|
Waitākere
Ranges Local Board
07 May 2020
|
|
Local
board decisions and input into the Annual Budget 2020/2021
File No.: CP2020/05362
Te take mō te
pūrongo
Purpose of the report
1. To
seek approval for local financial matters for the local board agreement 2020/2021,
which need to be considered by the Governing Body in the Annual Budget
2020/2021 process.
2. To
seek feedback on regional topics in the Annual Budget 2020/2021.
Whakarāpopototanga matua
Executive summary
3. Our
Annual Budget contains 21 local board agreements which are the responsibility
of local boards to agree with the Governing Body. These agreements set out
local funding priorities, budgets, levels of service and performance measures.
4. Auckland Council publicly consulted from 21 February to 22 March
2020 to seek community views on the proposed Annual Budget 2020/2021 and local board priorities to be included in the local board
agreements (Consultation part 1).
5. Since
this consultation was undertaken, the COVID-19 pandemic has exerted significant
pressure on the council’s financial position, which will have flow on
effects for the proposed budget for the 2020/2021 financial year. The council
is now considering what those impacts are likely to be, and plan to ask
Aucklanders for their views on certain aspects of Auckland Council’s
proposed ‘emergency budget’ in response to the financial impacts of
COVID-19 (Consultation part 2).
6. Local
boards are required to receive the feedback on the proposals in consultation
part 1, which are not affected by the changes being considered by the council
and therefore will not be subject to further consultation and make decisions on
them. This must be done before consultation part 2 can get underway, so the
scope of consultation part 2 is clear.
7. This report seeks decisions on local financial matters for
the local board agreement, including:
a) any
new/amended Business Improvement District (BID) targeted rates
b) any
new/amended local targeted rate proposals
c) proposed
Locally Driven Initiative (LDI) capital projects outside local boards’
decision-making responsibility
d) release
of local board specific reserve funds.
8. The council received feedback in person at community engagement
events and through written forms, including online and hard copy forms, emails
and letters.
9. This report summarises consultation feedback on the proposed Annual
Budget 2020/2021, including on local board priorities for 2020/2021.
Feedback on Waitākere Ranges Local Board priorities for
2020/2021
10. The local board consulted on the following priorities:
· activating Glen Eden Town Centre with events and
planning for its regeneration
· progressing designs for a new park in Swanson and
Oratia Halls Reserve
· supporting restoration of Shadbolt House for a
future writer’s residency
· restoring significant ecological areas in our local
parks and assisting private property owners to restore these areas
· progressing an application for the Waitākere
Ranges Heritage Area to become an International Dark Sky Park
· supporting community resilience planning in our
coastal villages
· advocating to secure regional funding to develop Te
Henga quarry for use as a park
· increasing our focus on climate action
· providing a high level of service from quality
parks and playgrounds, libraries, and community facilities
11. A total of 143 submissions were received on the
Waitākere Ranges Local Board priorities for 2020/2021, with 77 percent
supporting most or supporting all of the local board’s priorities.
Feedback on regional proposals in the
Annual Budget 2020/2021 from the Waitākere Ranges Local Board area
12. This report seeks local board views on regional Annual Budget topics
including:
· the changes to rates and fees, key proposals:
o Waitākere rural sewerage service and targeted rate
o Waste management
targeted rate
· other budget information.
13. Local board views on these regional matters will be
considered by the Governing Body (or relevant committee) before making final
decisions on the Annual Budget.
14. Out of the 4,673 submissions received on the regional
proposals in the Annual Budget 2020/2021, 254 submissions were from people
living in the Waitākere Ranges Local Board local board area. The
Waitākere Ranges had the third highest number of submission responses when
looking at local board areas across the region.
15. Auckland Council also consulted on the Council-Controlled
Organisations (CCO) Review at the same time. The feedback received on this will
be presented at a later date.
|
Ngā tūtohunga
Recommendation/s
That the Waitākere Ranges
Local Board:
a) receive consultation feedback on the
Waitākere Ranges Local Board priorities for 2020/2021.
b) receive consultation feedback on regional proposals in the Annual
Budget 2020/2021 from people or organisations based in the Waitākere
Ranges Local Board area.
c) recommend the Glen Eden Business Improvement District targeted
rate to the Governing Body with no change.
d) provide feedback on the proposed Waitākere
rural sewerage service and targeted rate to the
Governing Body.
e) provide feedback on the Annual Budget 2020/2021.
f) recommend that the Governing Body approves any proposed Locally
Driven Initiative (LDI) capital projects, which are outside local
boards’ allocated decision-making responsibility.
|
Horopaki
Context
16. Local board
agreements form part of the Auckland Council’s Annual Budget and set out
local funding priorities, budgets, levels of service and performance measures.
17. Auckland Council publicly consulted from 21 February to 22 March
2020 to seek community views on the proposed Annual Budget 2020/2021 and local board priorities to be included in the local board
agreements. This is now referred to as consultation part 1.
18. Since this
consultation was undertaken, the COVID-19 pandemic has exerted significant
pressure on the council’s financial position, which will have flow on
effects for the proposed budget for the 2020/2021 financial year. Work to date
on the proposed Annual Budget will need to be adjusted to consider the new
financial realities facing Auckland.
19. The financial
report presented to the Emergency Committee during April 2020 indicated
potential reductions in cash revenue of $350-650m for financial year 2020/2021,
depending on the length and extent of the disruption caused by COVID-19. The Emergency
Committee requested staff provide further information to the Governing Body on
the impacts of the various scenarios modelled against a rates increase of between
0 per cent and 3.5 per cent. They also resolved that further public
consultation on the Annual Budget would include considering whether to adopt a
2.5 per cent rather than 3.5 per cent general rates increase for the 2020/2021
financial year, among a
suite of other measures aimed at offering support to all ratepayers,
including businesses, facing hardship due to the impacts of COVID-19.
20. The council
is planning to ask Aucklanders for their views on certain aspects of Auckland
Council’s proposed ‘emergency budget’ in response to the
financial impacts of COVID-19. It is anticipated this will be carried out from
late May until mid-June 2020. This will be in addition to the Annual Budget
2020/2021 consultation we have already carried out from February to March 2020.
This is referred to as consultation part 2.
21. Consultation
part 2 is unlikely to revisit any of the specific proposals in consultation
part 1. Therefore, the local boards and the Governing Body are required to
receive the feedback on these proposals and make decisions on them. This must
be done before consultation part 2 can get underway so it is clear what
decisions have already been made, and what decisions will be made after
consultation part 2.
22. Further, some
of the proposed changes to fees and charges required a Special Consultative
Procedure (SCP) and the requirements for this were met in consultation part
1. It is important to complete this statutory process, especially where
consultation part 2 will not be relevant to the decisions on these fees and
charges.
23. This report includes analysis of the consultation feedback on the
Waitākere Ranges Local Board priorities for 2020/2021, and on the regional
proposals in the Annual Budget 2020/2021 from people or organisations based in
the Waitākere Ranges local board area.
Local financial matters for the local board agreement
24. This report
allows the local board to agree its input and recommend other local financial
matters to the Governing Body in May. This is to allow time for the Governing
Body to consider these items in the Annual Budget process.
Local targeted rate and Business Improvement District (BID)
targeted rate proposals
25. Local boards are required to endorse any new local targeted rate
proposals or BID targeted rate proposals in their local board area (noting that
any new local targeted rates and/or BIDs must have been consulted on before
they can be implemented).
26. The Glen Eden Business Improvement District targeted rate is
$84,226. There is no change to the BID rate proposed in next year’s
budget.
|
BID
area
|
Amount
of BID grant 2020/2021
|
Amount
of BID targeted rate revenue 2020/2021
|
Rate
in the dollar for 2020/2021 to be multiplied by the capital value of the
rating unit
|
|
Glen Eden
|
$91,920
|
$84,226
|
0.00091947
|
Funding for Locally Driven Initiatives (LDI)
27. Local boards
are allocated funding annually to spend on local projects or programmes that
are important to their communities. Local boards can approve LDI capital
projects up to $1 million, projects over that amount require approval from the
Governing Body.
28. Local boards
can recommend to the Governing Body to convert LDI operational funding to
capital expenditure for 2020/2021 if there is a specific need to do so.
Governing Body approval may be needed for the release of local board specific
reserve funds, which are funds being held by the council for a specific
purpose.
29. Local boards
can defer LDI projects where there was an agreed scope and cost, but the
project/s have not yet been delivered.
Local board input on regional plans
30. Local boards
have a statutory responsibility for identifying and communicating the interests
and preferences of the people in its local board area in relation to the
context of the strategies, policies, plans, and bylaws of Auckland
Council. This report provides an opportunity for the local board to
provide input on the Annual Budget.
31. Local Board
Plans reflect community priorities and preferences and are key documents that
guide both the development of local board agreements and input into regional
plans.
Council-controlled organisation (CCO) review
32. An
independent panel was appointed by Auckland Council to examine three areas: (1)
the CCO model, roles and responsibilities, (2) the accountability of CCOs, and
(3) CCO culture. Local boards had the opportunity to provide input into this in
March 2020.
33. Auckland
Council also consulted on the review of CCOs during the same period as the
Annual Budget, 21 February to 22 March 2020.
34. After
receiving feedback, the panel will report on key issues, community and stakeholder
feedback to council in May 2020.
35. The panel
will provide a final report and recommendations to Council in July 2020.
Types of feedback
36. Overall
Auckland Council received feedback from 4673 people in the consultation period.
This feedback was received through:
· Written feedback – 3,880 hard copy and online
forms, emails and letters
· In person – 793 people provided feedback at
Have Your Say events and community events.
Tātaritanga me ngā
tohutohu
Analysis and advice
Feedback received on Waitākere
Ranges Local Board priorities for 2020/2021
37. The local board consulted on the following priorities:
· activating Glen Eden Town Centre with events and
planning for its regeneration
· progressing designs for a new park in Swanson and Oratia
Halls Reserve
· supporting restoration of Shadbolt House for a
future writer’s residency
· restoring significant ecological areas in our local
parks and assisting private property owners to restore these areas
· progressing an application for the Waitākere
Ranges Heritage Area to become an International Dark Sky Park
· supporting community resilience planning in our
coastal villages
· advocating to secure regional funding to develop Te
Henga quarry for use as a park
· increasing our focus on climate action.
38. In the consultation material, the “Message from
the Waitākere Ranges Local Board Chair” set out a mission
statement for areas of investment which in addition to the local priorities
identified above, included improving walking and cycling, reducing waste,
showcasing sustainability, energy efficiency of council buildings, improving
public transport with a shuttle service to serve villages.
39. A total of 143 submissions were received on the
Waitākere Ranges Local Board priorities for 2020/2021, showing 77% support
most (49%) or support all (28%) of the local board’s priorities.
Just under a quarter did not support most (10%) or did not support any (13%) of
the local priorities.
|
Waitākere Ranges local priorities
|
Submissions
|
|
|
I
support all of the priorities
|
40
|
28%
|
|
I
support most of the priorities
|
70
|
49%
|
|
I do not
support most of the priorities
|
15
|
10%
|
|
I do not
support any of the priorities
|
18
|
13%
|
|
Total
|
143
|
|
40. Key themes across all feedback received (through written,
in person and social media channels) were:
Parks, sport and recreation
Local priorities
· providing a high level of service from quality
parks and playgrounds, libraries, and community facilities.
· restoring significant ecological areas in our local
parks
· progressing designs for a new park in Swanson and
Oratia Halls Reserve
· advocating to secure regional funding to develop Te
Henga quarry for use as a park
Submission themes
41. Most submissions supported some or all local priorities.
There were around 20 submissions with specific comments relating to parks,
sport and recreation. What they said:
· increase recreational access - open up closed park
tracks; improve swimming pool access (West Wave); dog walking areas too
restricted
· improve parks amenity - need more children’s
play areas, picnic areas, shade sails, Piha skate park, riding tracks
· develop specific parks – Te Henga Quarry,
Kowhai Park, Swanson parks generally.
· park maintenance was a concern for a few submitters
including overflowing bins and rubbish in parks and beaches, public toilet
cleaning, maintenance of walkways and cycleways
· support ecological restoration
Arts, community and events
Local priorities
· activating Glen Eden Town Centre with events and planning
for its regeneration
· supporting restoration of Shadbolt House for a
future writer’s residency
· supporting community resilience planning in our
coastal villages
Submission themes
42. Most submissions supported some or all local priorities.
There were 14 who commented specifically on the arts, community and events
theme. What they said:
· libraries were highlighted as doing a great job
· community safety was highlighted as concern
relating to police visibility and perception of crime rates.
· more needs to be done around supporting diversity
in the local area
· support for resilience and community services, and
Glen Eden town centre
· request support for the Glen Eden Pataka Kai (open
street pantries) movement
· Shadbolt House was not supported as a priority by
the seven who commented on it. Two noted support for the arts generally, while
others ‘core services’ should be the priority.
Environment
Local priorities
· restoring significant ecological areas in our local
parks and assisting private property owners to restore these areas
· progressing an application for the Waitākere
Ranges Heritage Area to become an International Dark Sky Park
· increasing our focus on climate action
· reducing waste, showcasing sustainability,
energy efficiency of council buildings
Submission themes
43. Most submissions supported some or all local priorities.
There were around 30 submissions that provided comment on environmental issues
including climate action, water quality, the dark sky project, kauri dieback
and ecological restoration. Environmental issues attracted the most comment and
it is noted that these relate to both regionally and locally funded activities.
A summary of what they said:
· Water quality – the need to do more to clean
up beaches and waterways came through as a strong theme in the submission. The
west coast lagoons and Manukau Harbour beaches such as Wood Bay and Titirangi
Beach were specifically mentioned. Submissions on the Waitākere rural
sewage rate also highlighted concern about water quality.
· Ecological restoration – reduce pests in
WRHA, dealing with weeds on public and private land should be a big priority,
increase spending on the environment, clear river of weeds and willows to
reduce flood risk, support more focus and funding to protect waterways, bush
and wildlife.
· Climate action and sustainability – this was
strongly supported by most who responded to this topic. One respondent
suggested more support for businesses to respond to climate change.
· Dark Sky Park – around 10 people comments on
this proposal and they were evenly divided over whether they supported it or
did not support it. Those that supported it seemed to see it as an important
priority, while those that did not support either thought it was not feasible
to have a dark sky park so near metropolitan Auckland, or that it just was not
a priority when looking at other things like track closures. One respondent
suggested there should be an overall ecological plan for the area.
· The Waitākere Ranges Protect Society and Piha
Residents and Ratepayers Association provided detailed feedback on this theme,
which are attached along with other submissions to read in detail (see
Attachment C).
Transport
Local priorities
· walking
and cycling, improving public transport with a shuttle service to serve villages.
Submission themes
44. Most submissions supported some or all local priorities.
There were 26 comments on transport matters, most of which relate to Auckland
Transport activities.
· Walking
and cycling – more bike paths needed; greenways and local links to reduce
car trips and link to public transport, Captain Scott Road cycle path.
· Public
transport – extend to rural areas, west Auckland seen as under-served,
train service improvements suggested
· Rural
footpaths – pedestrian safety and a lack of footpaths in rural areas was
highlighted by some submitters
· Road
maintenance was highlighted as an issue in some areas with Piha Road and
Bethells Road noted as being of concern.
Planning
Local
priorities
· activating Glen Eden Town Centre with events and
planning for its regeneration
Submission themes
45. Most submissions supported some or all local priorities.
Those that commented on planning for Glen Eden’s regeneration were
generally supportive.
46. The need to improve infrastructure for rural communities
came across as a theme in a number of submissions which mostly related to
transport. One submitter highlighted the need to improve infrastructure
provided by utility services such as power and communications.
Feedback received
47. 143 submissions were received on Waitākere Ranges
Local Board priorities for 2020/2021, showing that the majority of people
either support most (49%) or support all (28%) of the local board’s
priorities.
48. The Waitākere Ranges Local Board held three Have
Your Say events, two of which were drop-in sessions at Glen Eden and Titirangi
libraries, with a third formal Have Your Say event at the local board office.
49. There were three local events focused on the proposed
change to the Waitākere rural sewage service and targeted rate. These were
held at Te Henga, Piha and Huia.
Requests for local funding
50. Requests for local funding included:
· Request
1: parks development, for example Te Henga Quarry, Kowhai Park (Kaurilands),
shade sails in local parks, skate park in Piha
· Request
2: improving walking and cycling
· Request
3: increase funding for environmental initiatives, improving water quality
Information on submitters
51. The tables and graphs below indicate what demographic
categories people identified with. This information only relates to those
submitters who provided demographic information.
52. In summary, 83% of people who submitted were aged between
35-75 year old. There was only one submission from a person under 25.
Age groups of submitters
53. Most submitters were European or NZ European (86%),
compared to the 74.5% of people in the area who identify as being European.
Maori participation was low at 3%, compared to the 12.7% of the area’s
population who identify as Maori. Pacific participation was also low at 4%,
compared to the 11.7% who identify as being Pacific. Asian participation was
9%, compared to the 14% who identify as being of Asian ethnicity.
Ethnicity of submitters
Overview of feedback received on the
Annual Budget from Waitākere Ranges Local Board area
54. The Annual Budget 2020/2021 sets out our priorities and
how we're going to pay for them. The regional consultation on the proposed
Annual Budget focused on changes to rates and fees, the key proposals were:
· Waitākere
rural sewerage service and targeted rate.
· Waste
management targeted rate
· Refuse
collection in former Auckland City and Manukau City
55. The submissions received from the Waitākere Ranges
Local Board area on these key issues is summarised below, along with an
overview of any other areas of feedback on regional proposals with a local
impact.
Waitākere rural sewerage service and targeted
rate
56. Aucklanders were asked about a proposal to increase the
targeted rate for the Waitākere rural sewerage service to cover the full
cost of providing the service.
Question
3: Waitākere rural sewerage service and targeted rate
Last
year we consulted on removing the septic tank pump-out service funded by a
targeted rate. While feedback indicated a willingness to go ahead with the
removal of this service in the Henderson-Massey and Upper Harbour local board
areas, residents of the Waitākere Ranges local board area said they wanted
to keep the service. The cost of delivering this service is higher than the
current targeted rate of $198.43.
Our
proposal, for those in the Waitākere Ranges local board area who want the
service, is to recover the full cost by increasing the targeted rate to between
$260 and $320 a year (incl. GST). This increase would apply from July 2021.
If we
do not do this, the council could end the service, or continue to subsidise the
cost of the service to septic tank users in the Waitākere Ranges local
board area from all general ratepayers, including those who don’t use the
service.
57. The proposal to move to a full cost recovery model had a
stronger level of support across the region than it did in the Waitākere
Ranges area where the service is to be provided and the rate is levied.
58. In the Waitākere Ranges 51% of submitters supported
the proposal, while 49% did not support it, and either supported ending the
service (27%), or continuing the service with a subsidy from general rates
(22%).
59. Across the region the proposal to continue the service
with all costs paid from the targeted rate was favoured by around two thirds
(67%) of the submissions.
60. The local and the regional response were more or less the
same in agreeing the service should continue, at 73% and 77% respectively. The
main point of difference was whether it should be a full cost recovery model
through the targeted rate or a mixed model with a subsidy from general rates.
61. The level of support for ending the service was similar
at a local (27%) and regional level (23%).
|
Waitākere
rural sewage service and targeted rate
|
Waitākere Ranges
submissions
|
|
Region
|
|
|
Support
- continue the service
|
112
|
51%
|
1553
|
67%
|
|
Do not
support - end the service
|
59
|
27%
|
527
|
23%
|
|
Do not
support - continue the Waitākere septic tank service subsidised by all
general ratepayers
|
48
|
22%
|
246
|
11%
|
|
Total
|
219
|
|
2326
|
|
Responses
from people who live in the Waitākere Ranges
62. There is a diverse range in the reasoning when looking at
the comments made in responding to the proposal, the comments show many had
given the matter a lot of thought, and a few noted it was a hard decision to
make as to which option they supported. The table in Attachment B gives
a thematic overview of the reasons people gave, and full comments can be read
in submissions in Attachment C.
63. Waitākere residents who supported the proposal most
commonly said they liked the convenience, were concerned about the
environmental impacts of not doing it, and supported it being a user pays
service. Many were concerned that if it stopped some would forget to pump out
their tanks. What people have said in supporting the proposal:
· service is a necessity and council has a role to play
· concern people will forget to get a regular pump out and water
quality /environment will suffer
· support for regulation
· helps to financially plan for service
· private contractors will try to up-sell
· concern about increased cost and want council to negotiate a good
rate
· cost to general ratepayer over-emphasised
· question increased costs for service
· upgraded to a modern system and don’t want to subsidise those
who haven’t
· support adding a full inspection service
64. Those that supported the service continuing with a
subsidy from general rates praised the current service, had concern about the
cost increase, though in the interests of equity thought it fair to have some
cost paid for from general rates. A summary of what people have said:
· disbelief at the costs, increase too high
· support a ‘swings and roundabouts’ approach to who pays
- ratepayers often pay for services they don’t use
· concern about equity – rural residents pay for many urban
services
protect
WRHA – legal obligation
· praise for the current service, and positive examples given
· support adding a full inspection service
65. Those that supporting ending the pump out service often
said they would rather get it done privately as it would be cheaper. Some had
gone as far as getting quotes.
· support for individual responsibility - want to take care of it
myself
· cost increase seen as excessive, would rather get service when
needed
· some with holiday baches and smaller households commented the three
year pump out frequency was too much
· concern that responsible residents paying for those who do not look
after their systems
· service not seen as improving water quality
Waste management targeted rate
66. Aucklanders were asked about a proposal to increase the
waste management targeted rate.
Question
1: Waste management targeted rate
The
cost of responsibly dealing with our kerbside recycling (paper, cardboard and
plastics) has increased due to international market conditions.
To pay
for this we propose to charge only those who use the service by increasing the
targeted rate by $19.97 a year or $0.38 a week (the total cost changing from
$121.06 to $141.03 incl. GST).
If we
do not do this, we would have to fund the shortfall by increasing general rates
for all ratepayers, including those who don’t get a kerbside collection
service.
67. The graphs below give an overview of the responses from
the Waitākere Ranges Local Board area.
|
|
|
|
|
Support
|
106
|
68%
|
|
Do not support
|
36
|
23%
|
|
Other
|
13
|
8%
|
|
|
|
|
68. In Waitākere Ranges 155 people made submission
responses to this topic. The majority, just over two thirds supported the
proposal, while just under a quarter did not.
69. Some submitters provided additional comments. Below is a
summary of what people said:
Support
· Support making recycling viable
· More education is needed for the general public about what
to recycle
· Let’s look at how we might recycle in New Zealand
· lobby the government for a recycling plant for plastics in
NZ, and charges on plastic
· Concern that recycling is not being recycled but ending up
in landfill
Don’t
support
· Prefer a user (disposer) pays system as with general waste
· Too expensive, find savings from general rates to cover the
cost
· Concern that we are not recycling if its is just shipped
offshore
· Flat rate unfair for those with holiday baches with
infrequently need of service
· Support more product stewardship, and cutting down on waste
in the first place
Refuse collection in former Auckland City and Manukau
City
70. Aucklanders were asked about a proposal to increase the
refuse collection in former Auckland City and Manukau City targeted rate.
Question
2: Refuse collection in former Auckland City and Manukau City
In the
old Auckland City and Manukau City Council areas, households pay for rubbish
through a targeted rate. In other parts of the city, residents pay for their
collection via Pay As You Throw. The targeted rate for the Auckland City and
Manukau City Council areas no longer meets the cost of collection.
To
cover this extra cost we propose increasing the targeted rate in these areas by
$14.23 a year or $0.27 a week for a 120 litre bin (the total cost changing from
$129.93 to $144.16 incl. GST), and an additional $6.68 a year or $0.13 a week
for a large 240 litre bin (the total cost changing from $191 to $211.91 incl.
GST).
If we
do not do this, we would have to increase general rates for all ratepayers,
including those living outside these two areas who would subsidise residents of
old Auckland and Manukau cities.
71. The graphs below give an overview of the responses from
the Waitākere Ranges Local Board area.
|
|
|
|
|
Support
|
86
|
66%
|
|
Do not support
|
20
|
15%
|
|
Other
|
25
|
19%
|
|
|
|
|
Other feedback
72. Aucklanders were asked what is important to them and if
they had any feedback on any other issues.
Rating and funding
73. A proposed change to how we charge for pool fencing
inspections was a key consultation topic. Of the 17 responses from
Waitākere residents, 10 supported and 6 did not.
74. Six submitters highlighted a need for council to focus on
providing core services. There were a range of views of what those core
services were: clean up beaches; drainage, sewage, maintain footpaths and
cycleways; improve amenity for coastal areas; stop funding festivals; increase
support for community led initiatives.
75. Three submitters noted the difference in funding between
local board areas, and wanted to see more funding for outer areas, and
recognition of the special needs of the Waitākere Ranges Heritage Area.
76. Others highlighted dissatisfaction with services and how rates
are spent: “it’s like council wants our money but doesn’t
want to provide services”, “stop taking from us to pay for Auckland
infrastructure”.
Feedback on the draft Tūpuna Maunga o Tamaki
Makaurau Authority – Operational Plan 2020/2021
77. No feedback was received on the draft Tūpuna Maunga
o Tamaki Makaurau Authority – Operational Plan 2020/2021.
Feedback on other regional proposals with a local
impact
78. Feedback was received from the Waitākere Ranges
Local Board area on other regional proposals and activities, such as regional
park track closures, public transport, walking and cycling, water quality,
environmental services. These have largely been reflected in the summary
of local priorities earlier in the report.
|
Theme
|
Count
|
|
6-Transport
|
25
|
|
7-Water
|
11
|
|
8-Regional
Community Services
|
6
|
|
9-Regional
planning
|
17
|
|
10-Other
Regional Services
|
25
|
|
11-Rating and
Funding
|
40
|
Tauākī whakaaweawe
āhuarangi
Climate impact statement
79. The decisions
recommended in this report are procedural in nature. New targeted rates and the
release of reserve funds will not have any climate impacts themselves.
80. Some of the
proposed projects these would fund may have climate impacts. The climate
impacts of any projects Auckland Council chooses to progress with as a result
of this, will be assessed as part of the relevant reporting requirements.
81. Some of the
proposed projects these would fund will be specifically designed to mitigate
climate impact, build resilience to climate impacts, and restore the natural
environment.
Ngā whakaaweawe me
ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera
Council group impacts and views
82. The Annual
Budget is an Auckland Council Group document and will include budgets at a
consolidated group level. Consultation items and updates to budgets to reflect
decisions and new information may include items from across the group.
Ngā whakaaweawe
ā-rohe me ngā tirohanga a te poari ā-rohe
Local impacts and local board views
83. Local board
decisions and feedback are being sought in this report. Local boards have a
statutory role in providing local board feedback on regional plans.
84. Local boards
play an important role in the development of the Annual Budget. Local board
agreements form part of the Annual Budget. Local board nominees have also
attended Finance and Performance Committee workshops on the Annual Budget.
Tauākī whakaaweawe
Māori
Māori impact statement
85. Many local
board decisions are of importance to and impact on Māori. Local board
agreements and the Annual Budget are important tools that enable and can
demonstrate council’s responsiveness to Māori.
86. Local board
plans, which were developed in 2017 through engagement with the community
including Māori, form the basis of local priorities. There is a need to continue
to build relationships between local boards and iwi, and the wider Māori
community.
87. The analysis
included submissions made by mana whenua and the wider Māori community who
have interests in the rohe / local board area.
88. Ongoing
conversations between local boards and Māori will assist to understand
each other’s priorities and issues. This in turn can influence and
encourage Māori participation in council’s decision-making
processes.
89. Some of the
proposed projects these would fund may have impacts on Māori. The impacts
on Māori of any projects Auckland Council chooses to progress with as a
result of this, will be assessed as part of the relevant reporting
requirements.
Ngā ritenga
ā-pūtea
Financial implications
90. This report
is seeking local board decisions on financial matters in local board agreements
that need to then be considered by the Governing Body.
91. Local boards
are also providing input to regional plans. There is information in the
consultation material for each plan with the financial implications of
different options.
Ngā raru tūpono me
ngā whakamaurutanga
Risks and mitigations
92. Local
boards are required to make recommendations on these local financial matters
for the Annual Budget by 8 May, in order for the Governing Body to be able to
make decisions on them when considering the Annual Budget in May.
Ngā koringa ā-muri
Next steps
93. Local boards
will approve their local board agreements and corresponding work programmes.
94. Recommendations
and feedback from local boards will be provided to the relevant Governing Body
committees for consideration during decision making at the Governing Body
meeting.
95. The dates of
these meetings are yet to be determined as the impacts of the Covid-19 pandemic
and lockdown are taken into account.
Ngā tāpirihanga
Attachments
|
No.
|
Title
|
Page
|
|
a⇩
|
Waitākere Ranges Local Board Submission Comments
on Local Priorities and Services
|
25
|
|
b⇩
|
Waitākere Ranges Local Board Rural Sewage
Overview of Submission Themes
|
39
|
Ngā kaihaina
Signatories
|
Authors
|
Brett Lane - Local Board Advisor
|
|
Authorisers
|
Glenn Boyd - Relationship Manager Henderson-Massey, Waitākere
Ranges, Whau
|
