Agenda of Emergency Committee

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.

3 Confirmation of Minutes

That the Emergency Committee:

a) confirm the ordinary minutes of its meeting, held on Thursday, 7 May 2020, including the confidential section, as a true and correct record.

4 Petitions

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

5 Public Input

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

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

6 Local Board Input

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

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

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

7 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.”

Emergency Committee

14 May 2020

ATAP 2020 Update and Terms of Reference

File No.: CP2020/05840

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To seek endorsement of the rationale, scope and proposed process for the Auckland Transport Alignment Project 2020 update.

2. To seek endorsement on the draft Terms of Reference for the update.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

The report would normally go before the Planning Committee, however, in light of COVID-19, it must now be considered by the Emergency Committee

3. The Auckland Transport Alignment Project (ATAP) was last updated in April 2018. There is a need to refresh the 2018 package in light of a number of emerging issues:

· changes to the funding baseline due to the impacts of COVID-19 on existing revenue streams; any resulting economic stimulus packages introduced by central government; and the implications of the pre-COVID-19 New Zealand Upgrade Programme

· climate change and mode shift as increasingly important priorities for Auckland Council and central government that need to be better reflected in the transport package

· the need to provide strategic direction for upcoming statutory planning processes, such as the Long-term Plan (LTP) and Regional Land Transport Plan (RLTP), particularly for the last three years of the first decade (2028-31) which were not part of ATAP 2018

· the need to consider the transport investment needs of emerging brownfield and greenfield spatial priorities.

4. The ATAP 2020 update will develop a prioritised indicative investment package based on shared Auckland Council and central government objectives for transport, including priorities from ATAP 2018 around enabling quality compact growth, improving travel choices and access, increasing sustainability and resilience, eliminating road harm, and ensuring value for money.

5. In addition to the ATAP 2018 priorities the update will also focus on climate change, mode shift, emerging spatial priorities and post COVID-19 recovery.

6. The initial focus for the update will be to identify the available funding envelope. The project prioritisation process cannot begin until this work is complete. The revenue uncertainty caused by COVID-19 will mean that different funding scenarios will be required, ranging from no additional Crown funding (i.e. revenue holes are not plugged) to additional Crown funding to assist with economic stimulus.

7. There is a need to ensure that any transport stimulus packages introduced by central government to assist with the recessionary impacts of COVID-19 are consistent with the shared government and council objectives for transport, as opposed to focusing only on economic recovery and job stimulation.

8. The update will not impact on the delivery of projects that are already underway or committed, which comprise a significant proportion of the existing 10-year programme (2018-28). It will also not remove council’s statutory decision-making responsibilities in the development of the LTP, or Auckland Transport’s responsibilities in the development of the RLTP.

9. Phase 1 of the update will focus in detail on the current first decade (2021-31) and is expected to be completed by August 2020. Phase 2 will focus on decades two and three (2031-51) at a more indicative level and will be completed at a later date.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Emergency Committee:

a) endorse the rationale, scope and proposed process of the Auckland Transport Alignment Project (ATAP) 2020 update

b) endorse the draft Terms of Reference for the Auckland Transport Alignment Project (ATAP) 2020 update

c) delegate authority to the Mayor, Deputy Mayor, and Chair of the Planning Committee to provide political oversight for the Auckland Transport Alignment Project (ATAP) 2020 update.

Horopaki

Context

Rationale for the update

10. The first Auckland Transport Alignment Project (ATAP) in 2015 aligned the priorities of both Auckland Council and central government. Initial work developed a long-term strategic approach for the development of Auckland’s transport system.

11. ATAP was last updated in April 2018 and includes a $29 billion ten-year investment package. There is a need to refresh the 2018 package in light of a number of emerging considerations. These include:

a) the significant impacts of COVID-19 on Auckland Council and central government revenue streams, taking into account any economic stimulus packages announced by government within the timeframes of the ATAP 2020 update

b) the recent New Zealand Upgrade Programme (NZUP) of transport investment in Auckland

c) climate change and mode shift as increasingly significant policy considerations for both Auckland Council and central government

d) the need to provide direction for the upcoming round of statutory planning processes including Regional Land Transport Programme (RLTP), council’s Long-term Plan (LTP), the Government Policy Statement on Land Transport (GPS), and the National Land Transport Programme (NTLP)

e) emerging spatial priorities.

Project scope and process

12. The ATAP 2020 update (the update) takes a collaborative partnership approach aimed at agreeing an indicative prioritised investment package for Auckland. The prioritisation process is defined by the shared central government and Auckland Council objectives for transport in Auckland, which are:

· enabling and supporting Auckland’s growth and the quality compact urban approach

· accelerating better travel choices for Auckland

· better connecting people, places, goods and services

· improving resilience and sustainability of the transport system

· making Auckland’s transport system safe by eliminating harm to people

· ensuring value for money across Auckland’s transport system through well targeted investment choices.

13. In addition to the objectives above, the focus of the update will be on climate change, mode shift, emerging brownfield and greenfield priorities, and post COVID-19 recovery. The update will also take into account broader priorities outlined in relevant statutory documents such as the Auckland Plan and the draft GPS.

14. The initial focus of the update is to identify the available funding envelope. The process of prioritising projects and programmes for possible inclusion in the indicative package can only commence once available funding levels are determined. There are a number of key considerations that will impact upon this calculation:

i) the impacts of COVID-19 on existing revenue streams and the implications of any economic stimulus packages announced by the government within the timeframes of the update

ii) the implications of the NZUP:

· will the $1.6 billion of decade one ATAP funding freed up by the announcement be available for reallocation in Auckland?

· what consequential investments will be required as a result of the announcement?

iii) pending decisions on significant investments such as Drury and City Centre to Mangere

iv) cost escalation of existing projects

v) the portion of the existing programme that is already committed (and therefore not available for reallocation).

15. A range of investment package scenarios will be developed and evaluated to illustrate potential trade-offs between agreed objectives set out under paragraphs 12 and 13. These will be based on the best available knowledge of expected funding levels, which have become increasingly uncertain as a result of COVID-19.

16. The update includes two phases:

· phase 1 of the update will cover in detail the first decade (2021-31) with particular emphasis on the first three years, including the impacts of COVID-19 and any central government stimulus. This work is critical to informing the LTP 2021-31 and the RLTP 2021-31

· phase 2 of the update will focus on decades two and three (2031-51) at a more indicative level. Identifying priority projects for the outer decades provides a long-term approach to transport investment that supports climate change and mode shift outcomes.

17. The update will not undermine the delivery of projects that are either already underway or have a strong level of commitment (however that is defined). These projects constitute a significant portion of the overall decade one package.

18. The proposed ATAP 2020 process and workstream details are captured under section 5.4 of the draft Terms of Reference (TOR) (Attachment A) as developed by the ATAP Governance Group

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Funding uncertainty

19. COVID-19 and the resulting travel restrictions have led to significant uncertainty around traditional council and government revenue streams. Anticipated Auckland Council revenue from public transport fares, parking and enforcement, and the Regional Fuel Tax (RFT) have decreased substantially and may continue to do so. National Land Transport Fund (NTLF) revenue from fuel excise duty and road user charges has also declined.

20. The ATAP 2020 update will reflect this revenue uncertainty by assessing different funding scenarios in the development of a funding baseline. These scenarios include:

· no additional Crown funding provided (i.e. revenue losses are not plugged)

· Crown funding provided only to plug revenue losses

· additional Crown funding provided to assist with economic stimulus

21. More work is required in relation to the impacts of including Mill Road and Penlink in the NZUP. RFT revenues were previously earmarked to part fund these projects. However, as a result of the NZUP announcements both will now be entirely funded by central government. More work is required to assess the quantum of any RFT revenue ‘released’ as a result of this and whether it exceeds any forecast reduction in the RFT arising from COVID-19 related reductions in travel demand.

22. If, as a result of this work, it is determined that some RFT revenue is available to for reallocation to other projects it is likely that any such proposal will need to follow the process set out in the Land Transport Management Act (2003), including the requirement that the public be consulted on the proposed changes.

Post COVID-19 economic stimulus packages

23. Central government is developing a series of economic stimulus packages to respond to the recessionary impacts of COVID-19. Work has started with the identification of shovel-ready projects, led by Crown Infrastructure Partners. Auckland Council has provided a list of 73 projects for consideration, many of which are already on Auckland Council’s books.

24. There are considerable benefits in providing an integrated perspective of what Auckland needs from a transport stimulus package, as opposed to focusing only on economic recovery and job stimulation.

25. As such, any transport projects proposed for Auckland as part of the recovery process should also be consistent with the agreed Auckland Council and central government priorities outlined in paragraphs 12 and 13 above. This is particularly pertinent for goals around mode shift and climate change which require a long-term approach to transport investment to achieve envisaged outcomes.

26. The implications for the available funding envelope of including any ATAP projects within the government funded stimulus package would need to be assessed as part of the update.

Terms of Reference

27. Staff propose an update to the ATAP 2018 TOR so that they reflect the drivers underlying the ATAP 2020 update, the priorities of Auckland Council and government for transport in Auckland, and the focus of its workstreams.

28. The TOR also offer an efficient and timely means by which the political sponsors of ATAP 2020 can provide their direction for the process. As such, staff recommend that, in line with what occurred previously, a group consisting of the Mayor, Deputy Mayor and Chair of the Planning Committee receive delegated authority to provide political direction to staff throughout the ATAP process. The final ATAP report would be provided to the Planning Committee for its approval. The TOR is attached to this report for endorsement by the committee.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

29. Transport-related emissions account for about 43 percent of Auckland’s total emissions, with 90 percent of these relating to on-road travel. Reducing Auckland’s transport emissions will go a long way towards reducing Auckland’s overall emissions.

30. Reflecting emerging shared priorities by Auckland Council and central government on climate change, the update includes an added emphasis on climate change mitigation and adaptation, with a primary focus on the former given:

i) Auckland Council’s political commitment to a 1.5-degree Celsius-compliant emissions pathway

ii) Central government’s enactment of the Zero Carbon Act.

31. The update includes a climate change prioritisation workstream that will provide advice on the relative merits of the investment programmes from a climate perspective<Enter text>

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

32. Auckland Transport is a critical partner in the ATAP 2020 update and has played an integral role in agreeing its objectives, scope and approach.

33. The ATAP 2020 will develop an updated 10-year programme which will inform the RLTP. However, the update does not replace the statutory decision-making responsibilities of Auckland Transport regarding the activities within the RLTP, which will be consulted on publicly.

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

Local impacts and local board views

34. The updated ATAP will have significant local impacts not just in terms of the timing and location of specific projects throughout Auckland, but also as a result of its recommended strategic direction.

35. ATAP, including the updated ATAP 2020 package, does not have statutory standing. As such there are no legislatively prescribed processes for its development or the means by which stakeholders are consulted. Conversely, the statutory documents through which ATAP’s strategic direction will be delivered, the LTP and the RLTP, are subject to defined decision-making processes that allow for local board input. Both of these planning documents are currently under development.

36. Local boards will also have opportunities to input into the development and implementation of specific projects, depending on their location, through standard business case, project design and consenting processes.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

37. Māori benefit from forecast improvements in access, safety, environmental outcomes and transport choice in previous ATAP packages. The added emphasis of ATAP 2020 on climate change, mode shift and transport integration with emerging spatial priorities will continue to benefit Māori:

i) reduced transport emissions will impact positively on Māori. Māori are over-represented living in areas that have been found to be most vulnerable and least adaptable to the impacts of climate change. Additionally, Māori have higher exposure to air pollutants than other ethnic groups due to pre-existing social inequities, resulting in higher rates of chronic respiratory and cardiovascular disease

ii) mode shift reduces car dependency, which can take up a large proportion of household budget. Mode shift policies need to be supplemented by measures aimed at increasing affordability to ensure equitable access for all, including Māori

iii) integrating transport investment with emerging spatial priorities enable the development of affordable housing that provides transport choice.

38. More needs to be done to ensure strong representation from mana whenua and mataawaka in the development of transport investment in Tāmaki Makaurau. The ATAP Governance Group recognises that the role of Māori as Treaty partners needs to be better reflected in ATAP. In addition, mātauranga Māori (Māori knowledge) provides an important contribution to sustainable development, and there is an expectation from Māori that any infrastructure development should be informed by Te Ao Māori (the Māori worldview).

39. All members of the ATAP Governance Group have reinforced their respective organisations’ commitment to partner with Māori on all projects within the ATAP programme. As of February 2020, the Governance Group has been tasked with seeking advice from the Mana Whenua Kaitiaki Forum on partnership with Māori at the ATAP governance level. This process is ongoing.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

40. Transport is Auckland Council’s largest area of investment, with transport funding decisions made through LTP and Annual Plan processes. ATAP is a non-statutory document that helps to inform these funding decisions, as well as guide transport funding decisions made by Auckland Transport, central government and the New Zealand Transport Agency (NZTA).

41. Greater alignment between council and the government on transport should translate into a higher level of NZTA co-funding for activities funded by Auckland Council. This means that more will be able to be delivered for the same level of Auckland Council investment. To this end the recently released draft Government Policy Statement on Land Transport 2021 reaffirms the government’s commitment to ATAP.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

42. The following risks are identified:

Risk	Mitigation
Risk that projects that have bigger short-term stimulus benefits will be prioritised over other projects that deliver on agreed ATAP outcomes	Projects will be assessed on stimulus benefits and other key ATAP objectives. The governance group will resolve any differences in priority between stimulus proposals from different participating organisation.
Risk that there will be momentum loss for ATAP projects that are already underway as a result of the update	The update is not intended as a ‘wholesale’ review of the ATAP 2018 decade one (2018-28) agreed package of projects. The majority of the projects that are currently part of the programme are either underway or there is some commitment to their delivery. It is recognised that continuing uninterrupted delivery of the current programme is critical.
Risk that there will be loss of democratic input to Auckland’s transport investment priorities as a result of the update	The update will both provide guidance for, and be informed by, the development of the LTP and RLTP. But it does not replace the statutory decision-making responsibilities of council in relation to the LTP, nor the well-established processes for council’s input into the RLTP.
Risk that the update will not be able to be completed within the tight timeline required to meet government’s elections deadlines, particularly in light of the COVID-19 disruption.	The update has been separated into two phases to reflect the timing constraints. The governance group will oversee and manage timing risks.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

43. Phase one of the ATAP 2020 update will focus in detail on the current first decade (2021-31). ATAP parties will complete this phase by August 2020. Due to the purdah period before the September general election central government will not be able to adopt or make decisions on the ATAP package until late 2020.

44. Phase two of the work will focus on decades two and three (2031-51) at a more indicative level. Timeframes are yet to be determined for this work. However, it will need to be completed or at least well advanced, in time to inform Auckland Council’s 30 year infrastructure strategy, which is due for adoption as part of the Long Term Plan in June 2021.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Draft Terms of Reference for the ATAP 2020 update	19

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Robert Simpson - Principal Policy Analyst, Strategic Planning

Szening Ooi - Senior Transport Advisor

Authorisers

Jacques Victor - GM Auckland Plan Strategy and Research

Megan Tyler - Chief of Strategy

Phil Wilson - Governance Director

Emergency Committee

14 May 2020

Board Appointments - Tāmaki Redevelopment Company Limited

File No.: CP2020/05493

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To consider the reappointment of three directors of the Tāmaki Redevelopment Company. Two are jointly appointed by the Crown and Council, and the third is appointed by the Crown.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

The report would normally go before the Appointment and Performance Committee, however, in light of COVID-19, it must now be considered by the Emergency Committee.

2. Tāmaki Redevelopment Company Limited (TRC) is a joint venture between Auckland Council and the Crown.

3. One director on the board is appointed by Auckland Council, one director is appointed by the Crown, and the remaining directors are jointly appointed by the Crown and the Council.

4. The terms of three of the current directors end soon. Decisions need to be made whether to reappoint these directors, or to look for new directors.

5. A confidential report considers the reappointment of two Tāmaki Redevelopment Company Limited (TRC) directors jointly with the Crown.

6. The Crown is also considering reappointing a director, and council has been asked to endorse the Crown’s decision regarding this director. This is in line with previous processes undertaken in 2012, 2016 and 2018.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Emergency Committee:

a) note that there is a confidential report included on today’s committee agenda that provides information to:

i) make decisions for appointing directors to Tāmaki Redevelopment Company Limited

ii) note that the report is confidential due to the personal information contained in it.

Horopaki

Context

7. TRC, a joint venture between Auckland Council and the Crown, is an urban regeneration company. It aims to transform Tāmaki (including Glen Innes, Point England and Panmure) in Auckland over the next 20-25 years through co-ordinated economic, social, and housing initiatives.

8. TRC has partnered with Kāinga Ora – Homes and Communities to replace around 2,500 old state homes with a mixture of new state, affordable and market houses. Since partnering with Kāinga Ora, TRC’s primary focus is now on transforming the Tāmaki community through social and economic regeneration and creating safe and connected neighborhoods.

9. One director on the board is appointed by Auckland Council, one director is appointed by the Crown, and the remaining directors are jointly appointed by the Crown and the Council.

10. The terms of three of the current directors end soon. Decisions need to be made whether to reappoint these directors, or to look for new directors.

11. The Crown is also considering reappointing a director, and council has been asked to endorse the Crown’s decision regarding this director. This is in line with previous processes undertaken in 2012, 2016 and 2018.

12. The board appointment process for appointing directors to any external partnership board is outlined in the table below:

13. Council’s policy sets a maximum tenure of six years for substantive CCO directors in order to achieve a balance of experience and fresh thinking on individual boards.

14. It is noted that TRC is not a substantive CCO, but that the same general policy considerations apply.

15. The policy also recognises that there are sometimes good reasons to approve extensions beyond the two three-year terms, such as retaining the knowledge, skills and leadership on the board.

16. The confidential report on this agenda provides advice and options to assist the committee to make decisions regarding the appointment of directors to TRC.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

17. More detail is included in the confidential report attached to this agenda.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

18. The decision to reappoint directors to TRC does not have an impact on direct greenhouse gas emissions, and the effect on climate change over the lifetime of the decisions is considered minimal.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

19. There is no significant impact on other parts of the council group as a result of the appointments.

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

Local impacts and local board views

20. Board appointments to region-wide entities are the role of the Governing Body. The following comments are provided by the two local boards that are impacted by the work of TRC.

21. Ōrākei Local Board

· has reviewed the open and confidential reports on this agenda acknowledging Maungakiekie-Tāmaki as taking the lead role in providing feedback to this Emergency Committee

· provides support for the recommendations made in the confidential report

· requests that a process be implemented for future appointments to include a formal report seeking feedback from the Ōrākei Local Board prior to reporting to the Appointment and Performance Review Committee.

22. Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board:

· notes that TRC operates a significant programme exclusive to Tāmaki that overlaps with local board strategic issues and priorities

· notes the role of local board input into the selection of council appointments to non-substantive council-controlled organisations, as set out in the Appointment and Remuneration Policy for Board Members of Council Organisations

· notes the importance of nurturing the relationship between the TRC board of directors and the local board to help align work, set mutual strategic goals and keep abreast of relevant issues and opportunities

· notes that the local board has relevant localised insights and views to the makeup of the TRC board that should be considered by the Governing Body when making decisions on directors’ appointments

· supports the recommendations outlined in the confidential report on this agenda

· recommends that a local community member is considered for a future director’s appointment to TRC to acknowledge the value that localised intel can have in enriching decision-making.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

23. Auckland Council’s appointment and remuneration policy for board members of council organisations states that “The Selection Panel will interview and assess candidates against the required skills, knowledge and experience and may consider other factors such as:

· the council’s board diversity and inclusion policy (see section 4)

· candidates with knowledge of Te Ao Māori and established Māori networks.”

24. The policy therefore encourages the identification of appropriately experienced Māori directors for consideration for appointment to CCO and CO boards.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

25. There are no costs associated with the reappointment of the three directors on the TRC board.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

26. There are risks associated with all reappointments to external entities including:

i) Reputational: all candidates are appropriately screened to meet the skill requirements for an entity such as this and have appropriate governance experience especially within public-facing entities.

ii) Reputational: breach of privacy if confidential candidate information is provided to media outlets prior to final decisions being made by the committee. To mitigate the risk staff will continue to highlight the need for maintaining confidentiality during the appointment programme.

iii) Board imbalance - an opportunity for fresh thinking and skills will be considered once the current vacancy on this board can be filled later in 2020.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

27. Following approval from this committee, staff from the CCO Governance department will advise the Crown and the two local boards of the committee’s decision.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Josie Meuli - Senior Advisor

Authorisers

Alastair Cameron - Manager - CCO Governance & External Partnerships

Phil Wilson - Governance Director

Mayor	Hon Phil Goff, CNZM, JP
Deputy Mayor	Deputy Mayor Cr Bill Cashmore
Councillors	Cr Josephine Bartley	Cr Tracy Mulholland
	Cr Dr Cathy Casey	Cr Daniel Newman, JP
	Cr Fa’anana Efeso Collins	Cr Greg Sayers
	Cr Pippa Coom	Cr Desley Simpson, JP
	Cr Linda Cooper, JP	Cr Sharon Stewart, QSM
	Cr Angela Dalton	IMSB Chair David Taipari
	Cr Chris Darby	Cr Wayne Walker
	Cr Alf Filipaina	Cr John Watson
	Cr Christine Fletcher, QSO	Cr Paul Young
	Cr Shane Henderson	IMSB Member TBC
	Cr Richard Hills

Author	Sarndra O'Toole - Kaiarataki Kapa Tohutohu Mana Whakahaere / Team Leader Governance Advisors
Authoriser	Phil Wilson - Governance Director