Agenda of Upper Harbour Local Board

The Chairperson opened the meeting and welcomed those present.

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

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

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

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

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

4 Confirmation of Minutes

That the Upper Harbour Local Board:

a) confirm the ordinary minutes of its meeting, held on Thursday, 5 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 Upper Harbour Local Board. This means that details relating to deputations can be included in the published agenda. Total speaking time per deputation is ten minutes or as resolved by the meeting.

8.1 North Harbour Sports Council update

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To update board members on the status of the North Harbour Sports Council.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. David Gibson, CEO Harbour Rugby, and John Hunt, CEO Harbour Basketball, will be in attendance to provide an update on their plans for the coming year. They would also like to discuss issues around sport and recreation relevant to the Upper Harbour Local Board area and regionally.

3. The purpose of the sports council is to:

· act as an advisory group to Harbour Sport, identifying local and sub-regional issues

· speak as a collective voice for sport in the harbour region on behalf of the member organisations

· strengthen engagement with local boards and Auckland Council and be their acknowledged ‘voice of sport’

· support Harbour Sport to ensure that sports organisations know about local board and Auckland Council processes

· support Harbour Sport to keep local boards and council updated on the needs of sport and how they can best be met utilising a collaborate approach when possible

· be adaptable to all the above as the landscape changes.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Upper Harbour Local Board:

a) receive the deputation from David Gibson and John Hunt representing the North Harbour Sports Council and thank them for their attendance and presentation.

Attachments

a North Harbour Sports Council presentation................ 165

8.2 Harbour Sport update

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To provide board members with an update on their activities and programmes.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. Mike Bishop, CEO Harbour Sport, will be in attendance to update board members on their achievements over the past year.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Upper Harbour Local Board:

a) receive the deputation from Mike Bishop from Harbour Sport and thank him for his attendance and presentation.

Attachments

a Harbour Sport presentation......................................... 175

8.3 Herald Island Environmental Group: Kowhai Beach Reserve

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To highlight and discuss the major coastal erosion at Kowhai Beach Reserve, Herald Island.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. Jan Diprose, Chair of the Herald Island Environmental Group, will be in attendance to raise the issue of coastal erosion at Kowhai Beach Reserve. She is concerned that, should this issue not be mitigated with a sea wall, it will result in the eventual loss of this reserve.

3. On the advice of council staff, the group has measured the rate of erosion over the past two years and would like to present this data to the board, requesting that the board consider this project in its three-year planning process.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Upper Harbour Local Board:

a) receive the deputation from Jan Diprose from the Herald Island Environmental Group and thank her for her attendance and presentation.

Attachments

a Kowhai Beach Reserve coastal erosion memo.......... 195

b Kowhai Beach Reserve coastal erosion presentation 197

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

(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

(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

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

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

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Upper Harbour Local Board open unconfirmed minutes - 5 December 2019	11
b ⇩	Upper Harbour Local Board minutes attachments - 5 December 2019	29

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Regional Facilities Auckland overview presentation	37
b ⇩	Regional Facilities Auckland quarter 1 performance report for the period ending 30 September 2019	85

Upper Harbour Local Board

20 February 2020

Appointment of LGNZ Lead and nominee for LGNZ Conference 2020

File No.: CP2020/01015

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 Upper Harbour 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 Development

Authorisers

Louise Mason - GM Local Board Services

Eric Perry - Relationship Manager

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	DRAFT Upper Harbour Local Board input into the Auckland Council submission on He Kura Koiora i hokia - a discussion document on a proposed National Policy Statement for Indigenous Biodiversity	105

Upper Harbour Local Board

20 February 2020

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

File No.: CP2020/01344

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, Liquor Licensing Trust Elections and Recent Energy Trust Elections.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. In December 2019, the Justice 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 notes the outcome of submissions made to the 2016 inquiry, 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) review of representation arrangements and council’s desire to have discretion to review the number of councillors

(ii) timing of a poll if one is required as the result of a petition.

6. A draft submission is attached as Attachment A.

7. 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 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 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 Māori 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 Upper Harbour Local Board:

a) provide feedback to the Governing Body meeting on 27 February 2020 on the Inquiry into the 2019 Local Elections and Liquor Licensing Trust Elections, and Recent Energy Trust Elections.

Horopaki

Context

8. Following each local and parliamentary election, a select committee of Parliament, the Justice 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.

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

10. 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.

11. 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.

12. 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

13. 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

14. 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.

15. After the 2019 elections, a random sample of 1871 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 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.

16. 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.

17. 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.

18. All respondents were asked whether they preferred online voting or postal voting if they had the choice. Sixty-six per cent preferred online voting and 26 per cent preferred postal voting.

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

20. Research was also undertaken into the impact of different messaging on voter behaviour. The most effective message was a social norm message “74 per cent 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.

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

22. Auckland Council held 50 one-stop events which provided people the ability to enrol (the Electoral Commission attended) and to cast special votes. Council’s 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.

23. Another project was ‘Vote Friday’ through which business organisations gave staff time to fill out voting documents at work. Sixty organisations, representing 55,000 employees, took part.

24. 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

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

26. 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.

27. Of the licensing trusts in the Auckland area, only the Portage and Waitākere 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.

28. 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.

29. 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.

30. 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.

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

32. The draft submission notes the boundary issue.

The role of council staff

33. 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.

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

Disclosure of candidates or members with serious criminal convictions

35. 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.

36. 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.

37. 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.

38. 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.

39. 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

40. The term ‘irregularity’ has a legal meaning – if, as the result of an inquiry into an election, a judge determines there was an irregularity that materially affected the result, the judge may determine the election to be void.

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

Inquiry into the 2016 local elections

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

43. 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.

44. 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.

45. A full list of the committee’s additional recommendation is attached as Attachment C.

46. 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

47. The options for the Electoral 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.

48. 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.

49. 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.

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

50. The council has previously submitted pointing out the complexity of its elections with electors having to also elect District Health Board (DHB) members and Licensing Trust members. Our previous submission was that DHB elections should be moved to a different year.

51. 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.

52. 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.

53. 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

54. 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.

55. The draft submission expresses support for these recommendations.

Disclosure of interests

56. 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.

57. 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.

58. 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.

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

Probity in the 2019 elections

60. 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.

61. 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

62. 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.

63. 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.

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

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

66. 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

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

68. 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.

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

70. 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 20 members. The Governing Body wished to have discretion to increase the number of councillors.

71. 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

72. 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.

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

74. 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.

75. 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

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

77. 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.

78. 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).

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

80. 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

81. 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

82. 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.

83. 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

84. 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).

85. 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.

86. 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.

87. The Independent Māori Statutory Board’s (IMSB) 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.”

88. 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

89. 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

90. 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

91. 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 inquiry into 2019 Local Elections	119
b ⇩	Outcome of Auckland Council’s submissions to the Justice Select Committee’s Inquiry into the 2016 Local Elections	131
c ⇩	Further recommendations made to Government by the Justice Select Committee in its Inquiry into the 2016 Local Elections	135

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Warwick McNaughton - Principal Advisor - Democracy Services

Authorisers

Rose Leonard - Executive Officer

Phil Wilson - Governance Director

Stephen Town - Chief Executive

Eric Perry - Relationship Manager

Upper Harbour Local Board

20 February 2020

Auckland Transport monthly update - February 2020

File No.: CP2020/00816

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To provide an update on transport-related matters of specific application and interest to the Upper Harbour Local Board and its community, and an update on the status of the Local Board Transport Capital Fund (LBTCF).

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. Progress on the board’s LBTCF funded projects is noted in this report. The local board has $2,291,199 remaining in its LBTCF.

3. Included is a list of the public consultations sent to the local board from November 2019 to January 2020 for comment and the decisions of AT’s Traffic Control Committee (TCC).

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Upper Harbour Local Board:

a) receive the monthly update report from Auckland Transport for February 2020.

Horopaki

Context

4. AT is responsible for all of Auckland’s transport services, excluding state highways. AT reports on a monthly basis to local boards, as set out in its Local Board Engagement Plan. This reporting commitment acknowledges the important engagement role local boards play within the governance of Auckland on behalf of their local communities.

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

· be safe

· not impede network efficiency

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

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Rame Road project

6. At the September 2019 business meeting, the board requested that AT put the Rame Road project on hold pending receipt of the results of the public consultation on the project (resolution number UH/2019/113).

7. At a workshop on 19 December 2019, AT presented the local board with consultation feedback on the Rame Road project. A summary of the feedback follows:

Update on Upper Harbour LBTCF projects

8. The following table lists funds allocated to LBTCF projects during the last term and carried forward into the 2019-2022 term for completion:

ID	Project name	Unspent allocation from previous term	Project update
552	Rame Road upgrade	$1,421,506	This project is on hold until the local board determines otherwise.
565	Kyle Road footpaths	$520,879	The project is currently still in the design phase. At this stage, it is not possible to confirm a definitive construction timeline for the project. There is still preliminary design, consultation and consenting to be completed, and then final design. Works will then be coordinated with the adjacent subdivision work which affects both Schnapper Rock Road and Kyle Road, and also a separate proposed road rehabilitation project by AT in Kyle Road itself. The logistics of combining all three projects remain complex but will become clearer as works progress.
635	Upper Harbour Drive junction	$43,698	AT is scheduled for a workshop in March 2020 to update the local board on progress.
692	Gills Road footpath extension	$38,955	AT is scheduled for a workshop in March 2020 to update the local board on progress.
		$2,025,038
FUNDS AVAILABLE TO BE ALLOCATED IN THE 2019-2022 TERM
	2019/20	$0	Already allocated by previous board
	2020/21	$763,733
	2021/22	$763,733
	2022/23	$763,733
		$2,291,199
Total funds available in 2019-2022 term			$4,316,237
Amount committed to date on projects approved for design and/or construction			$2,025,038
Remaining budget			$2,291,199

Community Safety Fund

9. The Community Safety Fund (CSF) was established in the 2018 Regional Land Transport Plan and it allocated $20 million for local initiatives in road safety; $5 million in the 2019/2020 financial year and $15 million in the 2020/2021 financial year. It is apportioned to local board areas by a formula focused on numbers of deaths and serious injuries (DSI).

10. The Upper Harbour Local Board was allocated $800,168 from the CSF over two years. The board developed a list of safety projects which were prioritised after an assessment and a rough order of costs were established.

11. Currently projects are being further assessed and design work is in progress. It is expected that most projects will be delivered in year two of the programme.

12. AT expects to report back on the progress of these projects in the first quarter of 2020.

CSF project update

Location	Update
Gills Road footpath extension	AT’s Capital Project Control Group approved $1.3 million (to add to the local board’s allocation of $700,000) for the footpath works on Gills Road on 26 September 2019. AT has appointed a consultant to undertake the detailed design. The timeline for this work is still to be done and AT will be providing a progress update at a workshop in March 2020.

Location

Update

Gills Road footpath extension

AT’s Capital Project Control Group approved $1.3 million (to add to the local board’s allocation of $700,000) for the footpath works on Gills Road on 26 September 2019.

AT has appointed a consultant to undertake the detailed design.

The timeline for this work is still to be done and AT will be providing a progress update at a workshop in March 2020.

AT’s Speed Management Bylaw

13. At the end of October 2019, after consideration of almost 12,000 public submissions and reviewing technical reports, AT’s board approved a bylaw which will reduce speed limits on around 10 per cent of Auckland’s urban and rural roads.

14. The greatest impact of the speed limit reductions will be on high-risk rural roads, town centre streets and Auckland’s central business district.

15. Under the new Safe Speed Limits Bylaw, there are three important changes to speed limits:

· Following public feedback, most of Auckland’s city centre will have a speed limit of 30km/h (the current 10km/h combined pedestrian and vehicle zones will remain) apart from Hobson, Fanshawe and Nelson Streets which will be 40km/h with engineering treatments to protect vulnerable road users.

· Fourteen town centres such as Orewa, Te Atatu South and Westgate, will also have 30km/h speed limits.

· Around 700km of rural roads across the Auckland region will have new lower speed limits. The board decided to leave existing speed limits on 20 roads, mostly in rural areas in the south.

Vector and AT sign memorandum of understanding

16. On 20 January 2020, AT and Vector announced a memorandum of understanding (MoU) to explore the impacts of full implementation.

17. The MoU is a direct response to AT’s Low Emission Bus Roadmap (published in late 2018) that outlined its commitment to have all new buses in Auckland being electric from 2025, with the whole fleet fully electric by 2040.

18. A faster transition to electric buses requires a detailed assessment of the future demand on the electricity network.

19. Two reports will be produced as part of the MoU, the first exploring a route and service profile which will model the electricity demand that a fully electrified bus fleet will require. The second report will provide guidance on the electricity network infrastructure upgrades required at each bus depot as well as likely timings and costs. These two reports are expected to be delivered by June 2020.

20. Buses make up 87 per cent of the carbon emissions produced from public transport, so converting them from diesel to electric will also be a significant step towards meeting New Zealand’s 2050 zero-carbon emissions goal.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

21. AT engages closely with council to develop strategy, actions and measures to support the outcomes sought by the Auckland Plan 2050, the Auckland Climate Action Plan and council’s priorities.

22. AT’s core role is to provide attractive alternatives to private vehicle travel, reducing the carbon footprint of its own operations and, to the extent feasible, that of the contracted public transport network.

23. To this end, AT’s Statement of Intent contains three performance measures:

Measure	2019/2020	2020/2021	2021/2022
Number of buses in the Auckland bus fleet classified as low emission	5	25	55
Reduction in CO2e (emissions) generated annually by AT corporate operations (from 2017/18 baseline)	7%	9%	11%
Percentage of AT streetlights that are energy efficient LED	56%	66%	76%

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

24. The impact of information in this report is confined to AT and does not impact on other parts of the council group. Any engagement with other parts of the council group will be carried out on an individual project basis.

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

Local impacts and local board views

Local board issues under investigation

25. The local board have requested the following issues be investigated and these are still under investigation:

· 88 Aberley Road bus closure and 883 bus routing

· Greenhithe – road safety concerns

· Buckley Avenue, Hobsonville – safety concerns

· Scott Point community meeting 8 September 2019 – concerns raised

· Schnapper Rock Road – request for the installation of safety measures

· corner of Te Kawau Pass and William Pitcher Place, Greenhithe – roading issue

Gills Road bus

26. When the new bus network for the north was implemented, expected roadworks in the area meant that there was the potential for disruption to this bus route. This would lead to buses in the area being delayed and the service being unreliable.

27. Given that this roadwork project has yet to commence, AT will need look at when this bus route can be introduced. AT hopes to start the service in 2020/2021, but this will be subject to available budget.

Local board workshops

28. AT attended a workshop in December 2019 to update the board on the following topics:

· Medallion Drive project

· Rame Road project

· NZTA works

· introduction to how AT supports elected members and an outline of the new process for progressing LBTCF projects.

Consultation documents on proposed improvements

29. Consultation documents for the proposals summarised below have been provided to the Upper Harbour Local Board for its feedback. After consultation, AT considers the feedback received and determines whether to proceed further with the proposal as consulted on or proceed with an amended proposal if changes are considered necessary:

· proposal to install a bus stop and shelter at 21 Oakway Drive, Schnapper Rock

· proposal for parking improvements on Lorikeet Place, Unsworth Heights

· proposal to install broken yellow lines on Schnapper Rock Road, Greenhithe

· proposal to improve road safety in Ceres Court, Rosedale

· proposal to install ‘no stopping at all times (NSAAT) road markings along the western kerb and the northern end of Rata Place, Albany

· proposal to improve pedestrian safety on Oteha Valley Road, Albany.

AT’s Traffic Control Committee (TCC) report

30. Decisions of the TCC during the month of November and December 2019 affecting the Upper Harbour Local Board area are listed in the following table:

Date	Street/s and suburb	Report type	Restriction	Decision
1 Nov 19	Apollo Drive, Rosedale	Permanent traffic and parking changes combined	NSAAT / keep clear	APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS
1 Nov 19	Corinthian Drive / Oracle Drive, Albany	Permanent traffic and parking changes combined	NSAAT / bus stop	CARRIED
1 Nov 19	Oakway Drive / English Oak Drive, Schnapper Rock	Permanent traffic and parking changes combined	NSAAT / bus stop / bus shelter / give-way control / traffic island	CARRIED
1 Nov 19	Dale Road / Kopuru Road / Boyes Avenue / Roundel Crescent / Spriggs Lane / Pamu Road / Harewood Street, Whenuapai	Permanent traffic and parking changes combined	NSAAT / traffic island / road hump / footpath / give-way control / flush median	APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS
1 Dec 19	Aberley Road, Schnapper Rock	Permanent traffic and parking changes	NSAAT / bus stop / bus shelter	CARRIED
1 Dec 19	Scott Road / Nugget Avenue / Clark Road / Walter Merton Road / David Carnegie Road / Sidney Wallingford Road / Malcolm Calder Road, Hobsonville	Permanent traffic and parking changes	Lane arrow marking / cycle path / NSAAT / angle parking / road hump / give-way control	APPROVED IN PRINCIPLE
1 Dec19	Hobsonville Road / Brigham Creek Road, Hobsonville	Permanent traffic and parking changes	Footpath / flush median / NSAAT / edge line / traffic island	WITHDRAWN
1 Dec 19	Lorikeet Place, Unsworth Heights	Permanent traffic and parking changes	NSAAT / angle parking	CARRIED

31. AT’s major capital works affecting the Upper Harbour Local Board area are listed in the following table:

Major capital works in the Upper Harbour area – update as at 6 February 2020
Gills Road Link project and Dairy Flat Highway / The Avenue project	The Gills Road link and Dairy Flat Highway / The Avenue projects will be strategically re-evaluated, taking a more holistic view of the issues and opportunities to determine the most appropriate improvements required. This will also include the Albany village area.
Medallion Drive link project	The Medallion Drive link has been confirmed and is expected to be completed by the middle of 2021. Design has been completed and the construction phase will start in February 2020 and will take 18 months. More information about the Medallion Drive link project can be found at: https://at.govt.nz/projects-roadworks/albany-developments/medallion-drive-link/
Pedestrian signal on Oteha Valley Road	AT has completed external consultation. The project is in detailed design phase and construction is expected to be completed by July 2020.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

32. The decision to receive this monthly update report has no impacts or opportunities for Māori. Any engagement with Māori or consideration of impacts and opportunities will be carried out on an individual project basis.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

33. The decision to receive this monthly update report has no financial implications.

34. The following table gives the LBTCF financial summary for the Upper Harbour Local Board:

Upper Harbour LBTCF financial summary
Total funds available in current political term	$4,315,403
Amount committed to date on projects approved for design and/or construction	$2,025,038
Remaining budget	$2,291,199

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

35. The decision to receive this monthly update report has no risks and mitigations.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

36. AT will provide a further update report to the Upper Harbour Local Board in March 2020.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Owena Schuster – Elected Member Relationship Manager, Auckland Transport

Authorisers

Jonathan Anyon – Elected Member Relationship Team Manager, Auckland Transport

Eric Perry - Relationship Manager

Chairperson	Margaret Miles, QSM, JP
Deputy Chairperson	Lisa Whyte
Members	Anna Atkinson
	Uzra Casuri Balouch, JP
	Nicholas Mayne
	Brian Neeson, JP

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Upper Harbour Local Board record of workshop - 28 November 2019	149
b ⇩	Upper Harbour Local Board record of workshop - 12 December 2019	151
c ⇩	Upper Harbour Local Board record of workshop - 19 December 2019	153
d ⇩	Upper Harbour Local Board record of workshop - 30 January 2020	155

Author	Cindy Lynch - Democracy Advisor
Authoriser	Eric Perry - Relationship Manager

Author	Rita Bento-Allpress - Senior Local Board Advisor Upper Harbour
Authoriser	Eric Perry - Relationship Manager