Agenda of Kaipātiki Local Board

A screenshot of text

Description automatically generated

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

4 Confirmation of Minutes

That the Kaipātiki Local Board:

a) confirm the ordinary minutes of its meeting, held on Wednesday, 11 December 2019, as true and correct.

5 Leave of Absence

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

6 Acknowledgements

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

7 Petitions

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

8 Deputations

Standing Order 7.7 provides for deputations. Those applying for deputations are required to give seven working days notice of subject matter and applications are approved by the Chairperson of the Kaipātiki Local Board. This means that details relating to deputations can be included in the published agenda. Total speaking time per deputation is ten minutes or as resolved by the meeting.

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

9 Public Forum

A period of time (approximately 30 minutes) is set aside for members of the public to address the meeting on matters within its delegated authority. A maximum of 3 minutes per item is allowed, following which there may be questions from members.

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

10 Extraordinary Business

Section 46A(7) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 (as amended) states:

“An item that is not on the agenda for a meeting may be dealt with at that meeting if-

(a) The local authority by resolution so decides; and

(b) The presiding member explains at the meeting, at a time when it is open to the public,-

(i) The reason why the item is not on the agenda; and

(ii) The reason why the discussion of the item cannot be delayed until a subsequent meeting.”

Section 46A(7A) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 (as amended) states:

“Where an item is not on the agenda for a meeting,-

(a) That item may be discussed at that meeting if-

(i) That item is a minor matter relating to the general business of the local authority; and

(ii) the presiding member explains at the beginning of the meeting, at a time when it is open to the public, that the item will be discussed at the meeting; but

(b) no resolution, decision or recommendation may be made in respect of that item except to refer that item to a subsequent meeting of the local authority for further discussion.”

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Kaipātiki Local Board:

a) grant landowner approval under section 53(1)(f) of the Reserves Act 1977 for Kaipātiki Project Incorporated to relocate plants from the construction area at Lauderdale Reserve, legally described as Lot 164 Deposited Plan 49720, and place two containers for storage of materials and equipment and a portacom on Eskdale Reserve, legally described as Deposited Plan 51228, during demolition and construction of the community building for a period of 360 days as indicated on the plans attached to this report as Attachment A.

Horopaki

Context

8. This report considers the application for landowner approval from Kaipātiki Project Incorporated for temporary relocation from Lauderdale Reserve to Eskdale Reserve during construction of the new purpose-built community building.

9. The Reserves Act 1977 permits an administering body to allow a third party to place a container on land classified as a recreation reserve such as Eskdale Reserve for temporary occupation under section 53(1)(f) where the occupation is deemed temporary for a specified number of days per year. This applies to the Kaipātiki Project Incorporated situation where a new purpose-built community building will be constructed to replace the existing leased premises at 17 Lauderdale Road, Birkdale.

10. The agreement must limit the number of days allowed per year, in this instance, 360 days. For this activity there is an exemption for the requirement to obtain the Minister of Conservation consent under section 53(2) and public notification is not required. Iwi consultation and local board approval is still required.

11. The application is being presented to the Northern Mana Whenua Forum on 5 February 2020.

12. Kaipātiki Local Board is the delegated authority relating to local, recreation, sport and community matters.

Kaipātiki Project Incorporated

13. The Kaipātiki Project Incorporated manage an environment centre that includes growing native plants for community restoration purposes, teaching members of the community about gardening, pest control and conservation through volunteering in the nursery and hosting schools as part of their learning goals. The centre also has a restoration plan for the Eskdale Reserve Network of approximately 70 hectares which is delivered in cooperation with contractors and the community.

Planning Context

14. The application aligns with the Kaipātiki Local Board Plan 2017, outcomes to:

· ‘protect our environment’ with increased flora and fauna

· ‘provide high quality facilities’ with a green building

· provide ‘well managed services which meet community needs and active and healthy people’ by encouraging active participation in horticultural activities

· ‘identify Kaipātiki as their kāinga (home)’ by providing a community hub for education and training about plants, pest control and restoration projects in the area.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

15. A range of locations over eight sites were considered by Kaipātiki Project Incorporated. Aspects assessed included:

· office and nursery space

· public transport

· visibility

· proximity to bush

· collaborative space and

· the potential for growth.

16. It was determined that the adjoining site at Eskdale Reserve was the best location for the interim period during construction.

17. The options for the local board are to approve or decline the landowner request for the relocation of plants from the construction area and place two containers and a portacom for office space on Eskdale Reserve for storage of materials and equipment during demolition and construction.

18. The advantages of approving the landowner application are that:

· the relocation will allow the Kaipātiki Project Incorporated to continue their operation and add value to the community

· other activities including pest control, hosting of schools and the restoration plan for the Eskdale Reserve Network delivered in cooperation with contractors and the community will continue from this location

· the relocation will allow the construction of the community hub as scheduled in the Kaipātiki 2019/20 Capex work programme and, on completion, enable a range of activities and groups to continue to use a functional, adaptive, socially and ecologically regenerative facility.

19. If the Kaipātiki Local Board declines the landowner application for the relocation into Eskdale Reserve, Kaipātiki Project Incorporated will need to find another location or cease nursery activities for community restoration projects during the demolition and construction of the new building. This option is not recommended by staff.

Land and Community Licence to Occupy

20. Kaipātiki Project Incorporated have also applied for landowner approval for a licence to occupy the adjacent land to the leased area within Eskdale Reserve for the current nursery operations of 300 square metres and extending the area of plants to cover 500 square metres. The proposed area is outside the current leased footprint at the back of the building and will cross into the grassed area within Eskdale Reserve.

21. Public notification of the proposal to grant a licence to occupy for additional nursery premises is required and will provide the public and iwi the opportunity to provide input. If public notification and iwi engagement results in no objections, a licence to occupy for land use would be issued. If objections to the proposal are received, the local board would be requested to nominate a hearings panel to assess the objections and make a decision.

22. Kaipātiki Local Board has delegated authority to approve the public notification and iwi engagement of council’s intention to grant a licence to occupy for additional land for nursery use. This can be a lengthy process so will therefore be considered in a subsequent report, as the priority is to undertake the relocation of plants in the construction area and to provide a temporary storage area as indicated in Attachment A.

23. The request for the licence to occupy will be presented to Kaipātiki Local Board at a subsequent business meeting.

Specialists’ comments/consultation

24. The Parks and Places Specialist, Senior Maintenance Delivery Coordinator, Principal Project Manager, Senior Renewals Coordinator and Senior Arboriculture and Eco Specialist have been consulted and support the proposal.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

25. There is no impact on greenhouse gas emissions as the proposal does not introduce any new source of emissions.

26. The proposed new green building is designed to reduce or eliminate the impact on the environment and to enhance social outcomes. Green buildings use resources more efficiently (e.g. materials, energy, water and waste) and are more resilient to the external changes that may affect them, from climate-related weather effects to energy and/or water supply interruption.

27. The new community hub will be a healthy building for occupants and visitors through the use of low impact materials, adhesives and finishes (for example; timber treatment, glues and paints). It will have a reduced embodied carbon footprint with the use of sustainable materials. The building design has been oriented to the climatic conditions, movements of the sun and hours of use to encompass passive solar design. This ensures reduced greenhouse gas emissions and improved comfort for occupants.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

28. The proposed landowner approval and lease for additional premises have no identified impact on other parts of the council group. The views of council-controlled organisations were not required for the preparation of this report’s advice.

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

Local impacts and local board views

29. A workshop to review the developed concept plans for the new building was presented to the Kaipātiki Local Board during the Community Facilities workshop on 27 March 2019. A report was presented to Kaipātiki Local Board 19 June 2019 and the concept plan using the green building framework and was approved by the board, along with the request for staff to progress the project to the construction phase (resolution number KT/2019/98).

30. The recommendations in this report are within the local board’s delegated authority to grant landowner approvals.

31. The recommendations within this report support the Kaipātiki Local Board Plan 2017 as outlined above.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

32. An aim of community leasing and land advisory is to increase targeted support for Māori community development projects. The new building proposal seeks to enable Māori to more easily participate and partner in ecological restoration activities and educational programmes within the Kaipātiki Local Board area, enabling better outcomes for Māori.

33. Mana whenua have been part of the concept development workshops for the new building and have provided input and feedback to the development of the concept design. Additional input is being sought from mana whenua during the developed design phase.

34. The relocation proposal will be presented to the Northern Mana Whenua Forum in February with a request for any additional input.

35. There are no sites of value or significance to mana whenua identified in the Auckland Unitary Plan – Operative in Part in relation to the application.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

36. There are no financial operational implications for the local board over and above the existing maintenance requirements of this reserve for the relocation.

37. The financial implications for the new building were considered in the report to Kaipātiki Local Board dated 19 June 2019.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

38. There is a risk that the public may oppose the licence to occupy application to be considered at a later date by the local board for the increased occupation area for the nursery within Eskdale Reserve.

39. The current building is not fit for purpose for staff to operate from, so the redevelopment of the premises using the green building design provides future proofing of a community facility. This anticipates the future use of the building and land.

40. There is a risk with community facilities on public open spaces that, if the lessee surrenders the lease or is unable to continue to occupy the site, the council inherits a liability. Where any group owns a building on a park and surrenders its lease, they also surrender the building to council and in that regard the council has the opportunity to occupy or manage the facility itself, or on sell the buildings to another community group.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

41. Subject to the local board’s approval the decision will be communicated to the applicant with a formal landowner approval letter for the relocation into Eskdale Reserve. Conditions will be placed on the landowner approval regarding (but not limited to):

· health and safety conditions

· ensuring the applicant controls rubbish at the site

· safety fencing during construction

· reinstatement of land.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	19 February 2020 - Kaipātiki Local Board business meeting - Attachment A: Relocation site plan	13

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Raewyn Sendles - Land Use Advisor

Authorisers

Rod Sheridan - General Manager Community Facilities

Eric Perry - Relationship Manager

Kaipātiki Local Board

19 February 2020

Renewal of community lease and variation to The Marlborough Recreational Trust at 13A Chartwell Avenue, Glenfield.

File No.: CP2019/21553

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To grant a renewal and variation of the community lease to The Marlborough Recreation Trust at 13A Chartwell Avenue, Glenfield.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. The Marlborough Recreational Trust holds a community lease for their building and tennis courts in Marlborough Park, Glenfield. The current term of the lease expired on 30 November 2016. The lease is still operative on a month-by-month basis.

3. The Marlborough Recreational Trust has applied to renew its lease for the 10-year renewal period as provided for in the lease. The building and improvements on the site are owned by the trust.

4. Staff recommend the Kaipātiki Local Board grant a renewal of the community lease to The Marlborough Recreational Trust.

5. The renewal was presented at the November 2018 business meeting where the local board requested more work be done around the tennis club’s utilisation of the courts.

6. Staff have worked on a community outcomes plan for the tennis club to provide targets to increase utilisation of the tennis courts. This will be included in the lease renewal as a variation.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Kaipātiki Local Board:

a) grant a renewal and variation of the community lease to The Marlborough Recreation Trust at 13A Chartwell Avenue, Glenfield described as part Lot 152 DP 49525 and part Lot 20 DP 47205 shown on Attachment A to the agenda report and shown outlined in red on the following terms and conditions:

i) term – ten (10) years commencing 1 December 2016 with no further right of renewal and final expiry on 30 November 2026

ii) rent -$1.00 plus GST per annum, if requested

iii) the agreed community outcomes plan for the Marlborough Park Tennis Club be appended to the lease renewal as a variation (refer Attachment B to the agenda report).

b) note all other terms and conditions will be accordance with the deed of lease dated 2009.

Horopaki

Context

7. The Marlborough Recreational Trust has a lease for their building and tennis courts at Marlborough Park which commenced 1 December 2006 for a term of 10 years. The initial term of the lease expired on 30 November 2016 and there is one right of renewal available.

8. The Marlborough Recreational Trust has requested a renewal of its lease.

Land and buildings

9. The Marlborough Recreational Trust leased area is on land that is held in fee simple by Auckland Council as a classified recreation reserve. The classification permits the proposed activity undertaken by trust.

10. The trust was incorporated on 21 December 2005. The trust was established by the North Shore Rock Hounds Club Incorporated, the Marlborough Park Tennis Club Incorporated, and the Glenfield Rovers Association Football Club and Sports Club Incorporated to “promote, provide and maintain recreational facilities in the Glenfield area”.

11. The trust’s building and tennis courts on Marlborough Park are owned by the trust and occupied by the North Shore Rock Hounds Club Incorporated and the Marlborough Park Tennis Club Incorporated.

12. During a site visit the building and other improvements were found to well maintained and tidy.

Marlborough Park Recreational Trust

13. The North Shore Rock Hounds Club through the trust has exclusive use of the downstairs area of the building. The club has over 200 members.

14. The club provides a workshop for polishing and carving gemstones and rock, field trips, gem shows and the opportunity to enter national competitions.

15. Marlborough Park Tennis Club via the trust occupies the upstairs of the building and Tennis Court situated on Marlborough Park.

16. The tennis club has 65 members and offer their facilities to local schools for use. Often the courts are used for wet weather training for other sport teams.

17. The club rooms are available for hire to other groups and is disability friendly.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

18. Staff have determined that Marlborough Recreational Trust meet the renewal requirements under the terms of the original lease as evidenced below:

i) it is still a registered incorporated society

ii) it has complied with the terms of the operative lease

iii) it has agreed to include a community outcomes plan for the Tennis Club portion of the trust to ensure the delivery of quality services to the local community

iv) Marlborough Recreational Trust has provided a copy of its financial accounts, which indicate that its funds are sufficient to meets its liabilities and that it possesses adequate financial reserves

v) the group is managed appropriately as evidenced by its longevity and programmes offered.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

19. The designated impact level of the recommended decision on greenhouse gas emissions falls in the category of “no impact” because the proposal continues an existing activity and does not introduce any new sources of emissions.

20. Climate change has an unlikely potential to impact the lease as the site does not sit in close proximity of the coast.

21. No portion of the land is within a flood plain (refer Attachment C to the agenda report).

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

22. The renewal was first presented to the Kaipātiki Local Board at a business meeting in November 2018. The Kaipātiki Local Board requested the tennis club portion of the Marlborough Recreational Trust work towards formulating a plan that targeted better utilisation of the tennis courts before considering a resolution to renew the community lease.

23. Council’s Community Leasing and Parks, Sport and Recreation departments worked collaboratively with the club to formulate a community outcomes plan that sets out targets and measures to maximise utilisation of the courts whilst still enabling the club to remain viable.

24. The draft community outcomes plan was circulated to the local board for approval in November 2019. No concerns were raised.

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

Local impacts and local board views

25. The recommendations within this report fall within the local board’s allocated decision-making authority. The trust’s activities align with the Kaipātiki Local Board Plan 2017 outcome of “Our people are active and healthy”.

26. The lease renewal to the trust is an item on the Kaipātiki Community Lease Work Programme 2019/2020.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

27. Auckland Council is committed to meeting its responsibilities under Te Tiriti o Waitangi and its broader legal obligations to Māori. The council recognises these responsibilities are distinct from the Crown’s Treaty obligations and fall within a local government Tāmaki Makaurau context. These commitments are articulated in the council’s key strategic planning documents: the Auckland Plan, the Long-term Plan 2018-2028, the Unitary Plan and local board plans.

28. Support for Māori initiatives and outcomes are detailed in Te Toa Takitini, Auckland Council’s Māori Responsiveness Framework. An aim of community leasing is to increase targeted support for Māori community development projects.

29. There is no statutory requirement for public notification or iwi engagement for the lease renewal. Public notification and iwi engagement were undertaken at the time of granting the lease.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

30. All costs relating to the granting of this renewal is borne by Auckland Council’s Community Facilities department.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

31. Should the Kaipātiki Local Board resolve not to grant a renewal of the community lease to Marlborough Recreational Trust this decision will materially affect the group’s ability to undertake its core activities.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

32. Subject to the grant of a renewal of a community lease, council staff will work with the group to finalise the deed of renewal and variation to include the community outcomes plan.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	19 February 2020 - Kaipātiki Local Board business meeting - Attachment A Site Plan -Marlborough Recreational Trust	19
b ⇩	19 February 2020 - Kaipātiki Local Board business meeting - Attachment B - Marlborough Park Tennis Club Community Outcomes Plan	21
c ⇩	19 February 2020 - Kaipātiki Local Board business meeting - Attachment C Flood Plains overview Marlborough Park	23

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Phillipa Carroll - Community Lease Advisor

Authorisers

Rod Sheridan - General Manager Community Facilities

Eric Perry - Relationship Manager

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	19 February 2020 - Kaipātiki Local Board Business Meeting - Auckland Transport monthly update February 2020	27

Kaipātiki Local Board

19 February 2020

Appointment of LGNZ Lead and nominee for LGNZ Conference 2020

File No.: CP2020/01342

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To appoint a lead for Local Government New Zealand (LGNZ) matters and nominate a representative to attend the 2020 LGNZ Annual Conference and General Meeting.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. Local boards are invited to appoint a lead (and alternate) on Local Government New Zealand (LGNZ) matters. The lead will be the main contact for all LGNZ issues and will represent the local board at meetings of Auckland/LGNZ zone and any related meetings.

3. The LGNZ Annual Conference and General Meeting (AGM) takes place at the ASB Theatre Marlborough in Waiharakeke Blenheim from 8am Thursday 16 July to 3pm Saturday 18 July 2020.

4. Local boards are invited to nominate a representative to attend the LGNZ conference. This can be the local board appointed LGNZ lead or another member of the local board. Given the cost and overall numbers of elected member attendance, staff recommend that one member per local board attend.

5. In addition to the official delegates, LGNZ requires prior notice of which local board members plan to attend the AGM. Members wishing to attend are asked to register their intention with the Democracy Services Business Hub team by Friday 17 April 2020 so that this information can be provided to LGNZ.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Kaipātiki Local Board:

a) appoint a lead and alternate for Local Government New Zealand (LGNZ) related matters for the 2019-2022 triennium and task these members with representing the local board at Auckland/LGNZ meetings.

b) nominate one elected member per local board to attend the Local Government New Zealand 2020 Conference and Annual General Meeting in Waiharakeke Blenheim, Thursday 16 July to Saturday 18 July 2020.

c) confirm that Local Government New Zealand 2020 conference attendance, including travel and accommodation, will be paid for in accordance with the current Auckland Council Elected Member Expense Policy.

d) note that any members who wish to attend the Local Government New Zealand (LGNZ) Conference and Annual General Meeting must provide their names to the Democracy Services Business Hub team by Friday 17 April 2020 to ensure that they are registered with LGNZ.

Horopaki

Context

6. LGNZ is an incorporated society of local government organisations whose primary objective is to represent and advocate for the interests of local authorities in New Zealand. LGNZ champions policy positions on key issues that are of interest to local government and holds regular meetings and events throughout the year for members. The schedule of meetings includes an annual conference and meetings of local government geographical clusters (known as LGNZ zones) and sectors.

7. LGNZ is governed by a National Council made up of representatives from member authorities as outlined in the constitution. Some of its work is conducted through committees and working groups which include representatives from member authorities.

8. Elected members who have been formally appointed to LGNZ roles are:

Mayor Phil Goff

National Council representative for Auckland

Auckland Council representative on the Metropolitan Sector Group

Councillor Pippa Coom

Local Board Member Richard Northey

National Council representative for Auckland (appointed by Governing Body)

National Council representative for Auckland (appointed by local boards)

Deputy Mayor Bill Cashmore

Auckland Council representative on Regional Sector

Meetings of Auckland/LGNZ (Auckland Zone)

9. As part of recent changes to the LGNZ Rules, Auckland Council is no longer part of LGNZ Zone 1 but is expected to organise itself, with its multiple local boards and Governing Body, as an informal LGNZ zone.

10. Meetings of the Auckland/LGNZ zone have been scheduled on a biannual basis. These meetings will be co-chaired by the two Auckland representatives appointed to the LGNZ National Council by the Governing Body (Councillor Pippa Coom) and local boards (Member Richard Northey).

11. Meetings of the Auckland/LGNZ zone will be open to all elected members but formal representation will sit with the nominated leads.

LGNZ Annual conference and AGM 2020

12. This year, the LGNZ conference and AGM will be held at the ASB Theatre Marlborough, Waiharakeke, Blenheim, Thursday 16 July to Saturday 18 July 2020.

13. The conference takes place over the first two days commencing at 9.30am on Thursday 16 July 2020 and closing with the LGNZ Excellence Awards on the evening of Friday 17 July 2020.

14. The conference programme has the theme ‘Natural Capital’. The final programme will be publicly available at the end of February 2020. However, LGNZ has indicated that the programme is expected to include addresses from the Prime Minister, various political leaders and the President of LGNZ, and will also include sessions on the following topics:

· Natural capital - the Marlborough story

· Fishes in the river, fishes in the sea (water, aquaculture and the Resource Management Act)

· Tourism – working together to care for people, place and culture

· Building towards sustainable supply (housing)

· Resilience in the face of natural hazards (infrastructure and communities)

· Cultural wellbeing plenary session

· Interactive workshops on cultural, economic, environmental and social wellbeing

· Tours, showcases and dinners.

15. The AGM takes place on the last day of the conference from 9.30am to 12.30pm. The LGNZ constitution permits the Auckland Council to appoint four delegates to represent it at the AGM, with one of the delegates being appointed as presiding delegate.

16. Traditionally the four AGM delegates have been the Mayor, the Chief Executive and two Governing Body members who hold LGNZ roles. Delegates in 2019 were Mayor Phil Goff, Deputy Mayor Bill Cashmore, Councillor Penny Hulse and Local Board Chairperson Pippa Coom.

17. The Governing Body will consider an item on AGM attendance at its meeting on 27 March 2020 which includes the recommendation that Mayor Phil Goff be the presiding delegate and the other three delegates be comprised of either:

· two members of the Governing Body who hold a formal representation role with LGNZ and the Chief Executive, or

· one member of the Governing Body who holds a formal representation role with LGNZ and the Chief Executive, and a local board member, or

· two members of the Governing Body who hold a formal representation role with LGNZ and a local board member.

18. In addition to the official delegates, LGNZ requires prior notice of which local board members plan to attend the AGM. Attendance at the AGM is not compulsory for conference participants.

Pre-conference meetings

19. On Wednesday 15 July 2020, there will be a pre-conference meeting of the LGNZ National Council as well as a Te Maruata Hui. Elected members belonging to these two groups and wishing to attend these meetings would need to arrive earlier than other meeting participants.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Meetings of Auckland/LGNZ (Auckland Zone)

20. Local boards are requested to appoint a lead for the 2019-2022 triennium. The lead’s responsibilities include:

· attending and representing the local board at meetings of Auckland/LGNZ zone and other LGNZ meetings, as appropriate

· being the main contact for the local board on all LGNZ matters

· sharing information from Auckland/LGNZ and other LGNZ-related meetings attended with the local board.

LGNZ Annual conference and AGM 2020

21. In 2020, with the venue in Waiharakeke, Blenheim, and given the cost and overall numbers of elected member attendance, it is recommended that one member per local board attend. Having one attendee per local board means a maximum of 21 Auckland Council local board members would attend the conference.

22. The annual conference and AGM are two separate meeting sessions.

23. Local board members are invited to attend and take part in the conference.

24. For the AGM, member authorities will be represented by officially appointed delegates. Members who are not appointed delegates can attend as observers, provided they are included on the AGM registration form. Local board members who wish to attend the AGM as observers must register their intention with the Democracy Services Business Hub team by Friday 17 April 2020 so that their names can be included on the AGM registration form.

25. Local board members who attend the conference and/or AGM are strongly encouraged to report back to their local boards on proceedings at the conference. This ensures members who do not attend can still benefit from this opportunity.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

26. Conferences and events involving multiple participants, especially those requiring long distance travel, can generate a sizable carbon footprint. This is due to emissions associated with flights, car and taxi travel, hotel and event site emissions.

27. Estimates for emissions associated with travel to Blenheim or travel within Auckland for local meetings have not been calculated at the time of writing this report. Emissions, when known, can be offset through a verified carbon offset programme at a small cost.

28. Other opportunities to reduce emissions include:

· reducing the number of delegates to the Blenheim conference as recommended

· encouraging participants to opt for public transport options when attending meetings in Auckland

· encouraging delegates to provide updates to their local boards, including the option of daily updates from the conference and meetings via the local board Facebook pages, so that non-attendance does not disadvantage other members

· ensuring elected members are aware of the session recordings that LGNZ will make available after the conference. LGNZ have advised that they do not webcast or live-stream any parts of the conference as they try to encourage as many people as possible to attend in person.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

29. There are no impacts for council-controlled organisations or departments of council as the focus is on elected member attendance at meetings, including the LGNZ conference.

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

Local impacts and local board views

30. LGNZ advocates for issues that are important to local government. Many of these issues are aligned with local board priorities e.g. climate change. As such, there is interest at local board level in staying across the work of LGNZ and in identifying and harnessing opportunities to progress other advocacy areas that local boards may have.

31. Having a dedicated lead who can attend Auckland meetings on LGNZ matters and who can be part of future discussions about remits and other topics will enable local boards and their communities to continue to be informed and give considered input to work being led by LGNZ.

32. The LGNZ annual conference is always of interest to local board members. They provide a unique networking opportunity for local government leaders from around the country and the agendas of these meetings are designed to support local leaders in their roles and responsibilities. This is in line with the purpose of the elected member development programme which is to support elected members as governors and decision-makers.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

33. The work of LGNZ is expected to impact positively on Māori. LGNZ advocates on a variety of issues that are important to Māori including Māori housing, various environmental issues and council-Māori participation/relationship arrangements. In addition, LGNZ provides advice including published guidance to assist local authorities in understanding values, aspirations and interest of Māori.

34. The LGNZ National Council has a sub-committee, Te Maruata, which has the role of promoting increased representation of Māori as elected members of local government, and of enhancing Māori participation in local government processes. It also provides support for councils in building relationships with iwi, hapu and Māori groups. Te Maruata provides Māori input on development of future policies or legislation relating to local government. In the previous term, Councillor Alf Filipaina was a member of the sub-committee. Te Maruata will hold a hui on Wednesday 15 July 2020 from 10am to 4.30pm.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

Meetings of Auckland/LGNZ (Auckland Zone)

35. Meetings of Auckland/LGNZ are a new initiative being introduced this triennium following amendments to LGNZ zones. The two meetings for 2020 are scheduled for 13 March and 11 September and are not currently budgeted for. Staff will use existing resources and liaise with Kura Kāwana to identify combined opportunities for these meetings dates.

36. Managing attendance numbers by only requiring attendance of leads, with others as optional attendees if they wish, should contribute towards keeping meeting costs down.

Annual conference and AGM 2020

37. The normal registration rate for the LGNZ Conference and AGM is $1410 (early bird) or $1510 (standard). The total cost for early bird registration for 21 local board members is $29,610, with flights and accommodation additional.

38. Costs of attendance for one member from each local board are to be met from the elected members’ development budget as managed centrally by the Kura Kāwana programme.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

Meetings of Auckland/LGNZ (Auckland Zone)

39. The inaugural meeting of the Auckland Zone is planned for 13 March 2020. If a local board has not chosen an LGNZ lead by this date, they would need to select a member to attend this meeting as their official representative.

Annual conference and AGM 2020

40. The key risk is of delayed decision-making which can impact costs and registration choices. The sooner the registration for the nominated local board member can be made, the more likely it is that Auckland Council can take advantage of early bird pricing for the conference and flights, all done via bulk booking. Delayed information may also impact registration into preferred conference streams or events.

41. There is always a level of reputational risk associated with any financial expenditure. Large delegations to conferences can be costly, hence the advice that only one per local board attend.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

Meetings of Auckland/LGNZ (Auckland Zone)

42. There are two planned meetings for the Auckland Zone in 2020. The inaugural meeting is scheduled for 13 March and the second meeting is on 11 September.

43. Preparations for the inaugural meeting are being made by staff with guidance from the co-chairs. The agenda will include a report from LGNZ Executive and will also include an update on the ‘Localism’ project. The agenda will be made available to members closer to the time of the meeting.

Annual conference and AGM 2020

44. Once members are confirmed to attend, the Democracy Services Business Hub team will co-ordinate and book all conference registrations, as well as requests to attend the AGM.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Shirley Coutts - Principal Advisor - Governance Strategy

Linda Gifford – Programme Manager – Elected Member Develop

Authorisers

Louise Mason - GM Local Board Services

Eric Perry - Relationship Manager

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	19 February 2020 - Kaipātiki Local Board Business Meeting - Proposed meeting schedule for Kaipātiki Local Board 2020 - 2022	55

Kaipātiki Local Board

19 February 2020

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

File No.: CP2020/01343

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.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. In December 2019 the Justice Committee (“Committee”) notified its inquiry into the 2019 local elections. Submissions close on 29 February 2020.

3. Its terms of reference include matters relating to the 2019 elections, in particular:

(i) Low voter turnout

(ii) Liquor licensing trusts

(iii) Council staff releasing information that may affect the election outcome

(iv) Disclosure of candidates having serious criminal convictions

(v) Irregularities that could have compromised the fairness of the elections.

4. The Committee also invites feedback on its recommendations arising from the inquiry into the 2016 elections, in particular:

i) Electoral Commission to have responsibility for running local elections

ii) Same voting system to be used for all elections

iii) Foreign interference.

5. This report outlines recommended responses to the Committee’s terms of reference, identifies recommended responses to other recommendations made by 2016 inquiry (disclosure of interests, probity and Māori wards) and adds recommendations in regard to election issues not yet considered by the Committee:

(i) disclosure of interests

(ii) probity

(iii) Māori wards

(iv) review of representation arrangements

(v) timing of polls for creation of a Māori ward or change of electoral system

6. The draft submission is attached as Attachment “A”.

7. Local board feedback is attached as Attachment “X”.

8. A summary of recommendations made in the council’s submission is as follows:

Low voter turnout

· Note the research conducted by Auckland Council which is available on knowledgeauckland.govt.nz.

· Note the successful initiatives undertaken by Auckland Council including: Vote Friday and One-stop Shops.

· Consider that the response to low voter turnout may best be through a multi-modal approach which provides voters with options.

Liquor licensing trusts

· Note that with the passage of time trust boundaries no longer align with local government boundaries in the Auckland area and this creates complexity in terms of the number of different combinations of voting documents that are required.

Disclosure of candidates or members with serious criminal convictions

· Amend the Local Electoral Act 2001 to align with the Local Government Act 2002, schedule 7, clause 1, with the effect that a person is not eligible for election if they have been previously convicted of an offence punishable by a term of imprisonment of 2 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 Committee’s recommendation for the Electoral Commission to conduct local elections

Same electoral system, First Past the Post (“FPP”) or Single Transferable Vote (“STV”) in all elections

· Amend legislation to the effect 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 has noted the Committee’s recommendations and supports them.

Disclosure of interests

· Review the Local Authorities (Members Interests) Act 1965.

· 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.

Review of representation arrangements

· Amend the Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009 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 its membership.

Timing of polls for creation of a Māori ward or change of electoral system

· Amend the Local Electoral Act 2001 so that if a petition for a poll in respect of a resolution relating to Maori wards or change of electoral system is received by 21 February in the year prior to an election, a council has the discretion to conduct a poll in conjunction with the next triennial elections.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Kaipātiki Local Board:

a) approve the draft submission in Attachment “A” 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 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 made to the submission by the meeting and to make any other changes of a minor nature.

Horopaki

Context

9. 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:

The Justice Committee have opened for submissions on the Inquiry into the 2019 Local Elections and the Liquor Licensing Trust elections, and Recent Energy Trust Elections

The terms of reference for the inquiry 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.

10. Submissions are to be lodged by 29 February 2020.

11. 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.

12. The Committee’s report on its inquiry into the 2016 local elections was published on 10 December 2019 and the terms of reference for the current inquiry seek further submissions on key recommendations made by the committee.

13. This report firstly notes the responses to council’s submission to the inquiry into the 2016 local elections.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

14. The following analysis considers:

(i) matters raised in the Committee’s terms of reference regarding the 2019 elections:

· low voter turnout

· liquor licensing trusts

· the role of council staff

· disclosure of candidates or members with serious criminal convictions

· irregularities.

(ii) matters raised in the Committee’s terms of reference regarding its recommendations arising from its report on the 2016 local elections:

· Electoral Commission to be responsible for local elections

· same electoral system in all elections

· foreign interference.

(iii) additional matters for consideration by the Committee:

· disclosure of interests

· probity

· Māori wards

· review of representation arrangements

· timing of polls for creation of a Māori ward or change of electoral system.

Low voter turnout

15. Auckland Council has undertaken research into voter awareness in conjunction with the 2013, 2016 and 2019 elections. The following are highlights from the survey results that might be of assistance to the Committee in its investigation into low voter turnout.

16. After the 2019 elections a random sample of 1,871 Aucklanders were surveyed online. The survey tested respondents’ awareness of advertising and 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%

· “I forgot to vote” 11%

· “I did not know when voting finished, missed the deadline” 10%

· “I was away from home over the voting period” 8%

17. Of those who did not vote, 25% 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%

· “I forgot to send / complete it” 21%

· “I had other commitments during that time” 17%

· “I didn’t know anything about the candidates” 8%

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

· “Have online voting” 19%

· “It was my own fault” 8%

· “More advertising” 7%

· “Send reminders and notifications by post / email / txt” 7%

19. All respondents were asked whether they preferred online voting or postal voting if they had the choice. 66% preferred online voting and 26% preferred postal voting.

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

21. Research was also undertaken into the impact of different messaging on voter behaviour. The most effective message was a social norm message “74% of Aucklanders are planning to vote. Join them and vote this election!”. As compared with other messages such as a message of concern about low voter turnout, this had a more positive effect. This indicates election administrators should be cautious about negative messaging such as highlighting low voter turnout.

22. Survey results are being written up for publishing onto the council’s website knowledgeauckland.govt.nz.

23. Auckland Council held 50 one-stop events which provided people the ability to enrol (the Electoral Commission attended) and to cast special votes. Our experience of these could be described as “social voting”. A lot of people made use of them, enrolled then sat down to complete their voting documents. Typically, venues where the one-stop shops were held were packed with people wanting to vote.

24. Another project was “Vote Friday” through which business organisations gave staff time to fill out voting documents at work. 60 organisations, representing 55,000 employees, took part.

25. One of the answers to lifting turnout might include a multi-modal approach which does not seek to identify just one way for voting but develops options for voters. For example:

· Postal voting

· Advance voting

· One-stop shops

· Vote Friday

· Marae-based

· Ballot boxes at convenient locations such as supermarkets

· Online voting (once considered secure)

Liquor licensing trusts

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

27. Licensing trusts are established under the Sale and Supply of Alcohol Act 2012 (or the earlier Sale of Liquor Act 1989 and continued under the 2012 Act). The Law Commission, when it reviewed alcohol legislation prior to the 2012 Act, noted that licensing trusts were well supported by their communities and there was the ability for the community to petition for those trusts with monopoly powers to become competitive. It recommended no change to the law around licensing trusts.

28. Of the licensing trusts in the Auckland area, only the Portage and Waitakere Licensing Trusts have the sole right to establish and operate on-licences in hotels and taverns, and off-licences in their districts. The other licensing trusts are the Birkenhead, Mt Wellington and Wiri Licensing Trusts.

29. The aspect of licensing trusts that impinges on election administration the most relates to trust areas. Because these are not aligned with local government areas there are 26 more permutations of voting packs required in the Auckland Council area.

30. An example is the Birkenhead Licensing Trust. This was constituted in 1967 with its area being the whole of the then borough of Birkenhead. The area has not changed since then.

31. Any change to the western trust boundaries would have implications in terms of existing licences. However it may be possible to align the boundaries of the other three trusts, say with local board boundaries. Staff have not considered this in depth.

32. The aspect that affects overall voting is the complexity licensing trusts add to council elections.

33. The draft submission notes the boundary issue.

The role of council staff

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

(i) Ordinary requests for information from the public which are dealt with under the procedures in 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. Given that LGOIMA still applied in such situations and requests for information had to be met, responses to requests for information from candidates were published to the website so the information would be available to all candidates. Staff also considered it was useful for candidates and the electorate to have factual information rather than be misinformed.

(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 should not be involved in political debate.

35. Staff consider there is no need for legislative change in this respect.

Disclosure of candidates or members with serious criminal convictions

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

37. 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.

38. 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.

39. An alternative approach is to amend the Local Electoral Act 2001 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.

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

Irregularities that could have compromised the fairness of the elections

41. 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.

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

Inquiry into the 2016 local elections

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

44. A comprehensive table of the outcome of previous submissions is attached as Attachment B. 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.

45. 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.

46. A full list of the Committee’s additional recommendation is attached as Attachment C.

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

Electoral Commission to be responsible for local elections

48. 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.

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

· The arguments around centralisation vs decentralisation

· Efficiencies that could be created

· Issues that will need to be considered

· Effect on the voter experience

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

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

51. The council has previously submitted pointing out the complexity of our elections with electors having to also elect DHB members and Licensing Trust members. Our previous submission was that DHB elections should be moved to a different year.

52. The committee does not support moving DHB elections 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.

53. 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.

54. 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.

Foreign interference

55. 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 C.

56. The draft submission expresses support for these recommendations.

Disclosure of interests

57. The Committee’s report notes inconsistencies between the requirements for Parliamentarians and for local authority members in terms of declaring interests and makes recommendations that Government should introduce legislation setting out requirements for local authority members.

58. The existing legislation that applies to local authority members is the Local Authorities (Members Interests) Act 1965. This has been noted for some years as needing a complete 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.

59. 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.

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

Probity in the 2019 elections

61. 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.

62. 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.

Māori wards

63. The Justice Select Committee also considered the petition of Andrew Judd requesting that the legislative basis for establishing Māori wards is changed to become a part of a council’s representation review. A representation review addresses the number of councillors, whether they are elected by ward and, if so, how many per ward.

64. The Government members and National Party members of the committee had different views:

· National Party members of the committee do not consider that any change is needed in this area. We consider that it is appropriate to continue to treat the creation of separate Māori wards as a matter of community choice.

Government members of the committee recommend that the Government consider aligning the process of establishing Māori wards with all wards through representation review.

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

66. The draft submission notes the council’s current resolved position on Māori wards.

67. If the Governing Body wishes to consider establishing a Māori ward for the 2022 elections it must pass a resolution to that effect by 23 November 2020. This will be reported to the Governing Body closer to the time.

Issues arising from the review of representation arrangements

68. The review of representation arrangements is undertaken under the Local Electoral Act 2001 and is part of the overall election process.

69. 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.

70. 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. We made this point in our submission on the Local Electoral Matters Bill to the Justice Committee.

71. The set number of councillors was also noted as an issue when the Governing Body considered establishing a Māori ward. The Governing Body supported Māori wards in principle but did not proceed further because a member elected by a Māori ward would have to be one of the twenty members. The Governing Body wished to have discretion to increase the number of councillors.

72. 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.

Timing of polls on STV or Māori ward

73. The current provisions in the Local Electoral Act 2001 (“LEA”) 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. The LEA requires the chief executive to advise the electoral officer as soon as practicable once a valid petition is received. If received by 21 February in the year prior to the election, the electoral officer must conduct the poll within 89 days of receiving notice from the chief executive.

74. In the case of Auckland Council, conducting a standalone poll of over 1 million electors costs over $1 million.

75. On the other hand, the council has the discretion to initiate its own poll and may choose to hold a poll in conjunction with an election, which would lower the cost.

76. 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

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

78. It is also noted that an election consumes a large amount of paper – with each elector being posted a candidate booklet and voting document. There were 1,065,383 electors for the Auckland Council 2019 elections.

79. The global print and paper industry accounts for about 1% of global carbon dioxide emissions (though this is minor as compared to 69% of greenhouse gases from the energy and transportation industries).

80. Following an election, voting documents are kept by the district court for 21 days then shredded and sent for recycling.

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

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

82. Staff liaised with council-controlled organisations during the pre-election period in regard to 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

83. 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.

84. A presentation was given to the local board chairs forum and some local boards used their urgent decision-making processes to provide feedback.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

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

86. During the 2019 elections there was engagement with Māori through marae (*????). Staff were also aware of an initiative at a marae on Waiheke Island to hold a voting event, though there was some concern by others in the community around normal election protocols such as ballot secrecy and offering inducements.

87. The matter of Māori wards was considered by the Committee which was divided on including such wards in the existing reviews of representation arrangements which councils conduct. A deterrent to establishing a Māori ward is the potential cost of a referendum, which would be over $1 million for Auckland Council. The cost could be reduced if the legislation was changed to allow a council to hold a referendum in conjunction with the upcoming triennial election.

88. The IMSB’s previous recommendations to the Governing Body on Māori wards were:

“That the council establishes one or more Māori wards for the purpose of electing members of the council.

If a valid petition was received, that the council conduct a referendum on its own initiative in conjunction with the upcoming election in 2019

The Independent Māori Statutory Board in Auckland was created by an act of Parliament; the Board supports having both a Māori ward and an Independent Māori Statutory Board, not one or the other.

The Board considers that Māori wards 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. That identifying the cost of $1m for a referendum as a risk is a poor way to consider this opportunity for a Māori ward/s. It perpetuates the misunderstanding that the general public have about Māori wards which is that it is a race-based approach to becoming an elected member to councils and therefore ratepayers funds should not be used for referendums of this type. It also perpetuates the ignorance that the general public have about the challenges and difficulties Māori face being elected onto councils due largely to the low turnout of Māori voters for local government elections.”

89. The Governing Body resolved:

That the Governing Body:

a) receive the report and 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.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

90. 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 if a referendum is required to be held as the result of a petition, thereby reducing costs.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

91. 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.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

92. 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 ⇩	19 February 2020 - Kaipātiki Local Board Business Meeting - Draft Submission to inquiry into 2019 local elections	69
b ⇩	19 February 2020 - Kaipātiki Local Board Business Meeting - 2016 Submissions	81
c ⇩	19 February 2020 - Kaipātiki Local Board Business Meeting - 2016 additional recommendations	85

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Warwick McNaughton - Principal Advisor - Democracy Services

Authorisers

Rose Leonard - Executive Officer

Phil Wilson - Governance Director

Stephen Town - Chief Executive

Eric Perry - Relationship Manager

Chairperson	John Gillon
Deputy Chairperson	Danielle Grant, JP
Members	Paula Gillon
	Ann Hartley, JP
	Melanie Kenrick
	Cindy Schmidt
	Andrew Shaw
	Adrian Tyler

Authors	Jacinda Short - Democracy Advisor - Kaipatiki
Authorisers	Eric Perry - Relationship Manager

Authors	Paul Edwards - Senior Local Board Advisor - Kaipatiki
Authorisers	Eric Perry - Relationship Manager

Authors	Daniel Han - Local Board Advisor
Authorisers	Eric Perry - Relationship Manager