I hereby give notice that an ordinary meeting of the Puketāpapa Local Board will be held on:

 

Date:

Time:

Venue:

 

Thursday, 17 September 2020

10:00am

Via Skype for Business

 

Puketāpapa Local Board

 

OPEN AGENDA

 

 

 

 

MEMBERSHIP

 

Chairperson

Julie Fairey

 

Deputy Chairperson

Harry Doig

 

Members

Ella Kumar, JP

 

 

Fiona Lai

 

 

Bobby Shen

 

 

Jon Turner

 

 

(Quorum 3 members)

 

 

 

Selina Powell

Democracy Advisor - Puketapapa

 

11 September 2020

 

Contact Telephone: 021 531 686

Email: selina.powell@aucklandcouncil.govt.nz

Website: www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz

 

 


 

 


Puketāpapa Local Board

17 September 2020

 

 

ITEM   TABLE OF CONTENTS                                                                                         PAGE

1          Welcome                                                                                                                         5

2          Apologies                                                                                                                        5

3          Declaration of Interest                                                                                                   5

4          Confirmation of Minutes                                                                                               5

5          Leave of Absence                                                                                                          5

6          Acknowledgements                                                                                                       5

7          Petitions                                                                                                                          5

8          Deputations                                                                                                                    5

8.1     Deputations - Alcohol Healthwatch - importance of advocacy to reduce exposure to alcohol marketing, Auckland Signage Bylaw Review                5

9          Public Forum                                                                                                                  6

10        Extraordinary Business                                                                                                6

11        Notices of Motion                                                                                                           6

12        Notice of Motion - Deputy Chair H Doig - 10 Year Budget 2021-2031                     9

13        Auckland Transport September 2020 Report                                                         177

14        Project Streetscapes: Weed Management Report                                                 183

15        Puketāpapa Local Board Strategic Relationship Grants 2020/2021                    229

16        Puketāpapa Local Grants Round One and Multi-Board Round One 2020/2021, grant allocations                                                                                                                  245

17        Local Board Annual Report 2019/2020                                                                    257

18        Auckland Council's Year End and Quarterly Performance Report: Puketāpapa Local Board for quarter four 2019/2020                                                                             261

19        Approval for a new road name at 2-4 & 6 Budock Road, Hillsborough - delegated decision                                                                                                                       289

20        Urgent Decision - Puketāpapa Local Board feedback on the review of Auckland Council's Council Controlled Organisations                                                          293

21        Albert Eden – Puketāpapa Ward                                                                              311

22        Chairperson's Report                                                                                                313

23        Board Member Reports                                                                                             319

24        Governance Forward Work Programme Calendar                                                337

25        Record of Puketāpapa Local Board Workshop Notes                                          345  

26        Consideration of Extraordinary Items 

PUBLIC EXCLUDED

27        Procedural Motion to Exclude the Public                                                               357

17        Local Board Annual Report 2019/2020

a.      Draft 2019/2020 Puketapapa Local Board Annual Report                           357

18        Auckland Council's Year End and Quarterly Performance Report: Puketāpapa Local Board for quarter four 2019/2020

b.      20200917 Puketāpapa Local Board performance report for the financial quarter four and year ending 30 June 2020.                                                 357

C1       Statement of proposal for a new Navigation Safety Bylaw                                  357  

 


1          Welcome

 

 

 

2          Apologies

 

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

 

3          Declaration of Interest

 

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

 

4          Confirmation of Minutes

 

That the Puketāpapa Local Board:

a)         confirm the ordinary minutes of its meeting, held on Thursday, 20 August 2020, as a 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 Puketāpapa 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       Deputations - Alcohol Healthwatch - importance of advocacy to reduce exposure to alcohol marketing, Auckland Signage Bylaw Review

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To present to the local board on the importance of advocacy to the governing body (and relevant committees) on the Auckland Council Signage Bylaw review to reduce exposure of alcohol marketing in the local board area and wider Auckland region.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       Dr Nicki Jackson, Executive Director from Alcohol Healthwatch will present on the importance of advocacy to the governing body (and relevant committees) for the Auckland Council Signage Bylaw review to be used as an opportunity to effectively reduce exposure to alcohol of marketing in the local board area and wider Auckland region

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Puketāpapa Local Board:

a)      thank Dr Nicki Jackson from Alcohol Healthwatch for the presentation.

 

 

 

9          Public Forum

 

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

 

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

 

10        Extraordinary Business

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

11        Notices of Motion

 

Under Standing Order 2.5.1 (LBS 3.11.1) or Standing Order 1.9.1 (LBS 3.10.17) (revoke or alter a previous resolution) a Notice of Motion has been received from <Member Names>  for consideration under item 12.

 


Puketāpapa Local Board

17 September 2020

 

 

Notice of Motion - Deputy Chair H Doig - 10 Year Budget 2021-2031

File No.: CP2020/13159

 

  

 

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary https://acintranet.aklc.govt.nz/EN/workingatcouncil/techandtools/infocouncil/Pages/ExecutiveSummary.aspx

1.       Deputy Chair, H Doig has given notice of a motion that they wish to propose.

2.       The notice, signed by Deputy Chair, H Doig and Chair, J Fairey as seconder, is appended as Attachment A.

3.       Supporting information is appended.

 

Motion

That the Puketāpapa Local Board:

a)      review the current policy that reduces the differential between business and residential rates

b)      investigate introducing a rates differential for undeveloped properties

c)      investigate introducing a rates differential for unoccupied developments.

 

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

20200917 Notice of Motion 10 Year Budget 2021-2031 - Attachment A

11

b

20200917 Business Differential Summary (One)

13

c

20200917 Analysis of the current and past use of Council Rating Tools in NZ (Two)

135

      

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Selina Powell - Democracy Advisor - Puketapapa

Authoriser

Nina Siers - Relationship Manager for Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Puketāpapa

 


Puketāpapa Local Board

17 September 2020

 

 


 


Puketāpapa Local Board

17 September 2020

 

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Puketāpapa Local Board

17 September 2020

 

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Puketāpapa Local Board

17 September 2020

 

 

Auckland Transport September 2020 Report

File No.: CP2020/12635

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To provide an update to the Puketāpapa Local Board (the Board) on Auckland Transport (AT) matters in its area and an update on its local board transport capital fund (LBTCF). 

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       This report provides an opportunity to highlight AT activities in the Puketāpapa Local Board area and contains information about the following:

·   General advice on the 2019-2022 Local Board Transport Capital Fund and the Community Safety Fund;

·   Update on the Frost and Carr Road safety improvement work;

·   Review of proposed bus layover area on Hillsborough Road;

·   Public transport recovery under COVID-19;

·   General transport items of interest and

·   Public consultations and decisions of the Traffic Control Committee in the Puketāpapa Board area.

 

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Puketāpapa Local Board:

a)      receive the Auckland Transport September 2020 update report.

 

Horopaki

Context

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

4.       This report updates the Puketāpapa Local Board on AT projects and operations in the local board area, it updates the local board on their consultations and includes information on the status of the Local Board Transport Capital Fund (LBTCF) and Community Safety Fund (CSF).

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).

6.       The CSF is a capital budget established by AT for use by local boards to fund local road safety initiatives. The purpose of this fund is to allow elected members to address long-standing local road safety issues that are not regional priorities and are therefore not being addressed by the AT programme.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Local Board Transport Capital Fund (LBTCF)

7.       With the Auckland Council’s emergency budget now confirmed the LBTCF for the 2020/2021 Financial Year has been set at $5,000,000, for allocation across the 21 Local Boards. Allocation will still be based on the Local Board Funding Policy.  Decisions about the 2021/2022 and 2022/2023 Financial Years will form part of the Long Term Plan/Regional Land Transport Plan discussions but early indications are that these years will also see a more constrained capital programme, than prior to the COVID-19 crisis.

8.       Advice from the Finance Department set the following criteria for the fund following the setting of the Emergency Budget:

·    The $5,000,000 for 2020/21 will be split using the Local Board Funding Policy

·    Currently, with budgets unknown for 2021/2022 and 2022/2023 Boards are unable to combine future years allocations into a single project.

·    Boards are encouraged to target delivery of smaller projects or complete design and documentation for a project that can be physically delivered in 2021/2022.

9.       The Puketāpapa Local Board’s share of the 2021/2022 allocation is $167,138

10.     Now that the allocations of LBTCF have been determined, AT will attend a workshop with the local board in order to provide quality advice how the money is utilised.  This will include high level advice on the LBTCF proposals that the Puketāpapa Local Board was working through pre COVID-19.  The Puketāpapa Board LBTCF workshop will be held on 8 October.

 

Community Safety Fund Projects (CSF)

11.     The Community Safety Fund is funded from AT’s safety budget and is dependent on the level of funding AT receives from Auckland Council. This level of funding has been constrained through the Emergency Budget process.

12.     Safety projects will be prioritised according to DSI (death and serious injury) data and therefore local board community safety projects will continue with planning and design but cannot be delivered in the 2020/2021 financial year.

13.     Puketāpapa Local Board Community Safety projects are noted below:

·    Pedestrian crossing at 383 Hillsborough Rd, by Waikōwhai Primary

·    Pedestrian crossing improvements at 639 Richardson Rd, by Waikōwhai Intermediate and Hay Park School

·    Pah Road crossing awareness

·    Potter Avenue raised table to replace kea crossing for Wesley Primary School.

 


 

 

Safety Improvements on Frost and Carr Roads

14.     Contractors for Auckland Transport are currently constructing a series of safety measures along Frost and Carr Roads.  Despite the impact of COVID-19, work is progressing well.

15.     Although impacted by social distancing restriction during the return to level three and a week of bad weather in the last week in August, work will be completed by the end of September.

16.     There is likely to be some tidying up work that will run into early October.  Road marking, for instance, needs the road to “cure” for a few days before painting.  These finishing works will have a negligible impact on traffic flows.

 

Bus Layovers in Puketāpapa

17.       There has been a lot of interest in the new bus layover project on Hillsborough Road which is out for public consultation.

18.     The bus layover and proposed Exeloo planned for Hillsborough Road generated considerable feedback from local residents concerned about a number of aspects of the proposal.

19.     At its workshop on 13 August, AT presented the board with the current proposal and heard feedback from the board on the community’s concerns.  AT undertook to investigate the concerns and explore alternatives.

20.     The investigation was undertaken over the last month and included on-site assessments. Following this investigation, an updated feedback report was circulated to members on Monday 31 August.  Subject to Board feedback, this will provide the basis to update residents who provided comments.  This is likely to happen in the second week in September.

21.     The AT Metro team will then provide a further update to the Board in early October 2020.

 

COVID-19-19 Recovery for Public Transport

22.     Throughout New Zealand’s response to COVID-19 Auckland Transport has played a role in providing essential public transport services, keeping roads open and making sure that projects re-opened as soon as possible and that planning continued on projects.

23.     A key part of Auckland’s recovery is the public transport network.  Public transport is vital to Auckland’s economy because it provides lower cost transport, reduces the need for car parking and reduces congestion on the roads.  Encouraging people to make use of it contributes to Auckland’s recovery.  The number of people using public transport in Auckland has achieved the highest rate of recovery since lockdown compared to 21 other major cities around the world based on research by the UITP (International Association of Public Transport).

24.     Auckland Transport’s team and public transport service suppliers worked to encourage confidence in the use of public transport during all Alert Levels from 4 down to 1, including in regular cleaning and fogging of vehicles, physical distancing on board, use of AT Mobile APP to indicate space on board relative to physical distancing and quick changes to service timetables.

25.     During the August Alert Level 3, PT services operated on the same basis as they did the previous time.

26.     On 31 August, Auckland moved to Alert Level 2.5, a slightly more restrictive regime than the rest of New Zealand. There were some significant changes to PT services. These include;

·    Face coverings becoming mandatory on public transport

·    From 4 September QR codes have been displayed on public transport.

 

·    No cash fares are being accepted, there is limited seating to enable social distancing and boarding on buses is generally from the rear door.

27.     A significant campaign is underway to increase the uptake of Hopcards and to ensure that these cards are registered.  This will allow the Ministry of Health to undertake contact tracing very quickly, should this become necessary.  QR codes are further options for passengers with unregistered Hopcard but provides less details of the passenger’s journey.

28.     AT is preparing a campaign to encourage a greater uptake of Hopcards, the COVID-19 situation has brought aspects of this forward.

 

Denbigh Avenue Bus Stop Changes.

29.     There have been minor adjustments to a bus stop on Denbigh Avenue.  The stop now aligns with the site specified in the Transport Control Committee resolution

 

Review of Cross Town and Outer Link Bus Service

30.     AT has undertaken an extensive review of cross town services and in particular the outer link services.  The outcome of the review is in in the link below.  Board Members have already received a copy of the review.

Download the Central Crosstown bus changes consultation report (PDF 1.9MB, 32 pages).

31.     In summary, no decision has yet been made on the proposed bus route changes.

32.     Whilst the purpose of the proposal remains; to complete the network of bus routes in the area that we began in 2018, and to address the unreliability of the OuterLink, AT does not believe that now is the appropriate time to make bus route changes in this area.  This rationale is based on:

·      Auckland Transport needs more time to further understand the impacts of the closure and construction of Mt Eden Station, and monitor the effect of the temporary 64 bus service on your travel

·      AT also need to consider what adjustments are required to bus stop infrastructure and services at key locations in the neighbourhood to enable easier transfer options

·      AT is very aware that there is already a lot going on in the area.  We don’t wish to overwhelm the Mt Eden area with too many changes to public transport services in such a short space of time.

33.     As the next steps AT will continue to consider the responses we have received from this consultation as we explore other options that would:

·      Improve reliability of the OuterLink whilst still maintaining crosstown option(s) for the southern section of the route

·      Take the usage of the new 64 bus service into consideration

·      Continue to allow for the safe operation of buses.

34.     Once we identify these options, in early 2021 we will present them to the community to hear their views.


 

 

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

35.     Auckland Transport engages closely with Council on developing strategy, actions and measures to support the outcomes sought by the Auckland Plan 2050, the Auckland Climate Action Plan and Council’s priorities.

36.     One of AT’s core roles is providing 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.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

37.     The impact of information in this report is mainly confined to Auckland Transport.  Where LBTCF projects are being progressed by Auckland Council’s Community Facilities group, engagement on progress has taken place.  Any further engagement required 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

38.     AT attended a board workshop with the Puketāpapa Local Board in August 2020. The Board was briefed on the issues relating to the bus layover on Hillsborough Road.

 

Auckland Transport Consultations

39.     AT provides the Puketāpapa Local Board with the opportunity to comment on transport projects being delivered in their area.  The consultations below were sent to the Board during August 2020.


Location

Proposal

Hillsborough Road Signalised Intersection

Changes to the proposal for the signalised intersection, regarding advanced stop boxes for cyclists.

 

 

Traffic Control Committee resolutions

40.     There were no Traffic Control Committee decisions that affected the Puketāpapa Local Board area during the August 2020 reporting period.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

41.     There are no specific impacts on Māori for this reporting period.  AT is committed to meeting its responsibilities under Te Tiriti o Waitangi-the Treaty of Waitangi-and its broader legal obligations in being more responsive or effective to Māori.  Our Maori Responsiveness Plan outlines the commitment to with 19 mana whenua tribes in delivering effective and well-designed transport policy and solutions for Auckland.  We also recognise mataawaka and their representative bodies and our desire to foster a relationship with them. This plan is available on the Auckland Transport website - https://at.govt.nz/about-us/transport-plans-strategies/maori-responsiveness-plan/#about.

 

 

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

42.     The proposed decision of receiving the report has no financial implications for the Puketāpapa Local Board.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

43.     Auckland Council adopted its Emergency Budget 2020/2021 at the end of July 2020.

44.     AT’s capital and operating budgets have been reduced through this process.  Some projects we had planned for 2020/2021 may not be able to be delivered, which will be disappointing to communities that we had already engaged with.

45.     Both the Community Safety Fund and the Local Board Transport Capital Fund are impacted by these budget reductions.

46.     In order to mitigate this risk, AT will attend board workshops in September 2020 to discuss with local boards how to get best value from their 2020/2021 LBTCF allocations.  Community Safety projects will continue in design and will be delivered once funds become available.

47.     AT also intends to inform the local board in September 2020 on its forward works programme for 2020/2021. The details of this programme are still being developed.

 

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

48.     Auckland Transport will provide another update report to the Puketāpapa Local Board in October 2020.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Bruce Thomas – Auckland Transport, Elected Member Relationship Manager

Authorisers

Jonathan Anyon – Auckland Transport, Manager Elected Member Relationship Unit

Nina Siers - Relationship Manager for Maungakiekie-Tamaki Puketapapa

 


Puketāpapa Local Board

17 September 2020

 

 

Project Streetscapes: Weed Management Report

File No.: CP2020/12691

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To seek feedback from local boards on the recommended regional methodology to edge and maintain weeds on footpaths, berms and the kerb and channel on more than 5000km of urban roads in the Auckland region.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       Auckland Council manages edges and weeds on footpaths, berms and the kerb and channel in the urban road corridor for statutory, asset protection, amenity, and health and safety outcomes.

3.       The service level for weed management on berms and in the kerb and channel is the same across Auckland. However, the methodologies for edging and weed control on hard surfaces, either plant-based, synthetic herbicides or thermal, e.g. hot water/steam, differ between local board areas. In some cases, different methods are used within the same local board boundaries. This reflects the continuation of legacy council approaches.

4.       In April 2019, Auckland Transport transferred services and budget to the council’s Community Facilities department to manage weeds within the road corridor on their behalf. Auckland Transport retains responsibility for the road corridor as per the Local Government Act 1974 and the Land Transport Act 1998.

5.       The transfer was completed as part of Project Streetscapes (which did not include the Hauraki Gulf Islands), a variation to the Community Facilities outcome-based maintenance contracts. Part of the project included developing recommendations for a regionally consistent approach for edging and weed control on hard surfaces in the road corridor.

6.       Community Facilities has continued with the legacy approach to weed control while completing a review of weed management methodologies. The scope of the review and recommendations are for edging and weed control on hard surfaces within the urban road corridor, excluding the Hauraki Gulf Islands. Rural roads are not included due to differences in population, roading infrastructure and land use in rural areas.

7.       The evaluation criteria for the review’s recommendations include environmental impacts, community input, the council’s commitment to reduce carbon emissions in Te Tāruke-ā-Tāwhiri: Auckland's Climate Plan and the objectives of the council Weed Management Policy for effective, efficient, and sustainable outcomes.

8.       A council People’s Panel survey was conducted in October 2019 as one mechanism to gauge how Aucklanders feel about managing weeds on footpaths and kerbs (see Attachment A).

9.       The recommendation of this review is for a combination of plant-based herbicide with spot spraying of glyphosate for difficult to manage weeds. This is estimated to lead to a reduction in glyphosate, carbon emissions and water usage across the region while achieving effective control. This approach is estimated to be achievable within existing operational budgets.

10.     Feedback is sought from local boards to be included in the recommendation to the Governing Body on a standardised approach for edging and weed control on hard surfaces in the road corridor (see Attachment B). This will be presented at the Environment and Climate Change Committee on 12 November 2020.

11.     Should a local board choose to utilise alternative methodologies to those agreed, they have the option of using locally driven initiative (LDI) funding to cover the cost difference between the agreed regional weed management method and the alternative.

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Puketāpapa Local Board:

a)      provide feedback on the recommended approach to a standardised methodology to managing weeds on footpaths, berms and the kerb and channel across more than 5000km of urban roads.

 

 

Horopaki

Context

12.     Community Facilities carries out edging and weed management on footpaths, berms and the kerb and channel across more than 5000km of Auckland urban roads. This is done for asset protection and amenity, as well as health and safety outcomes, including:

·        preventing root intrusion causing damage to the road surface, kerb and channel, footpaths and other road assets

·        ensuring vegetation growing in the kerb and channel does not interfere with water flow

·        ensuring the safety of pedestrians and road users by maintaining clear sight-lines and minimising trip hazards

·        maintaining the streetscape in a tidy and aesthetically pleasing condition.

13.     Auckland’s moderate and wet climate makes the area particularly vulnerable to the detrimental effects of weeds. The climate causes vigorous growth, easy establishment, and increased infestation of weeds. The road corridor provides a dynamic environment for the spread of weeds including through vehicle and water dispersal.[1]

14.     Uncontrolled weeds on footpaths and the kerb and channel cause damage that can lead to increased repairs and renewals with a funding and environmental impact. This damage may create trip hazards, putting people at risk.

15.     Agrichemicals are used for edging and weed control in the urban road corridor. Edging is required on both sides of the road, which is over 10,000km of footpaths and berms. The Auckland Council Weed Management Policy guides the use of herbicide by the council and supports best practice weed control.[2] All agrichemical use must follow the rules of the Unitary Plan, which ensures that, when used correctly, agrichemicals can make a positive contribution to sustainable land use.[3]

16.     The outcome-based contract specifications for the road corridor do not permit herbicide application outside schools or early learning services on days that these institutions are in use. There are limitations on the time of spraying in urban areas and the contract specifications include instructions to not complete weed control where the berm is clearly being maintained by the adjacent property owner.[4]

17.     All of Auckland is covered by a ‘no-spray register’ for berms adjacent to private property. Any resident who agrees to manage weeds to a specified standard can apply to ‘opt out’ of weed management completed by the council, through recording their intent on the no-spray register. Residents can register through a dedicated form on the council website or through the council call centre.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Weed management in the road corridor

18.     The service level outcomes for weed management on berms and in the kerb and channel are the same across Auckland. However, the methodologies for their maintenance, either plant-based, synthetic herbicides or thermal, e.g. hot water/steam, differs between local board areas. In some cases, different methods are used within the same local board boundaries. These differences reflect the weed control methods and herbicides that were used by the legacy councils of Auckland City Council, Manukau City Council, Waitākere City Council, North Shore City Council, Papakura District Council, Rodney District Council and Franklin District Council prior to amalgamation.

19.     In April 2019, Auckland Transport transferred services and budget to the council’s Community Facilities unit to manage weeds within the road corridor. Auckland Transport retains responsibility for the road corridor as per the Local Government Act 1974 and the Land Transport Act 1998.

20.     Weed management on footpaths, berms and the kerb and channel is now part of the outcome-based Full Facilities contract for streetscapes. These include pest plant control, mowing, town centre cleaning, and waste removal completed on behalf of Auckland Transport.

21.     Community Facilities has continued with the legacy approach for edging and weed control on hard surfaces, while completing a review of the methodologies with a view to making recommendations to the Environment and Climate Change Committee for a consistent regional approach. The scope of the review and recommendations is only for the urban road corridor and does not include rural areas or the Hauraki Gulf Islands. This reflects the differences in population, roading infrastructure and land use in rural areas.

Comparison of weed management methodologies

Synthetic herbicide – glyphosate

22.     The synthetic herbicide used for edging and weed management on footpaths, berms and the kerb and channel in the urban road corridor in Auckland is glyphosate. Glyphosate is used by the council for weed management on parks and reserves, and by most road controlling authorities in New Zealand to control vegetation in the road corridor.[5]

23.     Glyphosate is a low toxicity broad-spectrum non-selective herbicide which is particularly effective on broadleaf weeds and grasses. Glyphosate is a systemic herbicide that is absorbed through green plant tissue and is then translocated throughout the plant, including the root system, to kill the entire plant.[6]

24.     Glyphosate is diluted with water and applied via foliar spray with a small left-hand steer vehicle in the urban road corridor. It is the most cost-effective method as it needs to be applied less frequently than other methods. In the urban road corridor, spot spraying with glyphosate typically occurs six times per year to achieve the desired level of service.

25.     There is some community and international debate about the health risk of glyphosate with several regions no longer using, or minimising the use of, glyphosate for weed control in public areas.

26.     Auckland Council’s agrichemical use is guided by the New Zealand Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in their role as the regulator of hazardous substances in New Zealand. The EPA gathers information from multiple credible sources when deciding whether substances are safe to use. The EPA has granted approval for the use of glyphosate-containing substances in accordance with the EPA code of practice. Should the EPA change their position on glyphosate, the council would respond appropriately.

27.     In October 2019 the EPA stated the following:

Products containing glyphosate are considered safe, provided that all of the rules around their use are followed. …We are aware that some reports linking glyphosate to health impacts are causing concern. We are in alignment with the vast majority of regulatory bodies around the world – including in the European Union, United States, Australia and Canada - which agree that glyphosate is unlikely to cause cancer.[7]

28.     For all agrichemical use, the council complies with the Environmental Protection Agency Code of Practice (NZS 8409:2004 Management of Agrichemicals) for the storage, mixing, use, disposal and certification of contractors.

29.     Glyphosate is strongly absorbed into soil and has no residual activity.[8] Community Facilities only uses approved formulations of glyphosate, with no human hazard ratings, within the road corridor.[9] While the formulation being used within the road corridor is also approved for use in the aquatic environment, it does have a hazard rating for toxicity for aquatic life at high concentrations.[10] As per the Code of Practice, glyphosate is only used in appropriate weather conditions to minimise spray drift by rain and wind.

30.     A caution for the use of glyphosate is the development of resistance in some weed species.[11]

31.     Local boards that use spot spraying of glyphosate for weed management include Franklin, Henderson-Massey, Howick, Māngere-Ōtāhuhu, Manurewa, Ōtara-Papatoetoe, Papakura, Rodney, Waitākere Ranges, and Whau. All methodologies include some mechanical removal of weeds.

Plant-based herbicide

32.     Plant-based herbicides used in the urban road corridor include Biosafe and Bio Weed Blast. The active ingredient is a fatty acid which is a contact herbicide. When applied to weeds, it burns off the foliage, thus preventing or reducing seed production and restricting growth.

33.     As plant-based herbicides are not systemic, i.e. they do not kill down to the root, they must be applied more frequently than glyphosate to meet service levels. Although they can kill annuals, generally they will not kill longer-lived mature perennial weeds, as they re-sprout from specialised (e.g. rhizomes) root tissue after the foliage has been burned off. Fatty acid-based herbicides need to be applied to young or small plants for acceptable weed control.[12]

34.     Plant-based herbicides are diluted with water and applied via foliar spray with small left-hand steer vehicle in the urban road corridor, approximately 12 times per year. The exclusive use of plant-based herbicide is approximately three times more expensive than glyphosate because of the additional frequency and quantity of product required.[13] There is an additional cost consideration due to the corrosive impact of the fatty acid on equipment which needs to be replaced more regularly.

35.     While plant-based herbicides are inactivated on contact with the soil and have no residual activity[14], there is a health and safety risk to be managed by the operators. The active ingredient is an eye, skin and respiratory irritant. There is a strong notable odour from plant-based herbicide which can be, and has been, the source of complaints from the public.

36.     For all agrichemical use, the council complies with the Environmental Protection Agency Code of Practice (NZS 8409:2004 Management of Agrichemicals) for the storage, mixing, use, disposal and certification of contractors.

37.     Plant-based herbicide is approved for use in Auckland and has been used since prior to amalgamation. Although there are no restrictions imposed by the EPA for application within the road corridor, the products have a hazard rating for toxicity for aquatic life. Instructions from the manufacturer include applying when conditions are dry, and rain is not expected in the road corridor within the next two hours.[15]

38.     Local boards that use plant-based herbicide exclusively, include Albert-Eden, Puketāpapa, Waitematā (excluding the central business district), Waiheke and Ellerslie in Ōrākei. All methodologies include some mechanical removal of weeds.

Thermal – steam and hot water

39.     Thermal technologies include steam and hot water. Water heated to high temperatures is applied to weeds with a hose and lance to destroy the foliage. Thermal weed management leaves the roots primarily untreated.[16]

40.     Thermal technology requires significant water use, using between 10-12L of water per minute.[17] Non-potable water sources can be used to mitigate demand on treated water sources, however non-potable water is not currently available in most areas of Auckland. This leaves the implementation of this method vulnerable to water restrictions as we have seen in 2020.[18]

41.     This method utilises mobile diesel boilers to heat water to 98 degrees. Diesel boilers use up to 9L[19] of diesel an hour with associated carbon emissions of 24kg.[20] Thermal technology is more expensive than herbicide. A two-person team is required, and the application rate is slower as it requires a prolonged application to cover the foliage. Application speeds are approximately 1.1km/hr[21] for thermal compared to 1.8km/hr for herbicide.[22] Like plant-based herbicide, thermal weed management needs to be applied more frequently, approximately 12 times a year, to meet weed management service levels.

42.     Local boards that use thermal technology include Devonport-Takapuna, Kaipātiki, parts of Upper Harbour and Hibiscus and Bays. There is some use of spot spraying of glyphosate to address persistent weeds. All methodologies include some mechanical removal of weeds.

 

 

Thermal – hot foam

43.     A product called Foamstream has been trialled in Auckland in 2020. Foamstream is a soluble concentrate which is added to hot water to create a foam and has been used in the United Kingdom for weed management. [23] The foam acts as an insulator to keep the heat higher for longer. The manufacturer claims that the use of foam could reduce the frequency of treatment cycles compared to using steam/hot water alone. A review of the trial is currently underway and, if the product proves suitable, staff will seek approval from Auckland Transport and Healthy Waters for its use in the road corridor.

Combination of synthetic and plant-based herbicide

44.     This approach uses a combination of both glyphosate and plant-based herbicide. Plant-based herbicide is applied throughout the year to manage weeds, with the use of glyphosate by spot spraying at peak weed growing times on difficult to control weeds.

45.     An integrated approach results in a reduction of both products and provides more effective control of persistent weeds than by using plant-based herbicide alone. This methodology is used in the Auckland Botanic Gardens to reduce the use of glyphosate. The use of herbicide with a different mode of action in combination with glyphosate is one of the main strategies to avoid glyphosate resistance.[24]

46.     Local boards that use a combined approach include Maungakiekie-Tāmaki and Ōrākei (except for Ellerslie where only plant-based herbicide is applied). All methodologies include some mechanical removal of weeds.

Methodology comparison

47.     In 2015, a comparison of methodologies was completed (see Attachment C). The data in the table was reviewed by Price Waterhouse Coopers (PWC) and the effectiveness, environmental and human health information was independently peer-reviewed by the firm AECOM.

48.     For the current review, further analysis was completed to estimate quantities of water, herbicide and operational carbon emissions per methodology. This reflects the council’s commitments within Te Tāruke-ā-Tāwhiri: Auckland's Climate Plan[25], the Auckland water efficiency strategy and the Weed Management Policy. The data on herbicide volumes has come from contractor reporting for the urban road corridor (as the data includes pest plant control, the use for edging and hard surfaces is expected to be lower). Water usage and fuel consumption are from product specification sheets and supplier data. These are estimates only, with volumes of herbicide and water varying by area, season and weed levels.

49.     For the purpose of this review, updated supplier costings for a regionally consistent approach were requested. The difference in pricing for alternative methodologies compared to glyphosate was expected, reflecting the different frequencies and volume of product needed. For plant-based weed control to achieve similar outcomes, more frequent treatments are required than glyphosate, thereby increasing the costs of materials, labour and fuel. Thermal technology is applied at the same frequency as plant-based herbicide, 12 times a year, with a slower application rate requiring a two-person team. These are estimates only and may not include costs for change implementation e.g. purchase of machinery etc.


 

       Table 1: Comparison of estimated operational carbon emissions, volume of water, herbicide and cost per km per year for each weed management approach

Methodology

Carbon emissions[26]

Water usage

Herbicide

Active Ingredient

(kg)

Application rate

Cost

Glyphosate

(6x per year)

1.1kg

180L

1.8L

0.9kg glyphosate

 

1.8km per hour (single operator)

$783

Combination of plant-based/ glyphosate

(10x per year)

1.9kg

870L

0.7L of glyphosate & 8L of plant-based

0.4kg glyphosate

5.6kg fatty acid

1.8km per hour (single operator)

 

$1293


Plant-based herbicide

(12x per year)

2.3kg

1350L[27]

13.5L

9.5kg

fatty acid

1.8km per hour (single operator)

$2265

Thermal technologies – steam and hot water

(12x per year)

264kg

6545L

Approx. 0.5L of glyphosate

0.25kg

glyphosate

1.1km per hour (two operators)

$3485

 Auckland Council – People’s Panel survey

50.     In October 2019, a People’s Panel survey was conducted as one mechanism to gauge how Aucklanders view management of weeds on footpaths and kerbs. The survey was sent to 39,789 members of the People’s Panel. They were provided with the information on the council website on the different methodologies[28]. However, at the time of the survey, estimated emissions, volume of herbicide, and cost were not available.

51.     Of the 5686 respondents, 66 per cent stated that they ‘care’ about the weeds on our footpaths and kerbs. The results showed that 43 per cent of residents use synthetic herbicide (e.g. glyphosate) for weed management on their own property. Synthetic herbicide (e.g. glyphosate) was the least preferred method for weed management in the road corridor by 52 per cent of respondents.

52.     Nineteen per cent were willing to pay higher rates for the council to use alternatives to synthetic herbicide, 42 per cent were not willing to pay extra, and 36 per cent indicated they may be willing to pay more[29]. There were differences in responses by local board area as detailed in Attachment A (People’s Panel results by local board).

53.     There are members of the community that believe glyphosate should not be used by Auckland Council.

Regional review recommendation

54.     The review of methodologies to manage weeds in the urban road corridor takes into consideration the Auckland Weed Management Policy, Te Tāruke-ā-Tāwhiri: Auckland's Climate Plan and community input.


 

Table 2: Summary of the advantages and disadvantages of the different weed management methodologies

Methodology

Advantages

Disadvantages

Synthetic herbicide – glyphosate

Low cost, low frequency of application, effective weed control

Reduced carbon emissions

Risk of community objection to the use of glyphosate

Restricted weather conditions for application

Herbicide resistance in some species

Plant-based herbicide

Reduction in glyphosate used by council for weed control

Immediate effect on weeds

Increased frequency and therefore a greater volume of herbicide compared to glyphosate

Plant-based herbicide is two to three times more expensive than glyphosate

The product is corrosive and has a strong odour

Restricted weather conditions for application

Thermal technology steam/hot water/hot water with a foam additive

Thermal technology does not use herbicide

Can be applied in any weather

Immediate effect on weeds

 

High water usage and carbon emissions

Spot spraying glyphosate is still required on high volume roads and to address persistent weeds

Thermal technology is more expensive than glyphosate

Combination of plant-based and synthetic herbicide, e.g. glyphosate

An estimated region-wide reduction in the use of glyphosate, carbon emissions and water use

Minimising the volume of agrichemical use across the region

Reduction in risk of plants developing glyphosate resistance

An increase in herbicide use in some local board areas

55.     The recommendation for a standardised methodology is a combination of plant-based herbicide with spot spraying of glyphosate for difficult weeds. This is estimated to lead to a reduction in glyphosate, carbon emissions and water usage across the region. There would be an increase in the use of plant-based herbicide. This approach is estimated to be achievable within current operational budgets.

56.     Thermal methodologies, including hot foam, could be used for sensitive areas but are not recommended for a region-wide approach due to their high emissions, water usage and cost. The exclusive use of plant-based herbicide is not recommended due to the additional volume of herbicide required and its cost.

57.     Local board feedback is sought on the standardised regional recommendation and on local priorities for weed control on footpath and kerb and channel (see Attachment B). Local board priorities will be included for consideration by the Environment and Climate Change Committee on 12 November 2020.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

58.     Climate change adaptation – changes in Auckland’s climate may alter the prevalence and spread of weeds within the road corridor. In the future, different methodologies and products may need to be considered depending on weed species.

59.     Climate change mitigation – Auckland Council adopted Te Tāruke-ā-Tāwhiri: Auckland's Climate Plan on 21 July 2020, which includes the reduction target for council to halve its carbon emissions by 2030 and reach zero net emissions by 2050.

60.     The choice of weed management methodologies has an impact on the council’s carbon emissions. The region-wide adoption of thermal would lead to an increase in carbon emissions at an estimated 1335 tons[30] or approximately 5 per cent of the council’s operational emissions for 2018/2019. This reflects the energy required to heat large volumes of water to 98 degrees with diesel boilers. The increase for the regional adoption of this methodology would impact on the council’s ability to meet the reduction targets of the Te Tāruke-ā-Tāwhiri: Auckland's Climate Plan.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

61.     Community Facilities undertakes the maintenance of green spaces within the road corridor under contract to and on behalf of Auckland Transport. Auckland Transport “manages and controls” the Auckland transport system as per the Local Government Act 1974 and the Land Transport Act 1998.

62.     Auckland Council adopted a Weed Management Policy for parks and open spaces in August 2013 (resolution number RDO/2013/137). The Weed Management Policy is to guide the management of weeds in Auckland’s parks and open spaces, including the road corridor.

63.     The recommendation for a standardised approach has been provided in consultation with Auckland Transport and with consideration of the objectives of the Weed Management Policy.

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

Local impacts and local board views

64.     The recommendations of this report will have differing impacts on local boards (except the Hauraki Gulf local boards which are excluded from the regional approach) given the different approaches currently in place. This report is to request feedback from local boards regarding their priorities for an effective, efficient, and sustainable standardised regional weed management methodology (see Attachment B).

65.     Should a local board choose to utilise alternative methodologies to those adopted as the region-wide approach, they are able to use locally-driven initiative (LDI) funding to cover the cost difference between the agreed regional weed management method and their preferred alternative.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

66.     The recommendations of the review take into consideration the Weed Management Policy, with the objective to minimise agrichemicals, and Te Tāruke-ā-Tāwhiri: Auckland's Climate Action Framework which were developed in consultation with mana whenua.

67.     An overview of the current methodologies and the priorities of the review were presented at the Infrastructure and Environmental Services Mana Whenua hui. The analysis and recommendations of the review will be presented to mana whenua for feedback in September 2020.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

68.     Different methodologies to manage weeds have different financial implications. This reflects the associated costs of the methodologies to achieve weed management outcomes.

Table 3: Estimated cost of weed management methodologies per km per annum[31]

Methodology

Estimated cost per km (per annum)

Estimated cost (per annum) across 5055km

Synthetic herbicide, e.g. glyphosate

$783

$3,958,000

Combination of plant-based and synthetic herbicide

$1293

 

$6,536,115

Plant-based herbicide, e.g. biosafe

$2265

$11,499,575

Thermal technology steam/hot water

$3485

$17,616,675

69.     The recommended approach, a combination of plant-based herbicide and spot spraying of glyphosate for difficult weeds, is estimated to be able to be delivered within the existing operational budgets.

70.     To standardise thermal and plant-based methodologies across the region would require an increase in budget to meet weed management service levels. As there is no additional operational budget for streetscape maintenance, methodologies requiring additional expenditure could impact on other Full Facilities services delivered to local boards e.g. town centre and park maintenance, replanting of gardens, and ability to respond to a request for service.

71.     Should a local board choose to utilise alternate methodologies to those adopted as the region-wide approach, they could use LDI funding to cover the cost difference between the agreed regional weed management method and their preferred alternative.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

72.     The outcomes of this project have the following risks:

Options

Risk

Mitigation

No change

Continuing with legacy arrangements, with inconsistent funding

Communication on the rationale for any decision to continue with legacy weed management methodologies

Standardising a regional weed methodology

Depending on the choice of the methodology, there would be different environmental and social impacts, including community concern

Local board decision-making enables the prioritisation of funding for local priorities and the services that their communities most value

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

73.     Local boards provide feedback on the recommended approach to weed management in the kerb and channel and footpaths and rank their priorities for weed management in the road corridor.

74.     Once the feedback is received, it will be collated and included in a report to the Environment and Climate Change Committee on 12 November 2020.

75.     At the meeting of the Environment and Climate Change Committee, a decision will be made on the methodology to be applied across the Auckland region for weed management.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Results of October 2019 People's Panel survey

195

b

Local board feedback on weed management impact priorities

219

c

Weed control methodology table

223

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Jenny Gargiulo – Principal Environmental Specialist

Authorisers

Rod Sheridan – General Manager, Community Facilities

Louise Mason - GM Local Board Services

Nina Siers - Relationship Manager for Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Puketāpapa

 


Puketāpapa Local Board

17 September 2020

 

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Puketāpapa Local Board

17 September 2020

 

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator



Puketāpapa Local Board

17 September 2020

 

 

PDF Creator


Puketāpapa Local Board

17 September 2020

 

 

PDF Creator


Puketāpapa Local Board

17 September 2020

 

 

PDF Creator


Puketāpapa Local Board

17 September 2020

 

 

PDF Creator


Puketāpapa Local Board

17 September 2020

 

 

PDF Creator



Puketāpapa Local Board

17 September 2020

 

 

Puketāpapa Local Board Strategic Relationship Grants 2020/2021

File No.: CP2020/13026

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To approve the allocation of funding for the Puketāpapa Strategic Relationship Grants 2020/2021.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       The Puketāpapa Local Board provides strategic relationship grants to build community capacity and to support community organisations to upskill staff and become more sustainable to deliver on initiatives which align to the local board’s priorities and outcomes.

3.       The local board approved a total strategic relationship grants budget of $122,500 for the 2020/2021 financial year (PKTPP/2020/110). A total of $55,500 was committed for year two of 2019/2020 approved multi-year applications (PKTPP/2019/130). This leaves a total of $70,000 to be allocated to the 2020/2021 strategic relationship grant round.

4.       Applications for the 2020/2021 grant round opened to community organisations on 27 January and closed on 10 April 2020.

5.       Thirteen applications were received requesting a total of $212,787. All applications were assessed by a panel of staff for alignment to the criteria outlined in the Puketāpapa Strategic Relationship Grant 2020/2021 Terms of Reference (Attachment A) and presented to the local board at a workshop on 28 May 2020.

6.       Staff recommend allocating $70,000 across six applicants who strongly align with the local board’s priorities and outcomes.

7.       Seven applications were determined to have medium or low alignment with the criteria. Staff will work with these organisations to look for alternative opportunities that are more aligned to the intended outcomes of their initiatives.

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Puketāpapa Local Board:

a)      Approve the following applications for strategic relationship grants:

Application ID

Applicant

Proposal

Recommended funding

PKTSRG2021-18

 

Tread Lightly Charitable Trust

Contribution to cost of delivering the Tread Lightly programme to schools in Puketāpapa.

$ 9827.00

(one-off)

PKTSRG2021-19

Roskill Together Trust

Contribution to a Community Development Coordinator and Programme Manager to provide community-led services across a range of age groups and cultures in Puketāpapa.

 

$10,000.00

(one-off)

PKTSRG2021-10

Roopa Aur Aap Charitable Trust

Contribution to salaries of counsellor, social worker and manager for counselling services in Puketāpapa.

$12,057.66 

 (one-off)

PKTSRG2021-17

New Zealand Ethnic Women's Trust

Contribution towards the development of 3-year Health and Wellbeing programme –resettled families.

$14,000.00

(one-off)

PKTSRG2021-01

Somali Education and Development Trust

Contribution to programme development, operational cost and programme coordinator.

$12,057.66 

(one-off)

 

PKTSRG2021-02

Bhartiya Samaj Charitable Trust

Contribution towards programme development.

$12,057.66 

(one-off)

 

Total

 

 

$70,000.000

 

b)      decline the following applications for strategic relationship grants:

Application ID

Applicant

Proposal

Recommended funding

PKTSRG2021-09

Auckland Deaf Society Incorporated

Contribution to filming equipment to improve online presence and professional development training programme for approx. 10-12 tutors.

$0

PKTSRG2021-11

Presbyterian Support (Northern)

Contribution to annual rent of their office at 37B Dornwell Road, Mt Roskill.

$0

PKTSRG2021-20

Social Enterprise Auckland Incorporated

Contribution to social entrepreneurs programme delivery, including four physical events, two interactive online workshops and two webinars for local businesses, innovators, entrepreneurs and social enterprises.

$0

PKTSRG2021-04

Tuilaepa Youth Mentoring Trust Board

Contribution to the cost of a project manager to implement the organisations business plan.

$0

PKTSRG2021-12

YMCA North

Towards Raise Up Puketāpapa Crew development and supporting the salary of the Youth Coordinator.

 

$0

PKTSRG2021-13

The Period Place

Towards programme management to reduce barriers and provide pathways for people to learn about and access environmentally sustainable period products and to enable positive conversations by openly discussing periods and reducing negative stigma.

 

$0

PKTSRG2021-16

Dress for Success Auckland

Contribution towards programme delivery.

$0

 

 

 

Horopaki

Context

8.       The purpose of the Puketāpapa Strategic Relationship Grants programme is to build community capacity and support community organisations to deliver on the local board’s priorities and outcomes identified in the Puketāpapa Local Board Plan 2017:

·    active participation

·    economic growth, good local jobs

·    improve transport choices and connectivity

·    strong sense of belonging and local identity

·    improving outcomes for Māori

9.       The Puketāpapa Strategic Relationship work programme line 992 has a total budget of $122,500.

10.     Applications for the 2020/2021 round of the Puketāpapa Strategic Relationship Grant programme opened on 27 January and closed on 10 April 2020.

11.     Applicants could apply for between $10,000 and $20,000 for one-off projects, and up to $20,000 per year over three years for multi-year funding.

12.     The strategic relationship grants programme was extensively advertised through the council grants webpage, local board webpages, local board e-newsletters, Facebook pages, council publications, and community networks.

13.     Thirteen applications were received (Attachment B) and assessed by a panel of staff for alignment to the criteria outlined in the Puketāpapa Strategic Relationship Grant 2020/2021 Terms of Reference (Attachment A).

14.     The Terms of Reference were developed by staff and adopted by the local board in 2018/2019. The criteria was revised in March 2020 to include Council’s ‘Guidance on payment of grants and other funding during Covid-19 Alert.

15.     The thirteen applications were presented to the local board at a workshop on 28 May 2020 to discuss their alignment with the local board’s priorities and outcomes for the grant round.

16.     A second workshop was held with the local board on 10 August 2020 to present additional requested information on applicants’ financial position and funding recently received from external funding sources post COVID-19.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

17.     Applications were assessed through a two-stage process as follows:

i.          Applications were assessed against grant programme eligibility criteria.

ii.          An internal Assessment Panel comprising of a convenor, three assessors and two subject matter experts. The panel considered all applications against the outcome areas and recommended grant allocations based on application assessment and alignment with grant programme outcomes. Subject matter experts in Youth Empowerment and Social Enterprise provided additional comments and insights for relevant applications.

18.     Following the impact of COVID-19 and the movement of Auckland between various alert levels, staff also asked applicants to consider adjustments to the new operating environment and provide additional information on how they were:

·    responding to emerging needs

·    changing and adapting to new or different delivery methods

·    increasing the use of technology

·    looking to contribute to the recovery phase

19.     Six applications were determined to strongly align with the criteria and are recommended for one-off funding; noting that five multi-year grant recipients were approved in 2019/2020 and will be entering year two of the funding cycle (PKTPP/2019/130).

20.     Funding these organisations will enable the local board to:

·    strengthen its strategic relationship with more organisations

·    invest in building capacity and capability so that the organisations are better able to deliver their services effectively, demonstrate impact, increase sustainability and strengthen their funding position to attract diverse funding opportunities

·    improve outcomes for local Māori communities

21.     Staff recommend allocating a total of $70,000 to the following applications with high alignment.

22.     The eligibility of each application recommended for funding has been identified in table one below:

Table one: 2020/2021 applications recommended for funding

Application ID

Applicant

Proposal

Requested funding

Recommended funding

PKTSRG2021-18

Tread Lightly Charitable Trust

Contribution to cost of delivering the Tread Lightly programme to schools in Puketāpapa.

$ 9827.00

(one-off)

$ 9827.00

(one-off)

Reason for full funding: The applicant has a good record of delivery.

The grant will support and facilitate a high level of engagement and learning from students, families and schools in the Puketāpapa area to change behaviours to reduce the impact of their everyday lives on the environment. The application demonstrates collaboration with local schools and realistic budget for use of funds.

PKTSRG2021-19

Roskill Together Trust

Contribution to a Community Development Coordinator and Programme Manager to provide community-led services across a range of age groups and cultures in Puketāpapa.

$10,000.00

(one-off)

$10,000.00

 (one-off)

Reason for full funding: The applicant is a key local community organisation that has the potential to grow their impact to deliver further community outcomes.

If the grant is approved, the applicant has agreed to work with staff to build the applicant's capabilities.

PKTSRG2021-10

Roopa Aur Aap Charitable Trust

Contribution to salaries of counsellor, social worker and manager for counselling services in Puketāpapa.

$20,000.00

(one-off)

$12,057.66 

 (one-off)

Reason for part-funding: Previously the applicant has been funded through local grants in May 2020. A contribution towards wages and salaries would lift the capacity of the organisation to respond to family harm incidents and respond to emerging needs across the COVID19 alert levels. If the grant is approved, staff will work with the applicant to improve the applicant's capabilities to monitor impact and evaluate outcomes in the local board.

PKTSRG2021-17

New Zealand Ethnic Women's Trust

Contribution towards the development of 3-year Health and Wellbeing programme –resettled families.

$19760.00

(one-off)

$14,000.00

(one-off)

Reason for part-funding: A solid proposal, also aligns with LDI line 991 Diverse participation priorities: where diverse local communities are healthy, inclusive, connected and participating.

Opportunity to start a conversation with the group for the workshops to include: COVID19-prevention information which is language appropriate, healthy eating choices, how to access health services, and other health related information. This programme will improve people’s connectedness and wellbeing so that they are engaged in the community and have access to a wide range of support through the Covid-19 response and recovery periods.

If the grant is approved, the applicant has agreed to work with staff to build the applicant's capabilities towards financial planning and sustainability and increase collaboration with other community organisations.

PKTSRG2021-01

Somali Education and Development Trust

Contribution to programme development, operational cost and programme coordinator.

$20,000.00 (multi-year)

$12,057.66 

 (one-off)

 

Reason for part-funding: Somali Education and Development Trust is an integral part of the wider network of refugee and new migrant communities and is a key local community organisation that has the potential to grow their impact to deliver further community outcomes. If the grant is approved, the applicant has agreed to work with staff to build the applicant's capabilities.

PKTSRG2021-02

Bhartiya Samaj Charitable Trust

Contribution towards programme development.

$20,000.00

(one-off)

$12,057.66 

(one-off)

 

Reason for part-funding:

The applicant has a good record of delivery and is a key local community organisation that delivers local community outcomes. If the grant is approved, staff will work with the applicant to build the applicant's capabilities to monitor impact and evaluate outcomes in the local board area and build collaboration with community organisations and networks.

Total

                                                                                                           $70,000.00

 

23.     As part of the implementation support provided, staff will be working with the organisations to introduce The Community Impact Toolkit. This is a five-step process from planning through to reporting. This will form part of the funding agreement to ensure good practice measures and evaluation processes are in place and to enable full accountability and report back to the local board.

24.     Five applications were determined to have medium or low alignment with the criteria or were in a stronger financial position than recommended applications. Staff will work with these organisations to look for other opportunities for collaboration with the local board or connect them with other funding rounds that are more aligned to the intended outcomes of their initiatives.

 

 

 

 

 

25.     Staff recommend declining the following five applications with medium or low alignment:

Table 2: Applications not recommended for funding

Application ID

Applicant

Proposal

Recommended funding

PKTSRG2021-09

Auckland Deaf Society Incorporated

Contribution to filming equipment to improve online presence and professional development training programme for approx. 10-12 tutors.

$0

Reason to decline: The proposal has stronger alignment with local grants and the applicant will be encouraged to make an application to the Local Grants round in 2020/2021.

PKTSRG2021-11

Presbyterian Support (Northern)

Contribution to annual rent of their office at 37B Dornwell Road, Mt Roskill.

$0

Reason to decline:  Insufficient detail about strategic plan, budget breakdown is unclear.

PKTSRG2021-20

Social Enterprise Auckland Incorporated

Contribution to social entrepreneurs programme delivery, including four physical events, two interactive online workshops and two webinars for local businesses, innovators, entrepreneurs and social enterprises.

$0

Reason to decline: The proposal has stronger alignment with local grants and the applicant has been funded through 2019/2020 Local Grants round.

PKTSRG2021-04

Tuilaepa Youth Mentoring Trust Board

Contribution to the cost of a project manager to implement the organisations business plan.

$0

Reason to decline: The organisation is based in West Auckland and there are existing youth providers in Puketāpapa currently working with Pasifka/Maori young people.

PKTSRG2021-12

YMCA North

Towards Raise Up Puketāpapa Crew development and supporting the salary of the Youth Coordinator

$0

Reason to decline: Whilst the proposal aligned with the fund, at the time of the assessment the organisation received some support through other council funding.

PKTSRG2021-13

The Period Place

Towards programme management to reduce barriers and provide pathways for people to learn about and access environmentally sustainable period products and to enable positive conversations by openly discussing periods and reducing negative stigma.

$0

Reason to decline:  The purpose of the initiative as proposed is unclear, and the budget breakdown and planning details are insufficient. The proposal has stronger alignment with local grants.

PKTSRG2021-16

Dress for Success Auckland

Contribution towards programme development.

$0

Reason to decline:  Ineligible: $5,000 is below the minimum amount for grants per year in this round.

 

 

 

 

 

 

26.    The following table two outlines the five multi-year grant recipients who will be entering year two of the funding cycle.

Table 3: Summary of 2019/2020 approved multi-year applications

Organisation

Amount recommended

Type of funding

English Language Partners

$10,000

Multi-year (three years)

Migrants Action Trust

$10,000

Multi-year (three years)

The UMMA Trust

$10,000

Multi-year (three years)

Te Karanga Trust

$12,500

Multi-year (three years)

Earth Action Trust

$10,000

Multi-year (three years)

Total:

$52,500

 

 

25.     The five recipients of multi-year grants have provided progress reports to demonstrate key performance indicators being met in the 2019/2020 financial year. The progress reports show recipients have increased their capacity, expanded their activities and have been responsive to the needs of their communities.  Multi-year recipients’ accountability updates were shared with the local board at a workshop on 28 May 2020.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

27.     All of the six applications determined to strongly align with the criteria and are recommended for funding will have a positive impact on climate change due to the reduced need for people to travel to reach these services.

28.     All of the six applications determined to strongly align with the criteria and recommended for funding are helping to develop community resilience and adaptation. This will broadly contribute toward community readiness for changes in the future such as those caused by climate change.

29.     Mana Taiao (Environment) is one of the key local board outcomes noted in the Strategic Relationship Grants Terms of Reference, including support for initiatives that promote active modes of transportation, reduction in carbon and other vehicle missions and environmental and ecological sustainability.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

The ‘Guidance on payment of grants and other funding during COVID-19 Alert’ adopted by the local board on 29 April 2020 was applied to the 2020/2021 Puketāpapa Strategic Relationship Grants. The grants are to be awarded based on the exception criteria.

29.     Alignment to the funding exception criteria during COVID-19 Alert Levels 4 and 3 was considered by a panel of staff including whether the applicant organisations were:

·    deemed as essential service – providing welfare support for vulnerable people in the community

·    able to deliver vital services during Levels 4 to 1 and through response and recovery periods.

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

Local impacts and local board views

30.     The local board is responsible for the decision-making and allocation of Puketāpapa Strategic Relationship Grants 2020/2021. The Puketāpapa local board is required to fund, part-fund or decline these grant applications against the local board priorities identified in the Puketāpapa Strategic Relationship Grant 2020/2021 Terms of Reference (Attachment B).

31.     Thirteen applications were received and presented to the local board at a workshop on 28 May 2020 to discuss their alignment with the local board’s priorities and outcomes for the grant round. 

32.     Staff note that section 48 of the Community Grants Policy states; ‘we will also provide feedback to unsuccessful grant applicants about why they have been declined, so they will know what they can do to increase their chances of success next time’.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

Māori make up six per cent of the local board population.

38.     The Puketāpapa Strategic Relationship Grant 2020/2021 aims to respond to council’s commitment to improving Māori wellbeing by providing grants to organisations who deliver positive outcomes for Māori.

39.       All six of the applications recommended for funding have identified outcomes for Māori:

·    Tread Lightly Charitable Trust: the programmes will indirectly influence achievement of Māori outcomes through engagement with tamariki and rangatahi Māori, with flow on effects for whānau (through encouraging intergenerational knowledge-sharing and learning). There may be an opportunity to further embed Māori culture and practices in the programme design i.e. concepts of kaitiakitanga and mauri.

·    Roskill Together Trust: the importance of the Treaty of Waitangi and Tikanga Māori practices are embedded through the delivery of Ngā Herenga Waka project activity, where Māori involvement in the design/concept, promotion of Te reo and tikanga practice is prioritised.

·    Roopa Aur Aap Charitable Trust: services and programmes are supported by values and commitment to affirming whānau connections by building and maintaining robust relationships with Māori communities and whānau and demonstrating hospitality through being welcoming, responsive, affirming and respective of all people and their whānau.

·    New Zealand Ethnic Women’s Trust: there is a desire to expand services and programmes to target women of Māori decent.

·    Somali Education: the applicant acknowledges the importance of Te Ao Māori and tikanga practices and its inclusion in areas of programme design and organisational operations.

·    Bhartiya Samaj Charitable Trust: ensures activities and events celebrate Māori culture.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

33.     The local board has set a total Puketāpapa Strategic Relationship Grants 2020/2021 work programme line 992 budget of $122,500. A total of $55,500 was committed for year two of 2019/2020 approved multi-year applications (PKTPP/2019/130). This leaves a total of $70,000 to be allocated to Puketāpapa Strategic Relationship Grants 2020/2021 applications.

42.     Staff recommend allocating $70,000 across six applications for the grant round.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

34.     The allocation of grants occurs within the guidelines and criteria of the Puketāpapa Strategic Relationship Grants 2020/2021 Terms of Reference. The assessment process has identified a low risk associated with funding the applications in this round.

44.     Risks associated with the ongoing response to COVID-19 have been mitigated through application of the ‘Guidance on payment of grants and other funding during Covid-19 Alert’ with all six of the recommended applications who are either deemed as essential service – providing welfare support for vulnerable people in the community and/or able to deliver their services in different ways during different alert levels. 

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

45.     Staff will notify the applicants of the local board’s decision.

46.     Staff will work create funding agreements for successful applicants, and work with unsuccessful applicants to advise on alternate funding opportunities.

47.     Staff will provide the local board with quarterly progress reports on the funded organisations and grant recipients will be invited to present their final accountability report at a local board workshop following the completion of the funded initiative.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Terms of Reference

239

b

Application Information (Under Separate Cover)

 

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Daylyn Braganza - Advisor - ACE

Authorisers

Graham Bodman - General Manager Arts, Community and Events

Nina Siers - Relationship Manager for Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Puketāpapa

 


Puketāpapa Local Board

17 September 2020

 

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Puketāpapa Local Board

17 September 2020

 

 

Puketāpapa Local Grants Round One and Multi-Board Round One 2020/2021, grant allocations

File No.: CP2020/12689

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

To fund, part-fund or decline the applications received for Puketāpapa Local Grants Round One and Multi-Board Round One 2020/2021.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

1.       This report presents applications received for the Puketāpapa Local Grants Round One (Attachment B) and Multi-Board Round One 2020/2021(Attachment C).

2.       The Puketāpapa Local Board adopted the Puketāpapa Local Board Community Grants Programme 2020/2021 on 21 May 2020 (Attachment A). The document sets application guidelines for community contestable grants.

3.       The local board has set a total community grants budget of $138,543 for the 2020/2021 financial year.

4.       Twenty applications were received for Puketāpapa Local Grants, Round One 2020/2021, requesting a total of $65,138.03 and seven multiboard applications were also received requesting a total of $22,918.72.

 

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Puketāpapa Local Board:

a)      agree to fund, part-fund or decline each application in Puketāpapa Local Grants Round One 2020/2021 listed in the following table:   

Application ID

Organisation

Main focus

Requesting funding for

Amount requested

Eligibility

LG2115-104

Urdu Hindi Cultural Association of New Zealand Incorporated

Arts and culture

Towards venue hire, stationery, printing, sound system costs, and musician fees for a “Ghazal Night – Poetry Symposium” at the Fickling Centre on the 21 November 2020.

$1,000.00

Eligible

LG2115-101

Brentwood Community Outreach

Community

Towards the purchase of food ingredients and transport to provide free cooked meals every Monday evening at the Wesley Community Centre.

$1,000.00

Eligible

LG2115-102

Mountains To Sea Conservation Trust

Community

Towards the cost of running a fully funded "Wesley and Waikowhai Kaitiaki Programmes" for 60 students from Wesley and Waikowhai Intermediate Schools respectively, including the cost of “Experiencing Marine Reserves” and “Para Kore Ki Tāmaki” components. (excludes the mileage and travel costs).

$5,000.00

Eligible

LG2115-105

Communicare-Civilian Maimed Association (Auckland) Incorporated

Community

Towards the weekly venue hire of the Hillsborough Friendship Centre for one year from 5 October 2020 to 30 September 2021.

$2,250.00

Eligible

LG2115-106

Blue Light Ventures Incorporated

Community

Towards the cost of three young people from the local board area to attend the Blue Light life skills programme.

$1,304.34

Eligible

LG2115-109

Mt Roskill Baptist Church

Community

Towards the cost of hiring “ride-on” preschool toys, a photo booth, three bouncy castles and an inflatable jousting arena for hosting the “Light Party” on 31 October 2020.

$1,166.08

Eligible

LG2115-110

Dance Therapy NZ

Community

Towards programme facilitation, marketing, materials, venue hire (Roskill Youth Zone), coordination, and administration costs for the "Dance 4 Us Mount Roskill" workshops from 15 February to 5 July 2021.

$5,000.00

Eligible

LG2115-115

Life Education Trust Counties Manukau

Community

Towards the overall costs to deliver a health and well-being programme to schools in the Puketāpapa Local Board area.

$5,000.00

Eligible

LG2115-116

Bhartiya Samaj Charitable Trust

Community

Towards the cost of sports clinic workshops, transport for a days outing, gift vouchers for volunteers and teachers and certificates, and trophies for a five day annual summer camp for children from the South Asian community.

$5,000.00

Eligible

LG2115-117

Pauline Visesio

Community

Towards venue hire, catering, volunteer facilitator, posters and stationery costs for running a senior support programme.

$1,000.00

Eligible

LG2115-118

Puketapapa Business Voice

Roskill Together Trust

Community

Towards the "Puketapapa Business Voice” coordinator's" fees.

$5,000.00

Eligible

LG2115-120

Roopa Aur Aap Charitable Trust

Community

Towards the cost of counselling sessions for the victims of family violence over three months.

$5,000.00

Eligible

LG2115-121

Hillsborough Community Trust

Community

Towards staging, bouncy castle hire and signage cost for the “Hillsborough Christmas Festival”.

$1,262.61

Eligible

LG2115-122

Youthline Auckland Charitable Trust

Community

Towards the costs of training and management of the volunteer counsellors from 1 October 2020 to 31 March 2021.

$4,000.00

Eligible

LG2115-123

Basava Samithi Australasia (NZ Chapter) Incorporated

Community

Towards the cost of annual functions for the Basaya Samithi group.

$4,715.00

Ineligible

LG2115-125

Active Transport Trust

Community

Towards the refurbishment of the "Roskill Bike Kitchen Container" specifically the cost of materials, concrete, wooden framing, corrugated iron, cladding, screws and nails.

$3,500.00

Eligible

LG2115-126

Puketapapa Business Voice

Roskill Together Trust

Community

Towards the "Puketapapa Business Voice" website development.

$1,400.00

Eligible

LG2115-127

New Zealand Eid Day Trust Board

Community

Towards the costs of security, audio-visual equipment, sound, and cleaning to host New Zealand Eid Day 2021 - Eid al Fitr.

$5,000.00

Eligible

LG2115-107

Friends of Wairaki Stream

Friends of Oakley Creek Incorporated

Environment

Towards the purchase of traps (possum and rat), bait and printing costs for flyers.

$2,540.00

Eligible

LG2115-103

Dominion Road School

Sport and recreation

Towards the purchase and installation of "Rugby and Soccer combination junior goal posts" for the "Dominion Road School playing fields

$5,000.00

Eligible

Total

 

 

 

$65,138.03

 

 

That the Puketāpapa Local Board:

b)      agree to fund, part-fund or decline each application in Puketāpapa Multiboard Round One 2020/2021, listed in Table Two below:

Application ID

Organisation

Main focus

Requesting funding for

Amount requested

Eligibility

MB2021-150

The Kids for Kids Charitable Trust

Arts and culture

Towards venue hire and production costs for the Kids Youth Choir performance at the Vodafone Events Centre.

$3,000.00

Eligible

MB2021-110

Fahima Saeid

Community

Towards the cost of hosting a “Refugee Ball” at the Flicking Centre, including venue hire, sound, volunteer, food, transport, artists and performers costs.

$2,000.00

Eligible

MB2021-119

CNSST Foundation, formerly known as Chinese New Settlers Services Trust

Community

Towards classroom rental costs, advertising, and contracted teacher fees for the "Unite Against COVID-19 CNSST Education and Well-being Programme"

$3,000.00

Eligible

MB2021-130

YMCA North Incorporated

Community

Towards the resources, marketing, catering, transport, training, and development costs of planning and implementing the Youth Advisory Panel initiatives across the four YMCA centres.

$3,000.00

Eligible

MB2021-139

Babystart Charitable Trust

Community

Towards babystart boxes, including clothing, blankets, towels and mother and baby goods, packaging materials, logistics and courier costs.

$3,954.72

Eligible

MB2021-136

The ReCreators Ltd

Environment

Towards the costs of Christmas upcycling workshops in local board areas including the costs of facilitators, materials, preparation, project management and administration.

$4,964.00

Eligible

MB2021-114

Auckland Softball Association Incorporated

Sport and recreation

Towards operating expenses for the Auckland Softball Association.

$3,000.00

Eligible

Total

 

 

 

$22,918.72

 

 

 

 

 

Horopaki

Context

1.       The local board allocates grants to groups and organisations delivering projects, activities and services that benefit Aucklanders and contribute to the vision of being a world class city.

2.       Auckland Council’s Community Grants Policy supports each local board to adopt a grants programme.

3.       The local board grants programme sets out:

·    local board priorities

·    lower priorities for funding

·    exclusions

·    grant types, the number of grant rounds and when these will open and close

·    any additional accountability requirements.

 

4.       The Puketāpapa Local Board adopted the Puketāpapa Local Board Community Grants Programme 2020/2021 on 21 May 2020 (Attachment A). The document sets application guidelines for community contestable grants.

5.       The community grants programmes have been extensively advertised through the council grants webpage, local board webpages, local board e-newsletters, Facebook pages, council publications and community networks.

6.       The local board has set a total community grants budget of $138,543 for the 2020/2021 financial year.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

5.       Due to the current COVID-19 crisis, staff have also assessed each application according to which alert level the proposed activity is able to proceed, under alert level two only 10 people are able to gather. Events and activities have been assessed according to this criterion.

6.       The aim of the local board grants programme is to deliver projects and activities which align with the outcomes identified in the local board plan. All applications have been assessed utilising the Community Grants Policy and the local board grant programme criteria. The eligibility of each application is identified in the report recommendations.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

7.       The local board grants programme aims to respond to Auckland Council’s commitment to address climate change by providing grants to individuals and groups with projects that support community climate change action. Community climate action involves reducing or responding to climate change by residents in a locally relevant way. Local board grants can contribute to expanding climate action by supporting projects that reduce carbon emissions and increase community resilience to climate impacts. Examples of projects include:

·    local food production and food waste reduction

·    decreasing use of single-occupancy transport options

·    home energy efficiency and community renewable energy generation

·    local tree planting and streamside revegetation

·    education about sustainable lifestyle choices that reduce carbon footprints.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

7.       Based on the main focus of an application, a subject matter expert from the relevant department will provide input and advice. The main focus of an application is identified as arts, community, events, sport and recreation, environment or heritage.

8.       The grants programme has no identified impacts on council-controlled organisations and therefore their views are not required.

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

Local impacts and local board views

9.       Local boards are responsible for the decision-making and allocation of local board community grants.  The Puketāpapa Local Board is required to fund, part-fund or decline these grant applications in accordance with its priorities identified in the local board grant programme.

10.     Staff will provide feedback to unsuccessful grant applicants about why they have been declined, so they can increase their chances of success in the future.

11.     A summary of each application received through Puketāpapa Local Grants, Round One 2020/2021 and multi-board applications is provided in Attachment B and Attachment C.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

12.     The local board grants programme aims to respond to Auckland Council’s commitment to improving Maori wellbeing by providing grants to individuals and groups who deliver positive outcomes for Maori. Auckland Council’s Maori Responsiveness Unit has provided input and support towards the development of the community grants processes.

13.     Nine applicants applying to Puketāpapa Local Grants Round One and five applicants applying to the multiboard round one 2020/2021 indicate projects that target Māori or Māori outcomes.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

14.     The allocation of grants to community groups is within the adopted Long-term Plan 2018-2028 and local board agreements.

15.     The local board has set a total community grants budget of $138,543 for the 2020/2021 financial year.

16.     Twenty applications were received for Puketāpapa Local Grants, Round One 2020/2021, requesting a total of $65,138.03 and seven multiboard applications were also received requesting a total of $22,918.72.

17.       Relevant staff from Auckland Council’s Finance Department have been fully involved in the development of all local board work programmes, including financial information in this report, and have not identified any financial implications.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

18.     The allocation of grants occurs within the guidelines and criteria of the Community Grants Policy and the local board grants programme. The assessment process has identified a low risk associated with funding the applications in this round.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

19.     Following the Puketāpapa Local Board allocating funding for round one of the local grants and multiboard grants, grants staff will notify the applicants of the local board’s decision.

 

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Puketāpapa Local Board Grants Programme 2020/2021

253

b

Puketāpapa Local Grants Round One 2020/2021 - grant applications (Under Separate Cover)

 

c

Puketāpapa Multi-Board Round One 2020/2021 - grant applications (Under Separate Cover)

 

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Moumita Dutta - Senior Grants Advisor

Authorisers

Marion Davies - Grants and Incentives Manager

Nina Siers - Relationship Manager for Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Puketāpapa

 


Puketāpapa Local Board

17 September 2020

 

 


 


 


 


Puketāpapa Local Board

17 September 2020

 

 

Local Board Annual Report 2019/2020

File No.: CP2020/12706

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To seek local board adoption of the 2019/2020 Annual Report for the Puketāpapa Local Board, prior to it being adopted by the Governing Body on 29 October 2020.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       The Auckland Council Annual Report 2019/2020 is being prepared and needs to be adopted by the Governing Body by 29 October 2020. As part of the overall report package, individual reports for each local board are prepared.

3.          Auckland Council currently has a series of bonds quoted on the New Zealand Stock Exchange (NZX) Debt Market maintained by NZX Limited. As council is subject to obligations under the NZX Main Board and Debt Market Listing Rules and the Financial Markets Conduct Act 2013 (FMCA), local boards may not release annual financial results in any form. Therefore, the attached annual report is being presented as confidential.

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Puketāpapa Local Board:

a)      adopt the 2019/2020 Puketāpapa Local Board Annual Report as set out in Attachment A.

b)      note that any proposed changes after the adoption will be clearly communicated and agreed with the chairperson before the report is submitted for adoption by the Governing Body by 29 October 2020.

c)      note that the draft 2019/2020 Puketāpapa Local Board Annual Report (refer to Attachment A to the agenda report) will remain confidential until after the Auckland Council group results for 2019/2020 are released to the New Zealand Stock Exchange which are expected to be made public by 30 October 2020.

 

Horopaki

Context

4.       In accordance with the Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009 and the Local Government Act 2002, each local board is required to monitor and report on the implementation of its Local Board Agreement. This includes reporting on the performance measures for local activities, and the overall Financial Impact Statement for the local board.

5.       In addition to the compliance purpose, local board annual reports are an opportunity to tell the wider performance story with a strong local flavour, including how the local board is working towards the outcomes of their local board plan.

6.       This story is particularly important this year in light of the impacts Covid-19 had on communities and the council in the third quarter of 2019/2020.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

7.       The annual report contains the following sections:

Section

Description

Mihi

The mihi relates to the local board area.

Message from the chairperson

An overall message introducing the report, highlighting achievements and challenges, including both financial and non-financial performance.

Local board members

A group photo of the local board members.

Our area

A visual layout of the local board area, summarising key demographic information and showing key projects and facilities in the area.

Performance report

Provides performance measure results for each activity, providing explanations where targeted service levels have not been achieved.

Funding information

Financial performance results compared to long-term plan and annual plan budgets, together with explanations about variances.

Local flavour

A profile of either an outstanding resident, grant, project or facility that benefits the local community.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

8.       The Council’s Climate Change disclosures are covered in Volume four of the Annual Report and sections within the Summary Annual Report.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

9.       Council departments and council-controlled organisations comments and views have been considered and included in the annual report in relation to activities they are responsible for delivering on behalf of local boards.

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

Local impacts and local board views

10.     Local board feedback will be included where possible. Any changes to the content of the final annual report will be discussed with the chairperson.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

11.     The annual report provides information on how Auckland Council has progressed its agreed priorities in the Long-term Plan 2018-2028 over the past 12 months. This includes engagement with Māori, as well as projects that benefit various population groups, including Māori.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

12.     The annual report reports on both the financial and service performance in each local board area.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

13.     The annual report is a legislatively required document. It is audited by Audit New Zealand who assess if the report represents information fairly and consistently, and that the financial statements comply with accounting standard PBE FRS-43: Summary Financial Statements. Failure to demonstrate this could result in a qualified audit opinion.

14.     The annual report is a key communication to residents. It is important to tell a clear and balanced performance story, in plain English, and in a form that is accessible, to ensure that council meets its obligations to be open with the public it serves.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

15.     The next steps for the draft 2019/2020 Annual Report for the local board are:

·     Audit NZ review during August and September 2020

·     report to the Governing Body for adoption on 29 October 2020

·     release to stock exchanges and publication online on 30 October 2020

·     physical copies provided to local board offices, council service centres and libraries by the end of October 2020.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Draft 2019/2020 Puketapapa Local Board Annual Report - Confidential

 

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

David Rose - Lead Financial Advisor

Authorisers

David Gurney – Manager Corporate and Local Board Performance, Financial Strategy and Planning

Kevin Ramsay - Acting Group Chief Financial Officer

Nina Siers - Relationship Manager for Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Puketāpapa

 


Puketāpapa Local Board

17 September 2020

 

 

Auckland Council's Year End and Quarterly Performance Report: Puketāpapa Local Board for quarter four 2019/2020

File No.: CP2020/13191

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To provide the Puketāpapa Local Board with an integrated quarterly performance report for quarter four, 1 April – 30 June 2020, and the overall performance for the financial year, against the agreed 2019/2020 local board work programme.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       This report provides an integrated view of performance for the Puketāpapa Local Board and includes financial performance and delivery against work programmes for the 2019/2020 financial year. Detailed information is provided in the following:

·        Attachment A, Puketāpapa Work Programme Update (Q4)

·        Attachment B, Puketāpapa Local Board performance report for the financial quarter four and year ending 30 June 2020.

3.       The COVID19 pandemic has resulted in significant pressure on council’s financial position. In response to the Ministry of Health’s orders and to ensure prudent financial management council’s focus and expenditure shifted to essential services. A pause on spending on non-essential services has had a significant impact on the delivery of work programme activities.

4.       75 activities within the agreed work programmes were delivered, including multi-year projects, that have progressed as expected.  42 activities were significantly delayed, on hold or not delivered.

5.       Key activity achievements from the 2019/2020 work programme include:

·    ID 145 Youth Development: The Puketāpapa Youth Board pivoted in response to lockdown restriction by running digital engagement in quarter three and four

·    ID 2425 Keith Hay Park in stall lightening and irrigation: installation of sports field lighting completed.

·    ID 479 Bremner Avenue Te Auaunga restoration project: This project and was able to be completed within the financial year despite the COVID-19 restrictions.

·    ID 3817 An Integrated Area Plan for the Mt Roskill redevelopment area, which is part of the Albert Eden and Puketāpapa Local Board area: This activity has progressed during COVID-19 restrictions. 

6.       Key activities not delivered / not progressed as expected include:

·    ID 883 Healthy Puketāpapa Action Plan: quarter four activities were impacted by
COVID-19, with no implementation due to redeployment of the Project Manager to the Auckland Regional Public Health Service.

·    ID 641 Healthy Rentals Puketāpapa: This project involves a visit to the rental property and installation of energy efficiency measures, so was unable to be completed due to COVID-19 restrictions.

·    ID 814 Increasing local employment through Freeland Reserve stream restoration project:  This project was cancelled due to the COVID-19 lockdown. The physical distancing restrictions meant that the training for this project could not occur

 

·      ID 884 Puketāpapa migrant community volunteer co-ordinator: The Migrant community volunteer co-ordinator activities in Puketāpapa parks were very severely reduced due to COVID-19 restrictions, especially during April and May.

7.       Budgets of unfinished activities have been carried forward into 2020/2021 work programmes.

8.       The 2019/2020 financial performance report is attached but is excluded from the public. This is due to restrictions on releasing annual financial reports and results until the Auckland Council Group results are released to the NZX – on or about 30 September.

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Puketāpapa Local Board:

a)      receive the performance report for the financial quarter four and year ending 30 June 2020.

b)      note the financial performance report in Attachment B of the report will remain confidential until after the Auckland Council Group results for 2019/2020 are released to the New Zealand’s Exchange (NZX) which are expected to be made public 30 September 2020.

c)      note that COVID19 has resulted in significant pressure on council’s financial position and ability to deliver agreed 2019/2020 work programme activities because

i)        asset based services were significantly impacted.  Regional and community facilities were either fully or partially closed.

ii)       spending on contracts was restricted to essential services only.

d)      note that quarter three reporting was not supplied to the local board as there was limited capacity to access information.

 

 

Horopaki

Context

9.       The Puketāpapa Local Board has an approved 2019/2020 work programme for the following operating departments:

·        Arts, Community and Events;

·        Parks, Sport and Recreation;

·        Libraries;

·        Community Facilities: Build Maintain Renew;

·        Community Leases;

·        Infrastructure and Environmental Services;

·        Plans and Places;

·        ATEED.

·        The Southern Initiative / The West Initiative;

 

 

10.     The graph below shows how the work programme activities meet Local Board Plan outcomes.  Activities that are not part of the approved work programme but contribute towards the local board outcomes, such as advocacy by the local board, are not captured in this graph.

Graph 1: work programme activities by outcome

 

11.     The COVID19 pandemic has resulted in significant pressure on council’s financial position and ability to deliver agreed 2019/2020 work programme activities.  In response to the orders made by Director General of Health on 25 March 2020 under s 70 of the Health Act 1956 council’s focus and expenditure shifted to essential services only.  Physical distancing requirements and measures to ensure prudent financial management meant that only essential activities and services could continue.

12.     Asset based services were significantly impacted as all regional and community facilities were either fully or partially closed depending on the Ministry of Health’s guidelines for each COVID19 alert level.

13.     Spending on contracts was restricted to essential services while in Alert Level 4.  These restrictions were reviewed as alert levels changed.  There are currently no restrictions, however, there continues to be extra spending approvals in place to ensure prudent spending and delivery of value for money for ratepayers.

14.     Reporting on quarter three reporting was not supplied to the local board as council staff working from home during the lockdown had limited capacity to access information and systems which affected their ability to deliver reports in a robust and meaningful way.

 

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Local Board Work Programme Snapshot

15.     The graph below identifies work programme activity by RAG status (red, amber, green and grey) which measures the performance of the activity.  It shows the percentage of work programme activities that have been delivered as expected (completed by the end of July 2019) or multi-year activities which have progressed as planned (green), in progress but with issues that are being managed (amber), and activities that are undelivered or have significant issues (red) and activities that have been cancelled/deferred/merged (grey).

 

 

Graph 2: Work Programme by RAG status

 

16.     The graph below shows the activity status of activities which shows the stage of the activity in each departments the work programmes.  The number of activity lines differ by department as approved in the local board work programmes. 

 

Graph 3: work programme activity by activity status and department

Key activity achievements from the 2019/2020 work programme

17.     The key achievements in the delivery of the local board work programmes for 2019/2020 include:

·        ID 145 Youth Development:  The Puketāpapa Youth Board pivoted in response to lockdown restriction by running digital engagement in Q3 and Q4.  They held events to promote positive mental health, shared important COVID-19 messaging and met with the local board online.  They also held a virtual leadership summit with 80 participants over two days. Topics included what it means to be a new leader in challenging times.

·        ID 2425 Keith Hay Park in stall lightening and irrigation: installation of sportfield lighting completed. Planning for the installation of the irrigation is well progressed.

 

·        ID 479 Bremner Avenue Te Auaunga restoration project:  This project was able to be completed within the financial year despite the COVID-19 restrictions.  All weed control was delivered and contractor planting was carried out in the week from 7 July 2020.  In that week 175 large specimen trees were planted to provide shade to the stream.

·        ID 3817 An Integrated Area Plan for the Mt Roskill redevelopment area, which is part of the Albert Eden and Puketāpapa Local Board area:  This activity has progressed during COVID-19 restrictions.  Monthly meetings were held remotely with the integrated area plan working group at which draft key topic maps, including possible actions, were discussed.  Input from the working group was also obtained on approaches to undertake community and mana whenua engagement.  This engagement is to commence during the first half of 2020/2021.

Overview of work programme performance by department

Arts, Community and Events work programme

18.     In the Arts, Community and Events work programme, there are 17 activities that were completed by the end of the year or will be by end of July 2019 (green), 3 activities that are in progress but are delayed (amber), 2 activities that are significantly delayed, on hold or not delivered (red) and 5 activities that have been cancelled and deferred in quarter four (grey).

Parks, Sport and Recreation work programme

19.     In the Parks, Sport and Recreation work programme, there are 3 activities that were completed by the end of the year or will be by end of July 2019 (green) and 6 activities that are in progress but are delayed (amber).

Libraries work programme

20.     In the Libraries work programme, there are 7 activities that were completed by the end of the year or will be by end of July 2019 (green).

Community Facilities: Build Maintain Renew work programme

21.     In the Community Facilities: Build Maintain Renew work programme, there are 23 activities that were completed by the end of the year or will be by end of July 2019 (green), 5 activities that are in progress but are delayed (amber), and 23 activities that have been cancelled and deferred in quarter four (grey).  Activities with significant impact other than COVID-19 are discussed below:

Table 1: Community Facilities activities with significant impact other than COVID-19

Activity name

RAG status

Activity status

Explanation and mitigation

Monte Cecilia Park - restore historic Whare

Amber

 

The board is waiting on formal confirmation from them about whether they will be in a position to fundraise for the restoration of the Whare building.

 

Community Leases work programme

22.     In the Community Leases work programme, there are 5 activities that were completed by the end of the year or will be by end of July 2019 (green), and 2 activities that have been cancelled and deferred in quarter four (grey). 

Infrastructure and Environment Services work programme

23.     In the Infrastructure and Environment Services work programme, there are 6 activities that were completed by the end of the year or will be by end of July 2019 (green), 1 activity that is in progress but are delayed (amber), and 3 activities that are significantly delayed, on hold or not delivered (red).

 

Plans and Places work programme

24.     In the Plans and Places work programme, there is 1 activity that was completed by the end of the year or will be by end of July 2019 (green), and 2 activities that have been cancelled and deferred in quarter four (grey). 

ATEED work programme

25.     In the ATEED work programme, there are 2 activities that were completed by the end of the year or will be by end of July 2019 (green).

The Southern Initiative / The West Initiative work programme

26.     In The Southern Initiative / The West Initiative work programme, there is 1 activity that is in progress but are delayed (amber).  Activities with significant impact other than COVID-19 are discussed below:

Table 2: The Southern Initiative / The West Initiative activities with significant impact other than COVID-19

Activity name

RAG status

Activity status

Explanation and mitigation

Youth Connections - Puketāpapa

 

Amber

 

The department was waiting for guidance from Kainga Ora about the community groups that are to be funded.

 

Deferred activities

27.     2019/2020 The Corporate and Local Board Performance team have identified projects from the local boards locally driven initiatives (LDI) operational budget 2019/2020 where there was an agreed scope and cost which were not been delivered.  These have been added to the work programme to be delivered in 2020/2021.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

28.     Receiving performance monitoring reports will not result in any identifiable changes to greenhouse gas emissions.

29.     Work programmes were approved in June 2019 and delivery is already underway.  Should significant changes to any projects be required, climate impacts will be assessed as part of the relevant reporting requirements.

30.     The local board is currently investing in several sustainability projects, which aim to build awareness around individual carbon emissions, and changing behaviour at a local level. These include:

·        EcoNeighbourhoods Puketāpapa (ID 640) – an EcoNeighbourhood is made up of groups of six or more neighbours within a local board area, with a shared objective to adopt sustainable practices and increase resilience within their homes, lifestyles and neighbourhoods. The EcoNeighbourhood group decides what sustainable living actions they wish to undertake, and the project co-ordinator supports these groups to act. vA minimum of four EcoNeighbourhoods will be set up in the local board area.

·        Healthy Rentals Puketāpapa (ID 641) - The healthy rentals project aims to raise housing literacy, support tenants to create warmer, drier homes, and reduce energy use and associated carbon emissions.  It is targeted at private rental tenants.

·        Puketāpapa Low Carbon Network (ID 646) - The low carbon network is a collection of individuals, households, groups, businesses, operating within the local board area working together to promote, support and implement community level low carbon activities.  Through a low carbon community broker, the network will determine the direction of and priority areas they would like to focus on, in accordance with the low carbon plan.

·        Low Carbon Lifestyles Puketāpapa (ID 649) - The project supports householders to lead low carbon lifestyles, with two objectives: to reduce residential energy use and associated carbon emissions and improve resident health by keeping houses warmer and drier.  The project involves a doorstep conversation with residents and may also include the provision of energy saving devices.

31.     The board is also investing in initiatives that respond to climate change, such as:

·        Urban Forest/Ngahere Strategy (ID456) – this seeks to increase the amount of urban forest cover.  This is the second year of local board specific implementation of Auckland’s Ngahere Strategy.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

32.     When developing the work programmes council group impacts and views are presented to the boards.  As this is an information only report there are no further impacts identified.

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

Local impacts and local board views

33.     This report informs the Puketāpapa Local Board of the performance for quarter ending 30 June 2019 and the performance for the 2019/2020 financial year.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

34.     The Puketāpapa Local Board is committed to strengthening and formalising its relationships with mana whenua and mataawaka. “Māori are recognised and affirmed as mana whenua” is an objective within the Puketāpapa Local Board Plan 2017.

35.     The local board continues to work with the Ngāti Tamaoho Trust to grow the relationship that was formalised in the Relationship Agreement signed in Manukau in July 2018.

36.     The board has included, in its Local Board Plan and work programme, a number of activities which mana whenua have been engaged in.  These include:

·        Te Auaunga Placemaking - Mana whenua have been engaged as a partner throughout the development of Te Auaunga Tohu and design guide.  Representatives from Te Akitai Waiohua, Ngāti Tamaoho, Ngāti Whātua Orākei, Te Kawerau a Maki, Ngāi Tai ki Tāmaki, and Ngāti Whanaunga provided advice to guide development of the design guide at multiple hui.  Capital budget is available to progress this plan.

·        Te Kete Rukuruku (Māori Naming of Reserves and Facilities).  Work has continued with mana whenua to identify opportunities for Māori names for local parks to enhance and recognise Auckland’s Māori identity and heritage.

·        Build capacity; Māori responsiveness – this project seeks to respond to the key aspirations and priorities for Maori in the Puketāpapa Local Board area.

37.     The board has several projects that seek to restore the mauri of awa, whanga, ngahere and projects that celebrate Te Ao Maori:

Arkells Reserve Weed Control and Volunteer Planting - focusses on plant pest control and riparian planting for Te Auaunga

 

 

 

Increasing local employment through Freeland Reserve stream restoration project – seeks to use a local nursery (Te Whangai Trust) to provide landscaping for this project.  This will support local social outcomes and connection to the awa

Community Management Plan for Te Auaunga and Mt Roskill schools – this involves the development of a restoration plan for the parts of Te Auaunga that run through Mt Roskill Primary, Mt Roskill Intermediate and Mt Roskill Grammar

Ecological Volunteers and Environmental Programme – with contractor assistance Friends of Wairaki Stream have cleared areas of persistent weeds and planted 1100 trees at Lynfield Reserve

Manukau Harbour Forum – the board participates in this co-governance forum to restore the mauri of the whanga

Ngahere Strategy – seeks to increase the amount of urban forest cover

Te Manu Aute Kite Day as a celebrates Matariki on Puketāpapa/Pukewiwi maunga

Whakatipu i te reo Māori – this libraries programme celebrates Te Ao Māori and strengthening responsiveness to Māori.

38.     The local board seeks to acknowledge Te Ao Māori and tikanga through karakia before meal breaks, special meetings/workshops with mana whenua on key projects of mutual interest, and blessings when large local board projects are undertaken or concluded in the community.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

39.     This report is provided to enable the Puketāpapa Local Board to monitor the organisation’s progress and performance in delivering the 2019/2020 work programmes.  There are no financial implications associated with this report.

Financial performance

40.     Auckland Council (Council) currently has a number of bonds quoted on the NZ Stock Exchange (NZX).  As a result, the Council is subject to obligations under the NZX Main Board & Debt Market Listing Rules and the Financial Markets Conduct Act 2013 sections 97 and 461H.  These obligations restrict the release of annual financial reports and results until the Auckland Council Group results are released to the NZX – on or about 30 September. Due to these obligations the financial performance attached to the quarterly report is excluded from the public. 

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

41.     Information about any significant risks and how they are being managed and/or mitigated is addressed in the ‘Overview of work programme performance by department’ section.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

42.     The Emergency Budget was adopted on 30 July. Work programmes for 2020/2021 were approved at the board’s business meeting in August.

43.     Delivery of the activities in the 2020/2021 work programme has commenced. There is a reduced timeframe to deliver these work programmes (10 months).

44.     As the delivery timeframe for the 2020/2021 work programmes is reduced, the reporting timeframe is likely to change.

 

45.     Resourcing of the 2020/2021 work programmes was based on the current staff capacity within departments.  If changes to staff capacity have an impact on work programme delivery, this will be signalled to the local board at the earliest opportunity.

 

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

20200917 Puketāpapa Work Programme Update (Q4)

271

b

20200917 Puketāpapa Local Board performance report for the financial quarter four and year ending 30 June 2020. - Confidential

 

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Mary Hay - Local Board Advisor - Puketāpapa

Authoriser

Nina Siers - Relationship Manager for Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Puketāpapa

 



Puketāpapa Local Board

17 September 2020

 

 


Puketāpapa Local Board

17 September 2020

 

 


Puketāpapa Local Board

17 September 2020

 

 


Puketāpapa Local Board

17 September 2020

 

 


Puketāpapa Local Board

17 September 2020

 

 


Puketāpapa Local Board

17 September 2020

 

 


Puketāpapa Local Board

17 September 2020

 

 


Puketāpapa Local Board

17 September 2020

 

 


Puketāpapa Local Board

17 September 2020

 

 


Puketāpapa Local Board

17 September 2020

 

 


Puketāpapa Local Board

17 September 2020

 

 


Puketāpapa Local Board

17 September 2020

 

 


Puketāpapa Local Board

17 September 2020

 

 


Puketāpapa Local Board

17 September 2020

 

 


Puketāpapa Local Board

17 September 2020

 

 


Puketāpapa Local Board

17 September 2020

 

 


Puketāpapa Local Board

17 September 2020

 

 


Puketāpapa Local Board

17 September 2020

 

 


Puketāpapa Local Board

17 September 2020

 

 

Approval for a new road name at 2-4 & 6 Budock Road, Hillsborough - delegated decision

File No.: CP2020/12788

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To inform the Puketāpapa Local Board that a delegated decision was made and approved under delegation to the Chair and Deputy Chair to approve the name for a new private road at 2- 4 & 6 Budock Road, Hillsborough.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       At the 21 May 2002 Puketāpapa Local Board Business Meeting the board considered Item 13: Approval for a new road name at 2- 4 & 6 Budock Road, Hillsborough PKTPP/2020/53:

That the Puketāpapa Local Board:

a)      to delegate the naming item 2 – 4 & 6 Budock Road, Hillsborough to the Chair and Deputy Chair.

Following discussions, the Chair and the Deputy Chair made the following decision:           

That the Puketapapa Local Board

a)   approve the name Mah Lane for the new private road created by way of subdivision at 2‑ 4 & 6 Budock Road, Hillsborough in accordance with section 319(1)(j) of the Local Government Act 1974 (resource consent reference BUN60332602 & SUB60332604).

 

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Puketāpapa Local Board:

a)      note the decision made under delegation by Chair J Fairey and Deputy Chair H Doig

i)        approve the name Mah Lane for the new private road created by way of subdivision at 2‑ 4 & 6 Budock Road, Hillsborough in accordance with section 319(1)(j) of the Local Government Act 1974 (resource consent reference BUN60332602 & SUB60332604).

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

20200917 Approval for a new road name at 2-4 & 6 Budock Road, Hillsborough - delegated decision

291

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Selina Powell - Democracy Advisor - Puketapapa

Authorisers

Nina Siers - Relationship Manager for Maungakiekie-Tamaki Puketapapa

 


Puketāpapa Local Board

17 September 2020

 

 


 


Puketāpapa Local Board

17 September 2020

 

 

Urgent Decision - Puketāpapa Local Board feedback on the review of Auckland Council's Council Controlled Organisations

File No.: CP2020/12809

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To inform the Puketāpapa Local Board (the Board) of a decision made under the local board’s urgent decision making process to provide feedback on the Auckland Council CCO Review.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       The Urgent Decision making process was initiated to seek authorisation by the Relationship Manager, Nina Siers to commence the Urgent Decision Making Process. 

3.       The Chair and Deputy Chair granted formal approval to make an Urgent Decision on 26 August 2020.

4.       The Urgent Decision being made was to seek local board feedback on the report of the independent panel’s review of Auckland Council’s Controlled Organisation (CCO) in time for Governing Body to consider at their 27 August 2020 meeting.

5.       The meeting deadline for the Auckland Council CCO Review feedback was outside a scheduled Puketāpapa Local Board Business meeting date their next meeting date is Thursday, 17 September therefore the Urgent Decision process was enacted.

6.       The Urgent Decision with the supporting information – Attachment 1 Officer Report about the CCO Review Report and Attachment 2 Puketāpapa Local Board Feedback on the review of Auckland Council’s – Council Controlled Organisations (CCO) is attached.

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Puketāpapa Local Board:

a)      welcome the findings and recommendations in the review of CCOs by the independent panel

b)      welcome the proposal in recommendation 34 on how to address CCO-local board engagement and request that this work be started as soon as possible

c)      identify any views and preferences on the recommendation to approve a merger of two CCOs (namely Auckland Tourism, Events and Economic Development and Regional Facilities Auckland Limited)

d)      note that local boards will be able to provide input on the other relevant CCO review recommendations as they are further developed for implementation

e)      identify views and preferences, if any, on the other findings and recommendations in CCO review.

 

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

20200826 Urgent Decision CCO Review

295

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Selina Powell - Democracy Advisor - Puketāpapa

Authoriser

Nina Siers - Relationship Manager for Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Puketāpapa

 


Puketāpapa Local Board

17 September 2020

 

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Puketāpapa Local Board

17 September 2020

 

 

Albert Eden – Puketāpapa Ward

File No.: CP2020/12636

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To enable the Albert-Eden-Puketāpapa Ward Councillors to verbally update the Local Board.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

The ward councillors provide a verbal update.

 

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Puketāpapa Local Board:

a)      thank Albert-Eden-Puketāpapa Ward Councillors Cathy Casey and Christine Fletcher for their update.

 

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Selina Powell - Democracy Advisor - Puketāpapa

Authoriser

Nina Siers - Relationship Manager for Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Puketāpapa

 


Puketāpapa Local Board

17 September 2020

 

 

Chairperson's Report

 

File No.: CP2020/12637

 

  

 

Te take mō te p,ūrongo / Purpose of the report

1.       To provide the Chairperson, Julie Fairey, with an opportunity to update local board members on the activities she has been involved with since the last meeting.

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2.       It is anticipated that the Chairperson will speak to the report at the meeting.

 

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Puketāpapa Local Board:

a)      receive Chair, Julie Fairey’s report for August 2020.

 

 

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Chair, Julie Fairey's report for August 2020

315

     

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Author

Selina Powell - Democracy Advisor - Puketāpapa

Authoriser

Nina Siers - Relationship Manager for Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Puketāpapa

 


Puketāpapa Local Board

17 September 2020

 

 


 


 


Puketāpapa Local Board

17 September 2020

 

 

Board Member Reports

 

File No.: CP2020/12638

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1.       To provide an update to the local board members on the activities they have been involved with since the last meeting.

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2.       It is anticipated that Local Board members will speak to their reports at the meeting.

 

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Puketāpapa Local Board:

a)      receive the member reports for August 2020.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Harry Doig's report, 01 August - 31 August 2020

321

b

Ella Kumar's report, 01 August - 31 August 2020

323

c

Fiona Lai's report, 01 June - 31 August 2020

327

d

Bobby Shen's report, 01 August - 31 August 2020

331

e

Jonathan Turner's report, 01 August - 31 August 2020

335

     

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Author

Selina Powell - Democracy Advisor - Puketāpapa

Authoriser

Nina Siers - Relationship Manager for Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Puketāpapa

 


Puketāpapa Local Board

17 September 2020

 

 


 


Puketāpapa Local Board

17 September 2020

 

 


 


 


Puketāpapa Local Board

17 September 2020

 

 


 


 


 


Puketāpapa Local Board

17 September 2020

 

 


 


 


Puketāpapa Local Board

17 September 2020

 

 


 


Puketāpapa Local Board

17 September 2020

 

 

Governance Forward Work Programme Calendar

File No.: CP2020/12639

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To present the Puketāpapa Local Board with its updated governance forward work programme calendar (the calendar).

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       The calendar for the Puketāpapa Local Board is in Attachment A.  The calendar is updated monthly reported to business meetings and distributed to council staff.

3.       The calendar was introduced in 2016 as part of Auckland Council’s quality advice programme and aims to support local boards’ governance role by:

·    ensuring advice on meeting agendas is driven by local board priorities

·    clarifying what advice is expected and when

·    clarifying the rationale for reports.

4.       The calendar also aims to provide guidance for staff supporting local boards and greater transparency for the public.

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Puketāpapa Local Board:

a)      receive the governance forward work programme calendar for September 2020.

 

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

20200917 Governance Forward Work Programme

339

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Selina Powell - Democracy Advisor - Puketāpapa

Authoriser

Nina Siers - Relationship Manager for Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Puketāpapa

 


Puketāpapa Local Board

17 September 2020

 

 


 


 


 


 


Puketāpapa Local Board

17 September 2020

 

 

Record of Puketāpapa Local Board Workshop Notes

File No.: CP2020/12640

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To provide a summary of Puketāpapa Local Board (the Board) workshop notes.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       The attached summary of workshop notes provides a record of the Board’s workshops held in August 2020.

3.       These sessions are held to give informal opportunity for board members and officers to discuss issues and projects and note that no binding decisions are made or voted on at workshop sessions.

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Puketāpapa Local Board:

a)      receive the Puketāpapa Local Board workshop notes for: 13 August, 27 August and 03 September 2020.

 

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Puketāpapa Local Board Workshop Record, 13 August 2020

347

b

Puketāpapa Local Board Workshop Record, 27 August 2020

349

c

Puketāpapa Local Board Workshop Record, 03 September 2020

353

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Selina Powell - Democracy Advisor - Puketāpapa

Authoriser

Nina Siers - Relationship Manager for Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Puketāpapa

 


Puketāpapa Local Board

17 September 2020

 

 


 


Puketāpapa Local Board

17 September 2020

 

 


 


 


Puketāpapa Local Board

17 September 2020

 

 


 


 

     

 


Puketāpapa Local Board

17 September 2020

 

 

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

That the Puketāpapa Local Board

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

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

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

 

17        Local Board Annual Report 2019/2020 - Attachment a - Draft 2019/2020 Puketapapa Local Board Annual Report

Reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter

Particular interest(s) protected (where applicable)

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

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

s7(2)(j) - The withholding of the information is necessary to prevent the disclosure or use of official information for improper gain or improper advantage.

In particular, the report contains detailed adjustments, assumptions and judgements that have impact on the financial results of the Auckland Council Group as at 30 June 2020 that require final Audit New Zealand sign-off and release to New Zealand Stock Exchange.

s48(1)(a)

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

 

18        Auckland Council's Year End and Quarterly Performance Report: Puketāpapa Local Board for quarter four 2019/2020 - Attachment b - 20200917 Puketāpapa Local Board performance report for the financial quarter four and year ending 30 June 2020.

Reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter

Particular interest(s) protected (where applicable)

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

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

s7(2)(j) - The withholding of the information is necessary to prevent the disclosure or use of official information for improper gain or improper advantage.

In particular, the report contains detailed adjustments, assumptions and judgements that have impact on the financial results of the Auckland Council Group as at 30 Jun 2020 that require final Audit New Zealand sign-off and release to NZ Stock Exchange..

s48(1)(a)

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

 

 

 

C1       Statement of proposal for a new Navigation Safety Bylaw

Reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter

Particular interest(s) protected (where applicable)

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

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

s7(2)(c)(i) - The withholding of the information is necessary to protect information which is subject to an obligation of confidence or which any person has been or could be compelled to provide under the authority of any enactment, where the making available of the information would be likely to prejudice the supply of similar information or information from the same source and it is in the public interest that such information should continue to be supplied.

In particular, the report contains a working draft of a bylaw yet to be approved for public consultation.

s7(2)(f)(ii) - The withholding of the information is necessary to maintain the effective conduct of public affairs through the protection of such members, officers, employees and persons from improper pressure or harassment.

In particular, the report contains a working draft of a bylaw yet to be approved for public consultation.

s48(1)(a)

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

 

   



[1] Waitākere Ranges Strategic Weed Management Plan 2015

[2] Auckland Council Weed Management Policy

[3] E34 Agrichemicals and vertebrate toxic agents - Unitary Plan

[4] Streetscapes Specifications - 19 March 2019_

[5] Transport Authorities - Glyphosate use

[6] Novachem Manual - Glyphosate 510

[7] https://www.epa.govt.nz/news-and-alerts/latest-news/use-of-glyphosate-in-new-zealand/

[8] Novachem Manual - Glyphosate 510

[9] Product Label Green Glyphosate 510

[10] Supplementary material glyphosate

[11] http://resistance.nzpps.org/index.php?p=herbicides/glyphosate

[12] Vegetation management Trial 2002

[13] Review PwC Weed Management Cost

[14] Novachem – Bio Safe

[15] Information provided by Kiwicare

[16] Back to the future - electrothermal, systemic, weedkiller

[17] Water use from Weedtechnics A4-SW900-Product-Specifications and Foamstream M1200 – Weedingtech spec sheet.

[18] Watercare - Drought response

[19] Weedtechnics A4-SW900-Product-Specifications

[20] Measuring Emissions: a guide for organisations – Emission factors for stationary combustion fuels Diesel 1 litre = 2.66 kg CO2/unit

[21] Linear km covers both side of the road e.g 2.2km. (average walking speed of between 2.9 kilometres per hour (km/h) and 6.5 km/h).

[22] Review PwC Weed Management Cost 15092015

[23] Best Practice Guidance - Notes for Integrated and Non-chemical Amenity Hard Surface Weed

[24] http://resistance.nzpps.org/index.php?p=herbicides/glyphosate

[25] https://www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/environment/Pages/auckland-climate-action-plan.aspx

[26] Emissions from direct/production and electricity use, but not including “embodied” or “life cycle emissions”. These emissions do not include fuel for the boiler pump or motorized sprayer.

[27] Water use -Bio Blast

[28] https://www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/environment/plants-animals/pests-weeds/Documents/weedcontrolmethods.pdf

[29] People Survey - 2019

[30] 264 kg x 5,055km road corridor. This could be mitigated by the use of battery power, there are no options currently available in New Zealand

 

 

[31] Costings should not be treated a final pricing but as an indication of pricing differences between methodology.