local boards were not involved, and their views were not sought in the actual election planning and operations. 

83.     A number of statutory decisions were required of the Governing Body leading up to the elections (such as whether to use the Single Transferable Vote system and the order of names on voting document) and local boards were fully consulted.

84.     Advice was provided to local board staff over questions relating to protocols within the pre-election period.

85.     This report will be circulated to local boards for their information.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

Engagement activity

86.     Staff trialled and tested a multi-pronged engagement approach with both mana whenua and mataawaka partners to encourage more Māori to stand for election and to vote in the 2019 local elections. The key areas of activity are set out below.

87.     During the candidate phase, staff held several information sessions at a range of marae around Tāmaki and observed that while interest was high, attendance was typically low. Our events were marae-based (Hoani Waititi, Manurewa, Papakura, Papatuanuku, Ngāti Whātua Ōrakei).  This was supplemented by regular sessions on Radio Waatea; sharing key messages about the elections and promoting the various events and opportunities for the Māori community to access more information about candidates, to enrol and to vote.

88.     Rangatahi groups were engaged to create videos, social, digital and print media in reo Māori, in order to tailor elections messaging directly to Māori, in ways that best resonated with them.

89.     One particular aspect of Māori engagement that is noteworthy and provides a favourable starting point for engagement over the next three years, is the One Stop Shops, which were held at marae, community centres, night and weekend markets and in conjunction with existing events and activations. In terms of engagement, this yielded the highest return of votes, enrolment and engagement from the Māori community.

90.     Staff will be using the learnings on Māori engagement from the 2019 election to build the future work programme.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

91.     The tables below show the actual expenditure for elections alongside the amounts that were budgeted for the two years in the lead up to the October 2019 local election.

2018/19
Full financial year

Budget

Actual

Variance

Delivery contract

945,904

1,320,000

-374,096

Delivery other

246,083

235,201

10,882

Communications

720,214

542,882

177,332

Engagement and research

135,500

185,959

-50,459

Elections planning

4,487

37,283

-32,796

Cost Recovery

-111,380

111,380

TOTAL  for 2018/19

2,052,188

2,209,946

-157,758

 

2019/20
As at end of January 2020

Budget YTD

Actual YTD

YTD Variance

Delivery contract

2,370,000

2,338,058

31,942

Delivery other

158,316

147,311

11,005

Communications

799,554

792,515

7,039

Engagement and research

176,324

215,033

-38,709

Inaugural meeting

68,000

57,401

10,599

Elections planning

0

-22,912

22,912

Cost Recovery

0

-60,000

60,000

TOTAL – end of January 2020

3,572,194

3,467,406

104,788

92.     At the time of preparing this report, final costs were still to be calculated.  Following the finalisation of costs, the district health boards, and licensing trusts will be invoiced for their share of the costs. 

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

93.     In the wider context of upcoming elections, there is the risk of participation continuing to decline.  This a challenge to the New Zealand local government sector as a whole and is further reported on in a separate report on this agenda which presents a submission to the Justice Committee’s inquiry into the 2019 local elections.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

94.     In order to avoid participation in elections continuing to decline, it is important to assist the work of Local Government New Zealand and the Society of Local Government Managers in a sector-wide approach through the modernising elections project.

 

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Warwick McNaughton - Principal Advisor - Democracy Services

Authorisers

Rose Leonard – General Manager Democracy Services (Acting)

Phil Wilson - Governance Director

Stephen Town - Chief Executive

 


Governing Body

27 February 2020

 

 

Inquiry into the 2019 Local Elections and Liquor Licensing Trust Elections, and Recent Energy Trust Elections

File No.: CP2020/00039

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To make a submission to the Justice Committee’s “Inquiry into the 2019 local elections and liquor licensing trust, and recent energy trust elections”.  The proposed Auckland Council submission covers:

·    matters relating to the 2019 local elections

·    the committee’s recommendations from its report on the 2016 local elections

·    elections issues not yet considered by the committee

2.       Auckland Council is not involved in energy trust elections and the draft submission does not make any recommendations in relation to energy trusts.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

3.       In December 2019 the Justice Committee (“committee”) notified its inquiry into the 2019 local elections and liquor licensing trust, and recent energy trust elections. Submissions close on 29 February 2020. The proposed Auckland Council submission is provided as Attachment A and local board feedback as Attachment B.

4.       The key points of council’s submission are as follows:

·    low voter turnout - Consider a multi-modal approach which provides voters with options

·    liquor licensing trusts - Trust boundaries no longer align with local government boundaries in the Auckland area and this creates complexity

·    disclosure of candidates or members with serious criminal convictions - Amend legislation so that a person is not eligible for election if they have been previously convicted of an offence punishable by a term of imprisonment of two years or more (unless their record has been wiped by the clean slate provisions)

·    Electoral Commission to be responsible for local elections - Further investigate the recommendation for the Electoral Commission to conduct local elections

·    same electoral system, either ‘first past the post’ (FPP) or ‘single transferable vote’ (STV) in all elections - Amend legislation so that all elections run in conjunction with the elections of a territorial authority, use the same electoral system and the same order of names on voting documents

·    foreign interference - The council supports the committee’s recommendations but also notes the council’s support for online voting provided it is considered secure

·    disclosure of interests - Review the legislation to provide a consistent framework across all local authorities for registers of interests

·    probity - Auditor-General to republish guidelines on the use of council resources during the pre-election period.

·    Māori wards - Records the council’s current resolved position for legislative change to allow Auckland to determine the number of members on the Governing Body and subject to that, agree in principle to establish a Māori ward.

·    review of representation arrangements - Amend legislation to remove the specification that Auckland Council’s Governing Body will comprise 20 members in addition to the mayor so that Auckland Council has the same discretion as any other council to review the number of members.

·    timing of polls for creation of a Māori ward or change of electoral system - Amend legislation so that a council has the discretion to conduct a poll in conjunction with the next triennial elections in order to reduce costs.

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Governing Body:

a)      approve the draft submission in Attachment A of the agenda report for submitting to the Justice Committee’s Inquiry into the 2019 Local Elections and Liquor Licensing Trust Elections, and Recent Energy Trust Elections

b)      receive the local board feedback and agree that local board recommendations are appended to the Auckland Council submission

c)      advise the Justice Committee that the council wishes to present its submission

d)      nominate a councillor to attend the Justice Committee hearing

e)      authorise the General Manager Democracy Services, in consultation with the mayor, to make amendments to the draft submission in line with changes agreed at the meeting and to make any other changes of an editorial nature.

 

Horopaki

Context

5.       Following each local and parliamentary election, a select committee of Parliament, the Justice Committee, (“committee”) conducts an inquiry to receive submissions and consider legislative changes. Its full terms of reference for its inquiry into the 2019 local elections are:

1)    Examine the law and administrative procedures for the conduct of the 2019 local elections, with particular reference to:

a)    low voter turnout at local elections

b)    liquor licensing trusts

c)    the role of council staff during election periods around decisions to release or not release information or any public statements that may be construed to affect the election outcome

d)    the issue of disclosure in respect of candidates or elected members with serious criminal convictions

e)    any irregularities or problems that could have compromised the fairness of elections.

2)    The inquiry will not be investigating allegations of any specific illegal behaviour by any person but is focussed on the issues of general law and administrative procedures.

 

3)    Consult stakeholders and the wider public about the recommendations in the Justice Committee’s report on the 2016 local elections, with particular reference to:

a)    the recommendation that the Government consider giving responsibility for running all aspects of local elections to the Electoral Commission

b)    the recommendation that the Government consider encouraging or requiring the same voting system to be used in all local elections

c)    feedback on the committee’s recommendations on foreign interference.

4)    Examine the law and administrative procedures for the conduct of elections for energy trusts held since 2016.

6.       The committee’s inquiry into the 2016 local elections was extended to include the inquiry into the 2017 general elections, to consider petitions in relation to Māori wards and accessibility and to consider the matter of foreign interference in elections.  Auckland Council submitted to this inquiry and the committee published its report on 10 December 2019.  The responses to council’s previous submission are covered in this report. 

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

7.       The following analysis is divided into three sections as follows:

Section 1: Matters raised regarding the 2019 elections

Section 2: Inquiry into the 2016 local elections

Section 3: Additional matters for consideration by the committee,

Section 1: Matters raised regarding the 2019 elections

1(a) Low voter turnout

8.       Auckland Council has undertaken research into voter awareness in conjunction with the 2013, 2016 and 2019 elections. Key points from that research are included in the Evaluation of the Auckland Council local elections report on today’s agenda.

9.       Lifting turnout is likely to include a multi-modal approach, including:

·    postal voting

·    advance voting

·    ‘one-stop shops’

·    ‘vote Friday’

·    Marae-based voting

·    ballot boxes at convenient locations such as supermarkets

·    online voting (once considered secure)   

1(b) Liquor licensing trusts

10.     The committee’s terms of reference include examining the law and procedures around liquor licensing trusts in the context of the 2019 elections.

11.     The aspect of licensing trusts that impinges on election administration relates to the geographical boundaries of the trusts. Because these are not aligned with local government electoral boundaries there are 26 permutations of voting packs required in the Auckland Council area. This affects overall voting by adding complexity to local elections.

12.     An example of the geographic boundary problem is the Birkenhead Licensing Trust.  This was constituted in 1967 with its area being the whole of the then borough of Birkenhead and the boundaries have remained unchanged.

13.     The draft submission notes the boundary issue.  It does not go as far as recommending that licensing trust boundaries are changed because to do so could affect holders of alcohol licences in the western trusts’ areas, since those trusts have exclusive licences in their areas.  The Mt Wellington, Birkenhead and Wiri licensing trusts do not have exclusive licences.

1(c) The role of council staff

14.     Auckland Council staff were involved in three types of scenarios regarding requests for information:

(i)         ordinary requests for information from the public under the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 (LGOIMA), which clearly states that decisions on requests are made by the chief executive.  There was no change to normal procedures.

(ii)        requests for information from candidates.  Staff noted that researching information for use by a candidate could be perceived as council resources being used for benefit of an election candidate.  Responses to requests for information from candidates were published to the website so the information would be available to all candidates. 

(iii)       proactive media statements of fact.  If a candidate continues to make public statements that are factually incorrect, there may be the need to correct that through the media, particularly if there are incorrect allegations about council operations. However, such statements should be the exception - staff were not involved in political debate.

15.     The draft submission does not advocate for legislative change on these matters.

1(d) Disclosure of candidates or members with serious criminal convictions

16.     There were no issues on this in the Auckland Council 2019 elections.  However, there was media coverage of candidates in other parts of the country who had previous convictions.

17.     Under the Local Government Act 2002, an elected member will lose their position if convicted of an offence punishable by a term of imprisonment of two years or more.  However, there is no requirement to disclose such offences if standing for election – there is no criminal check undertaken.

18.     One argument is that all candidates are subject to the ballot box and a candidate who has committed serious crime in the past is unlikely to be elected.

19.     An alternative approach is to amend legislation to apply to candidates the provisions in the Local Government Act 2002 for sitting members. So that not only is a sitting member disqualified but a person is prevented from standing if they have had a criminal conviction of the same type of offence (unless their record has been wiped by the clean slate provisions).  If this alternative approach is taken, then a candidate would need to declare on their nomination form that they are not prevented from standing by this requirement.

20.     The draft submission supports this alternative approach as it creates consistency between the Local Electoral Act 2001 and the Local Government Act 2002.

1(e) Irregularities that could have compromised the fairness of the elections

21.     The term “irregularity” has a legal meaning - if a judge as the result of an inquiry into an election determines there was an irregularity that materially affected the result, the judge may determine the election to be void.

22.     The draft submission notes there were no irregularities of this nature in the Auckland Council 2019 elections.

Section 2: Inquiry into the 2016 local elections

23.     The council submitted to the inquiry into the 2016 local elections.  The committee supported many of the council’s recommendations. 

24.     A comprehensive table of the outcome of previous submissions is attached as Attachment C.  The following summarises those council submissions which have already been incorporated into enacted legislation:

(i)         ability to conduct online voting pilots

(ii)        legislative confirmation that local authorities are to promote participation

(iii)       access to data associated with the electoral roll.

25.     The following summarises the council’s submissions which have been included into the committee’s recommendations to government:

(i)         when a non-mayoral vacancy occurs within 12 months after a triennial local body election, the position be filled by the next highest polling candidate (or STV equivalent) at that election

(ii)        shift the local election polling day to avoid the school holidays

(iii)       align local election overseas voting processes with general election overseas voting processes

(iv)       allow the electronic receipt of nomination forms and candidate statements and appropriate deadlines for them (consistent with the overall theme of wanting alignment between general and local elections)

(v)       give local authorities access to the supplementary roll and the deletions file held by the Electoral Commission.

26.     A full list of the committee’s additional recommendation is attached as Attachment D.

27.     The committee has asked for feedback on specific recommendations and the following outlines the proposed council response.

2(a) Electoral Commission to be responsible for local elections

28.     The options for the Electoral Commission (“Commission”) being responsible for local elections range along a spectrum from the Commission being responsible for a few key aspects, working collaboratively with local authorities, to the Commission being totally responsible. The committee’s recommendation is that the Commission should be responsible for running all aspects of local elections.

29.     The draft submission considers the following aspects of this proposal:

·    the arguments around centralisation and decentralisation

·    efficiencies that could be created

·    issues that will need to be considered

·    effect on the voter experience

30.     The proposal has merit but also has issues that need to be addressed.  The recommendation in the draft submission is that this proposal is considered further.

2(b) Same electoral system (FPP or STV) in all local elections

31.     The council has previously submitted pointing out the complexity of our elections with electors having to also elect district health board members and licensing trust members.  Our previous submission was that district health board elections should be moved to a different year. The committee does not support this and so requiring the same electoral system for all elections is the next best option.  However, the committee indicated the standard voting system might be STV. From its report:

“Some submitters suggested that the mixture of voting systems affects participation by confusing voters. Some suggested that all local elections should use the same system; the more popular system suggested was STV.”

32.     Reducing the complexity of the voting documents should contribute to higher voter participation and so the draft submission supports the recommendation to standardise the electoral system.

33.     The submission also notes that additional complexity is provided by the council, district health boards and licensing trusts making separate decisions about order of names. This should be standardised.

2(c) Foreign interference

34.     The committee was asked by the Justice Minister to look into the issue of foreign interference and the committee has asked for feedback on its recommendations. The committee’s recommendations are summarised in Attachment D.

35.     The Minister of Justice invited the committee to look into the resilience of the electoral system against foreign interference risks, provide any recommendations for improvement, and reassure the public that they can vote and participate in future elections with confidence. 

36.     The committee received evidence from the New Zealand Security Intelligence Service and the Government Communications Security Bureau.

37.     The draft submission expresses support for the committee’s recommendations and notes the position of Auckland Council in support of online voting as an alternative voting method to postal voting and because the community has requested it.  However, any voting method must have the trust of the community and the council’s support is subject to online voting being considered secure.  

Section 3: Additional matters for consideration by the committee

3(a) Disclosure of interests

38.     The committee’s report notes inconsistencies between the requirements for Parliamentarians and for local authority members for declaring interests and makes recommendations that Government should introduce legislation setting out requirements for local authority members.

39.     The existing legislation that applies to local authority members is the Local Authorities (Members Interests) Act 1965 which has been noted for some years as needing review.  In particular, section 3 provides for a person to be ineligible to be an elected member if they have an interest in a contract with the local authority of over $25,000 per annum.   Most contracts of that amount are let by staff under delegated authority and members do not participate in those decisions yet their eligibility for office might be affected. 

40.     The committee’s report also notes that maintaining a register of interests is ad hoc – some councils include this in their code of conduct and others do not.

41.     The draft submission states that the council supports a review of this legislation. 

3(b) Probity in the 2019 elections

42.     The committee’s report states there are not appropriate provisions for dealing with complaints about the conduct of local elections and recommends that the Government introduce legislative changes to provide better mechanisms.  For parliamentary elections, the Commission has a key role in making determinations, which can be challenged in court.

43.     A probity aspect which the report does not mention relates to the use of council resources during the pre-election period.  The Auditor-General is responsible for monitoring the use of public funds and property and had published guidelines about communications and the use of council resources during the pre-election period but withdrew these guidelines during the 2019 pre-election period.  There is now a lack of guidelines for providing consistent action by councils during this period.  The draft submission makes this point and advocates that these guidelines be replaced.

3(c) Māori wards

44.     The committee’s current terms of reference do not include reconsideration of the petition for legislative change around Māori wards. 

45.     The draft submission records the council’s current position on Māori wards from the Governing Body meeting on 28 September 2017 (GB/2017/125): that being:

“That the Governing Body:

a)      …..reiterate to government the position adopted by Council in 2015 supporting the need for legislative change to allow Auckland to determine the  number of members on the Governing Body and subject to that, agree in principle to establish a Māori ward and request for a consistent policy regarding Māori representation in line with legislation governing the composition of Parliament.”

46.     The Independent Māori Statutory Board has provided the following comments: 

“The Independent Māori Statutory Board considers that Māori wards as well as Independent Māori Statutory Boards are an investment into the future partnership and leadership of regions and is a tangible demonstration of how local government shows respect and regard for the Treaty of Waitangi and how they can give effect to this.

The approach of using a poll of electors to decide on a Māori ward is ineffective and the Board supports investigating other approaches for establishing Māori wards.  There are also challenges and difficulties Māori face being elected onto councils in part due to the low turnout of Māori voters for local government elections.  We support local government using a multi-modal approach to elections, particularly given the experience of the digital 2018 census and the impacts of poor census data has on Māori.”

47.     The limitations for the Governing Body in considering the establishment of a Māori ward for the 2022 local elections is covered in a report which evaluates the Auckland Council local 2019 elections on today’s agenda.

3(d) Issues arising from the review of representation arrangements

48.     A representation review addresses the number of councillors, whether they are elected by ward and, if so, how many per ward. The review of representation arrangements is undertaken under the Local Electoral Act 2001 and is part of the overall election process. 

49.     Every other council is able to review the number of its councillors but the number of councillors on the Auckland Council Governing Body is set at 20 in the Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009.

50.     Problems relating to this came to light in the recent review of representation arrangements. A workable option to address the under-representation in the Waitemata and Gulf ward would have been to increase the number of councillors, but this option was not available. Auckland Council made this point in our submission on the Local Electoral Matters Bill to the Justice Committee.

51.     The council has previously made submissions for this legislative provision setting the number of councillors to be repealed but this has not happened yet.  The draft submission raises this matter again, though it is noted the committee may view this as out of scope of their terms of reference.

3(e) Timing of polls on STV or Māori ward

52.     The current provisions in legislation for the council to resolve to change the electoral system (for example from FPP to STV) or to establish a Māori ward, allow for a petition for a poll of the community to be conducted. 

53.     In the case of Auckland Council, conducting a standalone poll of over 1 million electors, costs over $1 million. If the council had the discretion to initiate its own poll and could choose to hold a poll in conjunction with an election, this would lower the cost.

54.     The draft submission requests legislative change so that a council has discretion to conduct a poll that it is required to conduct as the result of a petition, in conjunction with the next triennial elections.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

55.     If election processes are modernised such that more electors become engaged with issues facing local government and vote, this will likely facilitate addressing climate issues.

56.     It is also noted that an election consumes a large amount of paper. The global print and paper industry accounts for about 1 per cent of global carbon dioxide emissions (though this is minor as compared to 69 per cent of greenhouse gases from the energy and transportation industries).

57.     Online voting may reduce the impact of elections on climate change; however this is not likely to occur for some time.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

58.     Staff liaised with council-controlled organisations during the pre-election period on election year protocols.  Council-controlled organisations were keen to understand what protocols should be followed in terms of elected members taking part in events, facility openings or community consultation during the pre-election period. Guidance that is standardised for the country from the Auditor-General is helpful. 

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

Local impacts and local board views

59.     Due to the requirement to complete a submission by 29 February 2020 and the intervening holiday period, there has not been the opportunity to formally report the draft submission to local boards.

60.     A presentation was given to the local board chairs forum and some local boards used their urgent decision-making processes to provide feedback which is provided as Attachment B.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

61.     Voter turnout among those of Māori descent in the Auckland Council local elections is a concern, being 11.3 per cent lower than non- Māori (24.7 per cent vs 35.9 per cent).  This compares with voter turnout for those of Māori descent in the general elections being 9.3 per cent lower than for non-Māori (71.1 per cent vs 80.4 per cent).

62.     The council’s own engagement with Māori is considered in the report “Evaluation of the Auckland Council local government 2019 elections.”  The Independent Māori Statutory Board supports the council’s position of seeking a multi-modal approach which will give Māori more options. 

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

63.     The aspects of the submission that have financial implications are:

(i)         consideration of the financial impact on councils if the Electoral Commission becomes responsible for the conduct of local elections

(ii)        the request for legislative change to give councils discretion to hold a referendum in conjunction with the next triennial elections. This would reduce any costs associated with such a referendum.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

64.     In the wider context of elections, there are some risks, including the deterioration of the postal service and the declining turnout.  These are risks to the democratic process itself. It is very important to address these issues.

65.     The committee received submissions from the Government Communications and Security Bureau and New Zealand Security Intelligence Service on risks to the electoral system due to foreign interference and this is referred to in the report.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

66.     Following approval of the submission it will be conveyed to the Justice Committee.  The Governing Body needs to decide whether it will address the committee.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Draft submission to the Justice Committee inquiry into the 2019 local elections

31

b

Local board recommendations

43

c

Outcome of Auckland Council’s submissions to the Justice Committee’s Inquiry into the 2016 Local Elections

51

d

Further recommendations made to Government by the Justice Committee in its Inquiry into the 2016 Local Elections

55

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Warwick McNaughton - Principal Advisor - Democracy Services

Authorisers

Rose Leonard – General Manager Democrary Services (Acting)

Phil Wilson - Governance Director

Stephen Town - Chief Executive

 


Governing Body

27 February 2020

 

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Governing Body

27 February 2020

 

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Governing Body

27 February 2020

 

 


 


 


Governing Body

27 February 2020

 

 


 


 


 


Governing Body

27 February 2020

 

 

Appointment of representatives to Ark in the Park Governance Group

File No.: CP2020/00572

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To appoint two representatives to the Ark in the Park Governance Group.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       Ark in the Park is a community-led conservation project in the northern part of the Waitākere Ranges Regional Park that is managed in partnership between Forest and Bird and Auckland Council.

3.       Ark in the Park works to restore the ecology of the area to its natural state through controlling non-native pests and predators and reintroducing native species which have become extinct from the area.

4.       Auckland Council has a partnership agreement with Forest and Bird for this project (see attachment A).

5.       As specified in the partnership agreement, the management of the project is overseen by a governance group made up of:

·    two representatives from the Governing Body of the Auckland Council

·    one representative from the Waitākere Ranges Local Board

·    one representative of the Executive of Forest and Bird

·    two representatives of the Waitākere Branch of Forest and Bird.

6.       In line with the partnership agreement, staff recommend the Governing Body appoint two representatives to the group. These representatives can be either councillors or Independent Māori Statutory Board members.

7.       Staff recommend that appointed representatives have a connection with the Waitākere Ranges, or an interest in the protection of indigenous biodiversity.

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation

That the Governing Body:

a)      appoint two members of the Governing Body to the Ark in the Park Governance Group for the 2019 to 2022 electoral term.

 

Horopaki

Context

8.       The Ark in the Park Open Sanctuary Project aims to enhance biodiversity in the Waitākere Ranges, while conserving the natural, recreational, historical and cultural features of the Ranges.

9.       The project covers approximately 2,270ha of the Upper Waitākere River catchment within Waitākere Ranges Regional Park.

 

10.     The Ark in the Park project is mandated under Auckland Council’s Regional Parks Management Plan (August 2010). It also enables the council to deliver on the goals of the Waitākere Ranges Heritage Area Act 2008.

11.     The Ark in the Park project contributes significantly towards achieving objectives of Auckland Council’s Indigenous Biodiversity Strategy, notably:

Objective 1: Conserve the greatest number and most diverse range of Auckland’s indigenous ecosystems and sequences.

Objective 2: Achieve long-term recovery of the greatest number of threatened species whose range includes the Auckland Region.

12.     The project involves some 400 active volunteers that contributed over 9000 hours of effort last year.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Partnership agreement between Auckland Council and Forest and Bird

13.     The Ark in the Park project is managed in partnership between Forest and Bird and Auckland Council.

14.     The partnership agreement for the project (attachment A) specifies that it should have a governance group composed of:

·    two representatives from the Governing Body of the Auckland Council

·    one representative from the Waitākere Ranges Local Board

·    one representative of the Executive of Forest and Bird

·    two representatives of the Waitākere Branch of Forest and Bird.

15.     The purpose of the Ark in the Park governance group is to oversee and review the overall direction of the project, approve the annual Ark plan and long-term restoration plan.

16.     Currently, the Forest and Bird representatives on the governance group are Kevin Hague (Forest and Bird CEO), John Staniland, and Robert Woolf. The latter representatives have a long association with the project. The current local board representative is Local Board Member Mark Allen and the alternate is Member Sandra Coney.

17.     The Governance Group will meet twice yearly or as may be otherwise agreed between the parties. The meeting commitment over the last term was approximately once per annum.

Preferred option – Appoint two representatives to the group

18.     In accordance with the partnership agreement, staff recommend that the Governing Body appoint two candidates to sit on the Ark in the Park Governance Group for the 2019-2022 electoral term.

19.     Staff recommend that appointed representatives have an association with the Waitākere Ranges or an interest in the protection of indigenous biodiversity.

20.     The other option available to the Governing Body is to not appoint representatives. This option is not recommended as it would mean that the council is not complying with the partnership agreement.

21.     It would also mean that a regional perspective for the council is not represented on the Governance Group, in the case that any decisions are required.

 

 

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

22.     The ongoing operation of the Ark in the Park project achieves protection of a substantial area of mature native forest in the Waitākere Ranges. This provides habitat for a host of native animal species and supports their resilience in the face of climate change effects.

23.     Maintenance of the forest ecosystem also provides carbon sequestration and helps regulate the hydrology of the Waitākere River catchment. This contributes to resilience in extreme weather events.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

24.     The Ark in the Park work programme is developed in consultation with the relevant departments of the council, including Regional Parks and Environmental Services.

25.     The project manager also liaises with other impacted parts of the council family, such as Watercare, when required.

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

Local impacts and local board views

26.     The Waitākere Ranges Local Board have appointed Local Board Member Mark Allen as their lead representative and Sandra Coney as alternate representative to the governance group for this term (resolution number WTK/2019/162).

27.     The Ark in the Park work programme is well aligned with the aspirations of the Waitākere Ranges Local Board, in particular the following outcomes identified in the Local Board Plan 2017:

Outcome 1: People actively protect the Waitākere Ranges Heritage Area

Outcome 2: Our unique natural habitats are protected and enhanced.

28.     To give effect to these aspirations the local board invests a significant component of their annual budget to local environmental projects. These projects restore and enhance the natural environment in partnership with their communities. Ark in the Park complements these local board projects.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

29.     A specific objective of the project is to “acknowledge the role of Te Kawerau a Maki as mana whenua for Te Wao nui o Tiriwa.” To achieve this, the project manager and Western Principal Ranger, Parks liaise directly with Te Kawerau a Maki representatives to seek their advice and recommendations.

30.     It is also achieved through wider parks initiatives. Iwi involvement in the Ark in the Park project includes attendance and ceremonial involvement with wildlife translocation events such as the release of pōpokotea (whitehead) and kōkako.

31.     The current Ark in the Park five-year plan includes the following goals in relation to iwi involvement:

·    Seek opportunities to work with Te Kawerau a Maki

·    Foster the relationship with Te Kawerau a Maki

·    Provide opportunities for mentoring rangatahi

·    Acknowledge the role of Te Kawerau a Maki in media communications about the project.

32.     Representatives from the Governing Body could be either councillors or Independent Māori Statutory Board members.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

33.     A full-time project manager employed by Forest and Bird manages the day to day aspects of the project. Auckland Council contributes $51,987 per year, which is paid to Forest and Bird and covers part of the salary for that role.

34.     Environmental Services and Parks department budgets provide operational funding for Council staff salaries and resources to support the Ark in the Park activities.

35.     In addition to the governance group, a management committee consisting of council staff, Forest and Bird employees, and project volunteers meets six times a year to guide Ark in the Park operations

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

36.     There are minimal risks associated with the recommended decision.

37.     If the Governing Body does not appoint representatives to the group, the main risk is a lack of regional representatives on the body in case of a required urgent decision.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

38.     If two representatives are appointed to the group, staff will liaise with them to advise the date of the first governance group meeting. Meetings occur as required, typically once a year.

 

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Signed Ark in the Park partnership agreement

63

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Alastair Jamieson, Team Manager Specialist Advice Environmental Services

Authorisers

Gael Ogilvie, General Manager Environmental Services

Barry Potter - Director Infrastructure and Environmental Services

Stephen Town - Chief Executive

 


Governing Body

27 February 2020

 

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Governing Body

27 February 2020

 

 

Auckland Council Submission on Funding Options for Fire and Emergency NZ

File No.: CP2020/00964

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To seek approval for the Auckland Council submission on the Fire and Emergency New Zealand Funding Review Consultation document.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       The Department of Internal Affairs has released a consultation document seeking feedback on future funding options for Fire and Emergency New Zealand (FENZ). This feedback will be used in the development of a preferred funding option for further consultation.

3.       The purpose of the funding review is to identify a permanent funding basis for FENZ that ensures stability of funding while fairly sharing its funding requirements across the beneficiaries of the service.

4.       Auckland Council recognises the value to the Auckland region provided by FENZ. It protects Aucklanders’ lives, limits injuries, and protects property, land and the environment. The council supports stability of funding for the service.

5.       At present the majority of funding for FENZ comes from levies on property (value insured against fire) and motor vehicle insurance. The review has identified free riding by under and uninsured owners as an issue with the current funding model.

6.       A range of options are considered including a charge on property value collected on the rates bill and an adjustment to the insurance-based levy to address equity concerns.  The consultation documents do not include all the information required to undertake a full assessment of the options being considered.  The draft submission (Attachment A to this report) focuses on the potential shortcomings and challenges of the property levy option.  

7.       Officers consider a charge on property value will capture uninsured and under insured properties.  However, to achieve this some property owners are likely to face large increases in their levy.  In addition, the use of property value will generate its own inequities. There is no evidence that using property values will lead to better outcomes than an adjusted insurance-based levy. The draft submission does not support the use of a property value-based levy to fund FENZ.

8.       Council will have further opportunity to provide feedback on the funding options at the next phase of the review when more information will be available to assess the options.

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Governing Body:

a)      approve the submission on funding options for Fire and Emergency New Zealand (Attachment A of the agenda report)

b)      delegate to the chair of the Finance and Performance Committee and Group Chief Financial Officer to authorise any minor amendments and corrections to the submission.

 

 

Horopaki

Context

9.       Before 1 July 2017, fire services consisted of two organisations, the Urban Fire Service and the Rural Fire Service.

a.       The Urban Fire Service was primarily funded by the fire service levy of 7.6 cents per $100 of the insurance of property against the risk of fire.

b.       The Rural Fire Service was funded through a number of different funding sources, including:

·    council rates

·    forestry companies

·    fire service levy and Department of Conservation contributions to the Rural Firefighting Fund

·    responsible party for the fire.

10.     After 1 July 2017, the two services joined to become FENZ.

Transitional levy regime

11.     FENZ is currently being funded by a transitional levy regime. The current levy is 10.6 cents per $100 of the amount insured against fire. The levy is capped at $127.06 for residential property and contents insurance.

12.     FENZ is expected to receive $624m in funding for the 2020/2021 year. Of this, around 86 percent is from the levy on insurance for property and eight per cent from the levy on motor vehicle insurance. Less than two per cent of funding comes from central government.

Updated insurance levy regime

13.     The current transitional funding model was never intended to be long-term.  The legislative changes in the Fire and Emergency New Zealand Act 2017 included changes to the insurance-based levy regime to update and modernise it. The proposed changes are:

·    the levy will apply to contracts of property insurance against physical loss or damage, whatever the cause of loss or damage (i.e. not limited to damage by fire)

·    the levy will apply to third party insurance for motor vehicles

·    the levy will be calculated based on the amount insured for the property, rather than the indemnity value of the property

·    different rates will be able to be set for residential and non-residential property.

14.     The transitional funding structure will remain until 1 July 2024.  At this time the updated insurance levy regime will come into effect if no other action is taken. 

15.     The updated insurance levy regime would likely increase the levy for holders of large property portfolios, including the council. Such owners tend to hold a much lower level of insurance for fire than for physical loss.  This is because it is unlikely that many properties in the portfolio would be affected by fire in a particular year, but an earthquake or storm could cause widespread damage across the portfolio. Under the current funding regime, owners of large property holdings pay less, relative to the value of their property, than owners of small property holdings, who tend to hold fire cover for the full value of their property.

The review

16.     The purpose of the Department of Internal Affairs (DIA) review is to investigate a wider range of options for funding FENZ than the status quo of the insurance levy. The review also seeks to ensure costs are shared in a way that is fair and affordable for households and businesses.

17.     The consultation document and feedback requested now is Phase One of the review. Phase Two of the review (March 2020 onwards) will develop the feedback into a preferred funding option for further consultation.

18.     Staff note that the DIA consultation document does not contain a proposed option. As such, the consultation document does not include detailed analysis of financial or implementation impacts of the options. Instead, it is focused on the potential risks and issues of the options, and the information that would be required for the next stage of the review.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

19.     Auckland Council recognises the value to the Auckland region provided by FENZ. It protects Aucklanders’ lives, limits injuries, and protects property, land and the environment. The council supports stability of funding for the service.

20.     The key change being considered by the review is to move away from the insurance-based approach (value of the insured property) to a property-based approach (based on rating information). Under the insurance-based approach, insurers collect the levy on FENZ’s behalf. Under the property-based approach, the levy could be collected by FENZ directly, or by council on behalf of FENZ. 

21.     The property-based approach could involve a charge set on property value, potentially combined with land use. Calculation of the charge would rely on council’s rating and valuation data.

22.     The draft submission (Attachment A to this report) does not support the use of a charge on property value collected on the rates bill. 

23.     This is the third new charge the government is proposing councils collect on their rates bills. The other charges are Kāinga Ora rates under the Urban Development Bill and infrastructure levies under the Infrastructure Funding and Financing Bill. The new charges proposed under those bills would help address the issues with funding the infrastructure required to support Auckland’s growth.

24.     Officers do not consider that there is strong case for the use of a property levy to fund FENZ. While a charge on property value will capture uninsured and under insured properties it will likely produce significant change in liability. The DIA has not provided evidence to show that the property model will produce better outcomes than current insurance-based levy.  A charge on property value also raises the following issues for the council:

·    a levy set on property value shifts costs to Auckland due to higher property values

·    property values are primarily driven by land values and do not align with the benefits provided by FENZ services

·    collecting the levy on the rates bill is likely to be viewed as an increase in rates

·    will increase the amount of fire levy paid by owners of multiple buildings including Auckland Council.

25.     Council will have further opportunity to provide feedback on the proposed funding model at the next phase of the FENZ review.

Impacts on Māori

26.     The DIA has identified potential impacts on Māori should the FENZ funding change from an insurance-based levy to a property value-based levy. These include:

·    collective ownership might make it difficult to establish who should pay the levy

·    Māori may own the land, but not the assets associated with it (e.g. a forest or farm)

·    there may be additional cost where existing buildings or assets are not insured but would be covered by a property based levy

·    iwi who hold large property portfolios may face increased costs.

27.     Council’s submission agrees with the issues identified above and in addition notes that some Māori land:

·    is undeveloped or may be difficult to develop and accordingly is unable to generate revenue from which charges on land can be paid

·    users of the land are not always reflected in ratepayer data making collection of rates and other charges on land difficult.

28.     Council recognises these issues through the use of remissions for Māori land.  These issues may also apply to only part of a block of land.  To accommodate these circumstances our remissions can be applied to a part of a property. Council’s submission requests that a property-based levy have similar flexibility to address issues for Māori land.   

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

29.     There is no climate impact from the issues considered in this report

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

30.     Changes to the FENZ funding model are likely to increase the amount of levy to be paid by Auckland Council. The actual impact cannot be assessed until a more detailed funding model is proposed. The council group will have the opportunity to provide feedback in the next phase of the review.

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

Local impacts and local board views

31.     There is no impact on local boards from this phase of the review.

32.     Any impacts on local boards and potential mitigations will be assessed during the next phase of the FENZ review. Local boards will have the opportunity to consider these issues and submit feedback. 

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

33.     The impact on Māori has been considered in the body of this report.

34.     Feedback was sought from the Independent Māori Statutory Board (IMSB). The IMSB will not be providing formal feedback for this phase of the review. Advice from IMSB officers was considered in the development of council’s submission.

35.     Feedback was sought from the Kaitiaki forum. Any feedback received will be appended to council’s submission.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

36.     The fire levy currently costs council $1 million across the Auckland Council group[1]. The levy is expected to rise significantly for council assets under a new funding model. The impact will be assessed at the next phase of the review once the proposed funding model is known.

37.     Depending on the model chosen, council may face significant costs to implement and/or administer the future levy. The draft submission proposes that any such costs be met by FENZ.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

38.     Risk associated with the review options have been identified in council’s submission. The key risks to council are financial (see Financial Implications) and reputational risks that could arise from council collecting the levy on behalf of FENZ. Mitigations will be considered at the next phase of the review.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

39.     After consideration of feedback, central government will select a preferred funding model. Further consultation will then be undertaken on the proposed model. A timeline for the next phase of the review has not been issued.

40.     Officers will report back when the next consultation document is released.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Auckland Council submission on funding options for Fire and Emergency New Zealand

79

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Beth Sullivan - Principal Advisor Policy

Justine Yu - Senior Advisor - Financial Policy

Aaron Matich - Principal Advisor – Financial Policy

Andrew Duncan - Manager Financial Policy

Authorisers

Ross Tucker - General Manager, Financial Strategy and Planning

Matthew Walker - Group Chief Financial Officer

Stephen Town - Chief Executive

 


Governing Body

27 February 2020

 

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Governing Body

27 February 2020

 

 

Governing Body's Forward Work Programme

File No.: CP2020/01135

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To approve the Governing Body’s forward work programme.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       The forward work programme identifies areas of work where the Governing Body has to make a decision.  It is in line with the forward work programmes of all other committees.

3.       Projects are briefly described and identified as requiring either decision or direction.  Where possible, likely timeframes for the projects coming before the Governing Body have also been identified.

4.       The forward work programme will be updated and reported monthly for information as part of the summary of information report.

5.       Staff recommend that the forward work programme be reviewed on a six-monthly basis in December and July each year.

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Governing Body:

a)      approve the Governing Body’s forward work programme

b)      agree that the Governing Body’s forward work programme be reported monthly for information and reviewed on a six-monthly basis in July and December each year.

 

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Forward Work Programme

89

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Sarndra O'Toole - Kaiarataki Kapa Tohutohu Mana Whakahaere / Team Leader Governance Advisors

Authoriser

Stephen Town - Chief Executive

 



Governing Body

27 February 2020

 

 

 

Tira Kāwana / Governing Body
Forward Work Programme 2020

The Governing Body deals with strategy and policy decision-making that relates to the environmental, social, economic and cultural activities of Auckland as well as matters that are not the responsibility of another committee.  The full terms of reference can be found here: Auckland Council Governing Body Terms of Reference

 

Area of work and Lead Department

Reason for work

Committee role

(decision and/or direction)

Expected timeframes

Highlight the month(s) this is expected to come to committee in 2020

Jan

Feb

Mar

Apr

May

Jun

Jul

Aug

Sep

Oct

Nov

Dec

Americas Cup 2021

Locations, infrastructure and funding

Decisions to approve locations, infrastructure and funding

(as and when required)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Chief Executive’s Performance Objectives

The Appointments and Performance Review Committee has the delegation to recommend performance objectives.

The Governing Body must then consider the recommendations and make a decision.

Decision to approve performance objectives

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appointment of Chief Executive

Statutory requirement

Decision around process to recruit a new chief executive

Decision to appoint a new chief executive

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

City Rail Link

Construction of the City Rail Link in the central city

Decisions to approve matter associated with City Rail Link

Decisions to note any matters raised by the Audit and Risk Committee about the project

(as and when required)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Review of council- controlled organisations

Overview of and decisions relating to any council-controlled organisations review including the implementation of any resulting changes to council-controlled organisations

Decision on appointment of a council-controlled organisations review panel

Consider draft report on the key issues, feedback from the community and stakeholders

Decision on final report and recommendations

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Annual Budget (Annual Plan)

Statutory requirement

Decision to approve consultation documents, supporting information and process prior to consultation

Decision to adopt Annual Budget

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

10-year Budget (Long-term Plan)

Statutory requirement

Decision to approve consultation documents, supporting information and process prior to consultation

Decision to adopt the 10-year Budget (Long-term Plan)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Annual Report

Statutory requirement

Decision to adopt the Annual Report

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Committee Forward Work Programmes

Responsibility for oversight of work programmes of all committee of the Governing Body.

Decisions to note the forward work programmes

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Review of Code of Conduct

The experience of working with the current Code of Conduct indicates that it could be further improved. In particular, it could be clearer about complaint, investigation and resolution processes, as well as available sanctions

Decision to adopt new Elected Members Code of Conduct

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Environmental Services

Ark in the Park

Decision to appoint GB representatives to Ark in the Park.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Terms of Reference

The Terms of Reference enables the governing Body to delegate to committees those power necessary for them to carry out their responsibilities to the most efficient and effective levels.

Any changes to the Terms of Reference must be done by the Governing Body.

Decision to adopt the Terms of Reference

Decision to adopt changes to Terms of Reference

 

Progress to date:

Terms of Reference approved November 2019
Link to decision

Terms of Reference amended to include working parties
Link to decision

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Standing Orders

Statutory requirement under the Local Government Act 2002, Schedule 7, clause 27

Originally adopted 16/12/2010

Decision to amend standing orders (as and when required)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Tūpuna Maunga o Tāmaki Makaurau Operations Plan

Section 60 of Ngā Mana Whenua o Tāmaki Makaurau Collective Redress Act 2014 requires the Tūpuna Maunga o Tāmaki Makaurau Authority (Tūpuna Maunga Authority) and Auckland Council to annually agree an operational plan as part of the annual or long-term plan process.

This requires the council to consult on a summary of the Draft Tūpuna Maunga o Tāmaki Makaurau Operational Plan (the Draft Tūpuna Maunga Plan).

The Governing Body is also required to adopt the final plan.

Decision to adopt Operations Plan and summary

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Health, Safety and Wellbeing

The Governing Body has the role of the person or organisation conducting a business or undertaking.

Decision to receive quarterly Health, Safety and Wellbeing report

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Alcohol Control Bylaw Review

Legislative requirement to review the bylaw and policy after five years.

Decision to approve statement of proposal #

Decision to Make/Amend/Revoke the bylaw

# public notification is required for bylaw reviews even if no change to the bylaw is recommended.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Proposal

 

 

 

 

Animal Management Bylaw Review

Legislative requirement to review the bylaw and policy after five years.

Decision to approve statement of proposal #

Decision to Make/Amend/Revoke the bylaw

# public notification is required for bylaw reviews even if no change to the bylaw is recommended.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Cemeteries and Crematoria Bylaw Review

Legislative requirement to review the bylaw and policy after five years.

Decision to approve statement of proposal #

Decision to Make/Amend/Revoke the bylaw

# public notification is required for bylaw reviews even if no change to the bylaw is recommended.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Proposal

 

 

 

 

Food Bylaw Review

Legislative requirement to review the bylaw and policy after five years.

Decision to approve statement of proposal #

Decision to Make/Amend/Revoke the bylaw

# public notification is required for bylaw reviews even if no change to the bylaw is recommended.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Freedom Camping

Explore the need for and options for regulating freedom camping in Auckland

Regulatory response may be required following completion of research and pilot

Decision to approve statement of proposal #

Decision to Make/Amend/Revoke the bylaw

# public notification is required for bylaw reviews even if no change to the bylaw is recommended.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Navigation Safety Bylaw Review

Legislative requirement to review the bylaw and policy after five years.

Decision to approve statement of proposal #

Decision to Make/Amend/Revoke the bylaw

# public notification is required for bylaw reviews even if no change to the bylaw is recommended.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Proposal

Outdoor Fire Safety Bylaw Review

Legislative requirement to review the bylaw and policy after five years.

Decision to approve statement of proposal #

Decision to Make/Amend/Revoke the bylaw

# public notification is required for bylaw reviews even if no change to the bylaw is recommended.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Property Maintenance Nuisance Bylaw Review

Legislative requirement to review the bylaw and policy after five years.

Decision to approve statement of proposal #

Decision to Make/Amend/Revoke the bylaw

# public notification is required for bylaw reviews even if no change to the bylaw is recommended.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Signage Bylaw Review

Legislative requirement to review the bylaw and policy after five years.

Decision to approve statement of proposal #

Decision to Make/Amend/Revoke the bylaw

# public notification is required for bylaw reviews even if no change to the bylaw is recommended.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Trading and Events Bylaw Review

Legislative requirement to review the bylaw and policy after five years.

Decision to approve statement of proposal #

Decision to Make/Amend/Revoke the bylaw

# public notification is required for bylaw reviews even if no change to the bylaw is recommended.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Traffic Bylaw Review

Legislative requirement to review the bylaw and policy after five years.

Decision to approve statement of proposal #

Decision to Make/Amend/Revoke the bylaw

# public notification is required for bylaw reviews even if no change to the bylaw is recommended.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Solid Waste Bylaw Review

Legislative requirement to review the bylaw and policy after five years.

Decision to approve statement of proposal #

Decision to Make/Amend/Revoke the bylaw

# public notification is required for bylaw reviews even if no change to the bylaw is recommended.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Mayoral Housing Taskforce Steering Group

Oversee the progress and implementation of the June 2017 Mayoral Housing Taskforce report.

 

Decision to setup, agree and approve membership of group

Decision to receive six-monthly updates

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Auckland Council Top Risk Register

The Audit and Risk Committee will refer the risk register to the Governing Body every quarter.

 

Decision to note the top risk register and risk heat map

Decision to receive quarterly reports

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Te Tiriti o Waitangi / Treaty of Waitangi

The Crown negotiates settlements with iwi on a confidential basis and from time to time invites Council to express its views.

The Te Tiriti o Waitangi / Treaty of Waitangi Settlement Working party is accountable to the Governing Body and reports its findings to the Governing Body.

Decision to approve submissions to the Crown as and when required

Decision to approve establishment and on-going implementation of co-management and other governance arrangements

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Local government elections

Evaluation of 2019 election and preparation for 2022 election

Consider evaluation report of 2019 election

Decision on submission to Justice Select Committee Inquiry into 2019 election

Decision on voting system for the 2022 election and whether to establish Māori wards

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Elected members expense policy

Responsibility to adopt expense policy rules for Remuneration Authority approval

Decision on elected members expense policy

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Governance Framework Review

The Joint Governance Working Party will make recommendations to the Governing Body on governance matters of mutual interest to the Governing Body and local boards

Decisions on Joint Governance Working Party recommendations

Decisions on Service Levels and Funding

Decisions on Governance Framework Review implementation as required

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 



Governing Body

27 February 2020

 

 

Summary of Governing Body information memoranda and briefings - 27 February 2020

File No.: CP2019/21635

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To receive a summary and provide a public record of memoranda or briefing papers that may have been held or been distributed to Governing Body members.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       This is a regular information-only report which aims to provide greater visibility of information circulated to Governing Body members via memoranda/briefings or other means, where no decisions are required.

3.       The following memos were circulated to members of the Governing Body:

Date

Subject

20/12/19

Location for the new office Hub in Albany

 

4.       The following workshops/briefings have taken place:

Date

Workshop/Briefing

17/2/20

CCO Review Councillor Input CONFIDENTIAL

 

5.       These documents can be found on the Auckland Council website, at the following link:

http://infocouncil.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/

at the top left of the page, select meeting/Te hui “Governing Body” from the drop-down tab and click “View”;

under ‘Attachments’, select either the HTML or PDF version of the document entitled ‘Extra Attachments’.

6.       Note that, unlike an agenda report, staff will not be present to answer questions about the items referred to in this summary.  Governing Body members should direct any questions to the authors.

 

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Governing Body:

a)      receive the Summary of Governing Body information memoranda and briefings – 27 February 2020.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Memo - Location for the new office Hub in Albany (Under Separate Cover)

 

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Sarndra O'Toole - Kaiarataki Kapa Tohutohu Mana Whakahaere / Team Leader Governance Advisors

Authoriser

Stephen Town - Chief Executive

 


Governing Body

27 February 2020

 

 

Recommendation to appoint an Acting Chief Executive and update on Chief Executive recruitment process

File No.: CP2020/00965

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To seek Governing Body agreement on the appointment of an Acting Chief Executive for Auckland Council, and for the Governing Body to note the updated process for the recruitment of a new Chief Executive.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       Under the Local Government Act 2002 (LGA), a local authority must, in accordance with clauses 33 and 34 of Schedule 7, appoint a Chief Executive. Section 42 of the LGA requires local authorities to appoint a Chief Executive to carry out various responsibilities as set out in that section.

3.       At its meeting on 12 December 2019, the Governing Body approved the process and approach to appointing a new chief executive.

4.       On 3 February 2020 Mr Stephen Town, the current Chief Executive, announced his resignation effective 25 June 2020. This date is before the term expiration date of 31 December 2020.

5.       To ensure stability and continuity of leadership, it is proposed that an Acting Chief Executive be appointed for the period from when the current Chief Executive finishes employment with council until when the new Chief Executive commences.

6.       The substantive discussion on this matter will take place in the confidential part of the agenda as it will involve information that relates to the setting of a recruitment process for the Chief Executive, and the committee may discuss matters relating to the person specification or potential candidates.

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Governing Body:

a)      note that there is a confidential report included in the agenda and provides information regarding the process to appoint the next Chief Executive.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.    

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Shameel Sahib - Head of Corporate Strategy

Authoriser

Stephen Town - Chief Executive

      

 


Governing Body

27 February 2020

 

 

Exclusion of the Public: Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987

That the Governing Body

a)      exclude the public from the following part(s) of the proceedings of this meeting.

The general subject of each matter to be considered while the public is excluded, the reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter, and the specific grounds under section 48(1) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 for the passing of this resolution follows.

This resolution is made in reliance on section 48(1)(a) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 and the particular interest or interests protected by section 6 or section 7 of that Act which would be prejudiced by the holding of the whole or relevant part of the proceedings of the meeting in public, as follows:

 

C1       CONFIDENTIAL:  Recommendation to appoint an Acting Chief Executive and update on Chief Executive recruitment process

Reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter

Particular interest(s) protected (where applicable)

Ground(s) under section 48(1) for the passing of this resolution

The public conduct of the part of the meeting would be likely to result in the disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding exists under section 7.

s7(2)(a) - The withholding of the information is necessary to protect the privacy of natural persons, including that of a deceased person.

s7(2)(i) - The withholding of the information is necessary to enable the local authority to carry on, without prejudice or disadvantage, negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiations).

In particular, the report contains information that relates to the setting of a recruitment process for the chief executive, and the committee may discuss matters relating to the person specification or potential candidates.

s48(1)(a)

The public conduct of the part of the meeting would be likely to result in the disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding exists under section 7.

 

   



[1] Levy by entity: Auckland Council $376k; Regional Facilities Auckland $225k; Auckland Transport $187k; Watercare $183k; Panuku $42k; ATEED $2k